#89400	From: mlnease <mlnease@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:27 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight 	m_nease 
 
 		Hi Scott,

Thanks--a keeper.

mike

Scott wrote:
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> "Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight
> into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal
> tranquility of awareness." [AN 4.94]
>
> Bh. Bodhi:
>
> "Here, monks, a certain person gains internal tranquility of mind but
> does not gain the higher wisdom of insight into things.* Another
> person gains the higher wisdom of insight into things but does not
> gain internal tranquility of mind..."
>
> * Note 46: "AA explains internal tranquility of mind (ajjhatta.m
> cetosamatha) as the concentration of full mental absorption (i.e.
> jhaana), and the higher wisdom of insight into things
> (adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa) as the insight knowledge discerning
> formations (sa"nkhaaraparigghaahaka-vipassanaa~naa.na). The latter is
> called 'higher wisdom' and it is insight into the 'things' comprised
> by the five aggregates."
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Scott.


#89401	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:04 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Howard, -

You wrote :

Yes, your reading is also possible, and is in fact the less strained of
the two. You're probably correct.
................

Thank you very much for the willingness to consider another opinion.


Tep
===


#89402	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:23 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight ... Simplify, simplify, simplify 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Alex, -

I appreciate your reply.

> T: Your reply to my simple question (see below) has not yet
> answered it. The explanation seems to complicate the problem,
> not solving it.
>
> So, could you please try again? Talk to me like you would to a 10-
> year-old kid; it will work.

Alex: In that sutta, 1 option seems to say that samadhi is not
required for Arhatship or insight into phenomena.

The Buddha has said that all noble disciples have 5 faculties, one of
which is samadhi (defined as 4 Jhanas).

So it seems hard to reconcile "no samadhi is necesery" and "samadhi
is necessery".


Furthermore since when "sensuality and unwholesome states" are fully
understood, 1st Jhana can be attained and since by the Anagami stage
one has let go off sensuality & unwholesome states, Jhana should be
easy to reach.

Furthermore, Pannavimutti Arahants are defined as possesing Jhana -
so the notion of totally dry Arhat is hard to reconcile with the
suttas.
=====================

T: A reply to your question on 'reconciliation' was given in another
post about 2 hours ago. Essentially, it states that both samatha and
vipassana are required for total Release. Therefore, no
reconciliation is necessary.

"And what qualities are to be abandoned through direct knowledge?
Ignorance & craving for becoming: these are the qualities that are to
be abandoned through direct knowledge.

"And what qualities are to be developed through direct knowledge?
Tranquillity & insight: these are the qualities that are to be
developed through direct knowledge. [MN 149]


I hope you agree with the Buddha. Thanks.


Tep
===


#89403	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:32 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight ... Simplify, simplify, simplify 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Tep,

Thank you very much for your wonderful replies.



Best wishes,

Alex


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri"
<indriyabala@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Alex, -
>
> I appreciate your reply.
>
> > T: Your reply to my simple question (see below) has not yet
> > answered it. The explanation seems to complicate the problem,
> > not solving it.
> >
> > So, could you please try again? Talk to me like you would to a 10-
> > year-old kid; it will work.
>
> Alex: In that sutta, 1 option seems to say that samadhi is not
> required for Arhatship or insight into phenomena.
>
> The Buddha has said that all noble disciples have 5 faculties, one
of
> which is samadhi (defined as 4 Jhanas).
>
> So it seems hard to reconcile "no samadhi is necesery" and "samadhi
> is necessery".
>
>
> Furthermore since when "sensuality and unwholesome states" are fully
> understood, 1st Jhana can be attained and since by the Anagami stage
> one has let go off sensuality & unwholesome states, Jhana should be
> easy to reach.
>
> Furthermore, Pannavimutti Arahants are defined as possesing Jhana -
> so the notion of totally dry Arhat is hard to reconcile with the
> suttas.
> =====================
>
> T: A reply to your question on 'reconciliation' was given in
another
> post about 2 hours ago. Essentially, it states that both samatha
and
> vipassana are required for total Release. Therefore, no
> reconciliation is necessary.
>
> "And what qualities are to be abandoned through direct knowledge?
> Ignorance & craving for becoming: these are the qualities that are
to
> be abandoned through direct knowledge.
>
> "And what qualities are to be developed through direct knowledge?
> Tranquillity & insight: these are the qualities that are to be
> developed through direct knowledge. [MN 149]
>
>
> I hope you agree with the Buddha. Thanks.
>
>
> Tep
> ===
>


#89404	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 1:10 pm 
Subject: Re: Samadhi & Insight .. Scott's Contribution ... 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Tep,

T: "Do you see any difference between 'parigghaaha' and 'pari~n~naa'
or pari~n~naata ? Is discerning same as comprehending, in your opinion?

PTS PED:

"Pariggaha...2. taking up, seizing on, acquiring, acquisition, also in
bad sense of 'grasping'..."

"Pari~n~na...[the adj. form of pari~n~naa, cp. abhi~n~na] knowing,
recognising, understanding..."

"Pari~n~naata [pp. of parijaanaati] well understood, thoroughly known..."

Scott:  Rather than compare English words, do you think that this
'taking up', or 'knowing' or having 'well understood' is a function of
pa~n~naa?  Provided that 'discern' and 'comprehend' are taken as
synonymous, and refer to the function of pa~n~naa, then perhaps they
are the same thing in this context.  I'd say so, given the above proviso.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89405	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 2:05 pm 
Subject: Re: Samadhi & Insight .. Scott's Contribution ... 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Scott,-

Thank you for having been a reliable friend in the Dhamma for me.
>
> >T: "Do you see any difference between 'parigghaaha'
> >and 'pari~n~naa' or pari~n~naata ? Is discerning same as
> >comprehending, in your opinion?

> Scott:
> PTS PED:
>
> "Pariggaha...2. taking up, seizing on, acquiring, acquisition,
> also in bad sense of 'grasping'..."
>
> "Pari~n~na...[the adj. form of pari~n~naa, cp. abhi~n~na] knowing,
> recognising, understanding..."
>
> "Pari~n~naata [pp. of parijaanaati] well understood, thoroughly
known..."
>
> Scott:  Rather than compare English words, do you think that this
> 'taking up', or 'knowing' or having 'well understood' is a function
of
> pa~n~naa?  Provided that 'discern' and 'comprehend' are taken as
> synonymous, and refer to the function of pa~n~naa, then perhaps they
> are the same thing in this context.  I'd say so, given the above
proviso.
>
>
...............................

T: That makes sense. I was confused by the PTS' wordings : "taking
up, seizing on, acquiring, acquisition, also in bad sense
of 'grasping'..."


Tep
===


#89406	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 2:13 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight ... Simplify, simplify, simplify 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Alex, -

It is a good feeling whenever a discussion ends well.

> Alex:
> Thank you very much for your wonderful replies.
>
T: :-)  You are welcome, Alex.


Tep
===


#89407	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:07 pm 
Subject: What is a path in Buddhism? 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi Sukin, Alex and others , -

This post was motivated by the interesting conversation below:
.................................................

Alex:
It is interesting that in MN36, after severe austerities the Buddha
remembered Jhana and that it IS PATH TO AWAKENING.

Sukin: It is the path to-be-Buddhas take. This path is *not* `The
Path'.

Alex: So, the Buddha followed one path and taught us another?
.................................................

Tep: Indeed, the question is : 'What is a path in Buddhism?'
According to to the Chief Disciple Sariputta, a great Arahant, each
of the 37 dhammas in the Bodhipakkhiya-dhamma group is a path.
Samatha and vipassana are paths. The seven purifications are paths.
[Remember the Relay Chariots Sutta?]  Below, the Pali inserts are my
own.

Patisambhidamagga, IX, 5:
-------------------------

The path of seeing is right view, the path of directing-onto is right
thought, the path of embracing(pariggaha) is right speaking, the path
of originating is right acting, the path of cleansing is right
living, the path of exertion is right effort, the path of
establishment is right mindfulness, the path of non-distraction is
right concentration.

The path of establishing is the mindfulness enlightenment (bojjhanga)
factor, the path of investigating in the investigation-of-ideas
enlightenment factor, the path of exertion is the energy
enlightenment factor, the path of pervasion(intentness upon) is the
happiness enlightenment factor, the path of peace is the tranquillity
enlightenment factor, the path of non-distraction is the
concentration enlightenment factor, the path of reflexion(patisankha)
is the equanimity enlightenment factor.

The path of unshakability by non-faith is the faith power(bala), the
path of unshakability by idleness is the energy power, the path of
unshakability by negligence is the mindfulness power, the path of
unshakability by agitation is the concentration power, the path of
unshakability by ignorance is the understanding power.

The path of resolution is the faith faculty (indriya), the path of
exertion is the energy faculty, the path of establishment is the
mindfulness faculty, the path of non-distraction is the concentration
faculty, the path of seeing(dassana) is the understanding faculty.

The faculties(indriya) are the path in the sense of dominance, the
powers(bala) are the path in the sense of unshakability, the
enlightenment factors(bojjhanga) are the path in the sense of cause,
the foundations of mindfulness(satipatthana) are the path in the
sense of endeavouring, the bases for success(iddhipada) are the path
in the sense of succeeding, the actualities(sacca) are the path in
the sense of suchness(reality, tathata).

Serenity(samatha) is the path in the sense of non-distraction,
insight is the path in the sense of contemplation(anupassana),
serenity and insight are the path in the sense of single function
(taste, rasa), coupling is the path in the sense of non-excess
(anativattana).

Purification of virtue is the path in the sense of restraint,
purification of cognizance is the path in the sense of non-
distraction, purification of view is the path in the sense of seeing,
liberation(vimokkha) is the path in the sense of freedom, recognition
(vijja) is the path in the sense of penetration, deliverance(vimutti)
is the path in the sense of giving up, knowledge of destruction is
the path in the sense of cutting off(samuccheda).
...........................


Besides the Buddha, who else could have said it all so beautifully?


Yours truly,


Tep
===


#89408	From: "maitreyi144" <maitreyi144@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 12:21 pm 
Subject: I need Missing pages from Vimutti Magga 	maitreyi144 
 
 		All,

Recently I purchased a book Vimuttimagga (Path of perfect freedom) by
Arahant Upatissa (translated by SOma Thera and Kheminda thera)

Unfortunately, due to the defect in the book, it is missing pages 1 to
16 after index.

I would greatly appreciate if any one can scan these pages (1 to 16)
and send it to me.

With Metta, ~Maitreyi


#89409	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:36 pm 
Subject: Re: [Relentless Training] .. the All and the 201 dhammas .... 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Tep

> FYI please observe the list of 201 dhammas below and tell me if you
> still think that the All subsumes the 201 dhammas.
> .................

Thanks for setting out the text of the All and of the 201 dhammas.

To my understanding, the 201 dhammas in the list are not 201
different dhammas, but are the same set of dhammas classified in
different ways.

For example, items 1-5 -- "Materiality, feeling, perception,
formations, consciousness" -- are the 5 khandhas (rupa, vedana,
sanna, sankhara and vinnana).  As we know, these are one way by which
dhammas are classified.

Then items 6-10 and 12–16 are particular instances of the first
khandha (rupa), and item 11 is the fifth khandha (vinnana).  And so
on.

In other words, there's a lot of repetition in the list of 201.  The
same dhammas are classified in many different ways, to help
understand them better.

Likewise, the items listed as comprising the All are the same dhammas
as comprise the khandhas.  Thus, taking the first set from the All:
Eye = a kind of rupa;
visible object = rupa;
eye consciousness = vinnana;
eye contact = phassa cetasika = sankhara;
any feeling that arises with eye contact as its condition = vedana;
and so on.

So yes, I do see the 2 sets of dhammas as referring to the same
(limited number of) dhammas.

Jon


#89410	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:37 pm 
Subject: Re: kayagatasati .. Relentless Training ... 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Tep

> T: So you mean the conventional effort of every-day living does not
> involve kusala or akusala cittas?

I mean that when in conventional speech we talk about making an
effort to do something, we are not referring specifically to viriya
cetasika, but to a series of moments of consciousness (broadly
speaking, trying to achieve something that has not yet been achieved).

> BTW can kusala effort arise in a "conventional" non-ariyan who
> develops sila (e.g. abandons wrong speech and maintains right
speech)?

Agreed.  At each moment of kusala consciousness there is kusala
effort, and at each moment of akusala consciousness there is akusala
effort.

> T: Can a kusala kamma arise without an intention?
> Specifically, do you deny what the Buddha taught in AN 6.63?
>
> "Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way
of
> body, speech, & intellect."
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.063.than.html

Agreed.  All moments of kusala kamma (in fact, all moments of kusala)
are accompanied by kusala cetaina.

Jon


#89411	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:39 pm 
Subject: Re: Sila Always Comes First ! 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Tep

> You become a sotapanna first when your sila is pure. You then
become
> an anagami when your concentration becomes "perfected". Lastly, you
> become an arahant when your panna is fully developed.
>
> I do not see any problem with the sequential development.

Agreed, but I would describe this as sequential *perfection* or
*attainment*.

As far as *development* is concerned, at the mundane level, this must
proceed in parallel, as it is only through the development of
awareness and insight (panna) that sila can become perfected and sota
path attained.

Hoping we are in agreement on this point ;-))

Jon


#89412	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 3:42 pm 
Subject: Re: One-pointedness in Sattipatthana SN 47. 4 (4) at Sala 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

Thanks for including me in this thread.

> In Sattipathana samyutta 4 (4) At Sala sutta, the Buddha has said:
>
> "dwell contemplating the bodyin the body, ardent, clearly
> comprehending, unified, with limpid mind, concentrated, with one-
> pointed mind, in order to know the body as it really is"...
> pg 1630 CDB .
>
> So even though you are correct about not having any self view, one
> pointedness, unified & concentrated mind IS NEEDED.

Yes, but the concentration spoken of here is the concentration that
accompanies insight (when the object of consciousness is a
characteristic of a dhamma), not the concentration associated with
samatha/jhana (when the object is a mental image, such as a kasina).

Jon


#89413	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 5:37 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Alex,

Thanks for the reply.  Regarding:

"...However, let us remember this point. The 'minimum' requirements
are not always sufficient.  Just because some are able to achieve the
path easily, quickly and without much work in *THIS* life, it doesn't
by itself means that it is the only and most effective path for us..."

Scott: Not wishing to plunge once again into the jhaana debate, I
would ask whether you consider the jhaana factors to be part of the
'things comprised by the five aggregates'?  If so, these will still
need to become the object of adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa in order for
pa~n~naa to develop enough such that the Path might arise would they
not?  This would indeed be the development of pa~n~naa should such a
thing occur.

And from this point of view, these jhaana factors are no less or no
more worthy objects of pa~n~naa than any other dhamma, as I see it.

Again, just a reply, Alex.  Please leave me out of the debate if you
don't mind.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89414	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:01 pm 
Subject: Re: One-pointedness in Sattipatthana SN 47. 4 (4) at Sala 	truth_aerator 
 		Dear Jon and all,

>--"jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex
>
> Thanks for including me in this thread.
>
> > In Sattipathana samyutta 4 (4) At Sala sutta, the Buddha has said:
> >
> > "dwell contemplating the bodyin the body, ardent, clearly
> > comprehending, unified, with limpid mind, concentrated, with one-
> > pointed mind, in order to know the body as it really is"...
> > pg 1630 CDB .
> >
> > So even though you are correct about not having any self view,
>one
> > pointedness, unified & concentrated mind IS NEEDED.
>
> Yes, but the concentration spoken of here is the concentration that
> accompanies insight (when the object of consciousness is a
> characteristic of a dhamma), not the concentration associated with
> samatha/jhana (when the object is a mental image, such as a kasina).
>
> Jon


Don't you know by now that I don't preach "insightless" Samadhi?

Regarding this "mental image" stuff. Where is it in the suttas? If
these images are so bad, why did the Buddha so often talked about
anapanasati and he did talk (very briefly) about Kasinas.

Remember that mindfulness has different degrees of power. Weak
mindfulness may not be enough. But Jhana superpowered mindfulness can
do it


Best wishes,

Alex


#89415	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 6:06 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight 	truth_aerator 
 		Dear Scott, Jon and all,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <scduncan@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Alex,
>
> Thanks for the reply.  Regarding:
>
> "...However, let us remember this point. The 'minimum' requirements
> are not always sufficient.  Just because some are able to achieve
>the path easily, quickly and without much work in *THIS* life, it
>doesn't by itself means that it is the only and most effective path
>for us..."
>
> Scott: Not wishing to plunge once again into the jhaana debate, I
> would ask whether you consider the jhaana factors to be part of the
> 'things comprised by the five aggregates'?

Yes, Jhana falls within 5 aggregates and has similiar characteristics
of anicca-dukkha-anatta.


>If so, these will still need to become the object of
>adhipa~n~naadhammavipassanaa in order for
> pa~n~naa to develop enough such that the Path might arise would they
> not?  This would indeed be the development of pa~n~naa should such a
> thing occur.

Of course Jhana factors need to be scrutinized and overcomed and any
attachement to them be cut off forever. But this happens AFTER one
reaches at least the 1st Jhana - level of understanding.


Understanding of Sensuality & Unwholesome mental qualities = 1st
Jhana.

Understanding of vitakka&vicara = 2nd Jhana.
Understanding of piti = 3rd Jhana.
Understanding of Sukha = 4th Jhana.
Understanding of Rupa = Base of Infinite space.

Understanding of Base of Infinite space = Base of infinite
Consciousness.

Understanding of Base of infinite Consciousness = Base of Nothingness.

Understanding of Base of Nothingness = Base of Neither Perception nor
Non-perception

Understanding of Base of Neither Perception nor Non-perception =
Sanna-vedana Nirodha
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html


Understanding of Kama-Loka = Rupa Jhana
Understanding of Rupa-Loka = base of infinite space (Aruppa Jhana)
Full Understanding of Arupa, Rupa, Kamaloka = Cessation. Arhatship

Best wishes,


Alex


#89416	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 7:02 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Introduction to the Dhamma. 	sukinderpal 
 		Dear Tep (and Nina),


===========
T: Your email sounds a lot different this time ... it is like an off-
list message that is easy-going and friendly. Thank you for this new
way of communication.

Sukin: I’m not very good at it, but I hope I will be more aware of my
akusala tendencies. :-)

===========
<snip>
  >Suk: To make it easier for myself, I would like to ask if you have
read say, Nina's `Abhidhamma in Daily Life' and if you disagreed with
anything stated there.

T: I have not read it from the first to the last page yet. Assuming
that the whole book is in complete agreement with the objective in
her Introduction as shown below, I think I mostly agree with it
(except for some deviations from the Suttas).

Sukin: Neither have I :-P, but I thought that you might have. I was
however trying to draw your attention to the first one or two chapters,
not so much to get you to agree with the Abhidhamma or Nina’s book, but
to the whether you thought that a new-comer would find it helpful to be
told about the things stated there, beginning with there being two kinds
of realities, nama and rupa (or mind and matter) and so on.

So if you can, please read at least the first chapter. But remember that
I am not trying to convince you of the Abhidhamma, so there is no need
to compare it with the Sutta Pitaka at this point. In fact with
newcomers, I may not even want them to feel that they are particularly
studying the “Buddha’s Teachings”, but rather about the Truth, i.e. if
that is what they are interested in. Though it is true that we wouldn’t
come to know about this without having heard the Dhamma, and that we
need to constantly refer to the Teachings, our Saddha in the Buddha’s
Dhamma however is founded not in mere belief, but on our understanding
of reality / Truth.

===========
Nina: As regards the Abhidhamma, this is an exposition of all
realities in detail. 'Abhi' literally means 'higher', thus '
Abhidhamma' means 'higher dhamma'. The form of this part of the
Tipitaka is different, but the aim is the same: the eradication of
wrong view and eventually of all defilements. Thus, when we study the
many enumerations of realities, we should not forget the real purpose
of the study. The theory (pariyatti) should encourage us to the
practice (patipatti) which is necessary for the realization of the
truth (pativedha). While we are studying the different namas and
rupas and while we are pondering over them, we can be reminded to be
aware of nama and rupa appearing at that moment. In this way we will
discover more and more that the Abhidhamma is about everything which
is real, that is, the worlds appearing through the six doors.
...................................

T: The 'worlds appearing through the six doors' are real. There is
nothing to disagree with at this point, before the ultimate realities
creep in and make the 'worlds appearing through the six doors' no
longer real.

Sukin: So this is your first objection, namely that the concept of
“ultimate reality” vs. concept is misleading? If so what do you propose
as a better way of looking at it? But do remember, not to refer to the
Suttas as authority and I’ll try to remember to not refer to the
Abhidhamma. My reason for referring to Nina’s book was because I saw it
as being the best in terms of matching what is read with experience. And
because this is source of my present understanding.

==============
<snip>
  >Suk: Do you think it a good introduction to the beginner of Dhamma,
to be told that there are two kinds of realities, Nama and Rupa.
Nama include the conditioned namas namely, citta and cetasika and the
unconditioned Nibbana (which I'll leave out for now). Conditioned
nama is that which experiences an object, and this can be another
nama or a rupa. Rupa is material reality, it is conditioned but it
can't experience anything.
`Conditioned' means that none of these realities can arise without
the arising of certain other realities at the same time and each
conditioning the other in various ways.

T: That "there are two kinds of realities" is the first sentence of
Chapter 1, The Four Paramattha Dhammas. But after more and more
details are added i.e. the various cetasikas and cittas and Nibbana
as Nama, then it is no longer easy for the "beginner"!

Sukin: Actually I find this to be a process of “simplifying”. Perhaps
this is because Nina’s expositions being so helpful, instead of
remaining ‘abstract’, the more ‘practically’ inclined reader is at some
point, forced to ‘apply’ what is read to experience, now. Is it then
that those who do not appreciate her writings as much as it should, this
is because the different names / lists remain abstractions? In fact I’d
like to propose that those who have such ideas as ‘applying the
Abhidhamma’ to meditation etc, the Abhidhamma to them is and likely
remain a list of abstract ideas only.

This brings me back to the idea of ‘pariyatti’, that indeed this is
about ‘understanding’ in the moment; only in this case, the level is
such that the object is ‘concept’ rather than reality, and how this is
directly related to patipatti. But I digress. Besides I need to keep
away from making reference to ‘Abhidhamma’ and continue instead, to talk
about the truth of what is read or heard about in relation to what can
be observed in experience.

=============
T: Besides, Nama and rupa in the suttas are defined differently; Nama
does not include citta(consciousness) or Nibbana. For example, MN 9:

"Feeling, perception, intention, contact, & attention: This is called
name. The four great elements, and the form dependent on the four
great elements: This is called form. This name & this form are called
name-&-form."

Sukin: Again, I think that at this point it would be more helpful to
leave out reference to Abhidhamma vs. Suttas. But my question to you:

What do you understand about Nama to believe that this applies only to
cetasikas and not to citta (I’ll leave out Nibbana for now)?

=============
  >Suk: If you don't think that this is the best introduction, what in
your opinion is?

T: It is one of the best easy-to-read Buddhism books (with a heavy
emphasis on Abhidhamma) written by Western scholars, Sukin. In my
humble and cheap opinion (IMHACO), there is no "the best"
introduction book on the Buddha's Dhamma.

Sukin: I didn’t mean “best” as in comparison with ‘other’ books and
actually had more like “good” in mind. ;-) What I wanted to focus on as
I hope I’ve made more clear above, is whether what is said makes sense
to the reader in terms of experience. Though of course the result of
this will be not only that one is introduced the Dhamma itself, but also
prove the “rightness” of it and hence seed for Saddha.

Thanks Tep, for agreeing to do this. It will also serve to test my own
understanding, how much I simply ‘repeat ideas’ or go by authority, and
how much any real understanding, if any, is involved.

Metta,

Sukin


#89417	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 9:53 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is the Abhidhamma Reading Free from Self View? 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Dear Tep,

On one hand I would like not to get distracted and limit my discussion
with you to only the other thread. On the other hand, your questions
below seem too important not to respond to. So perhaps I will answer and
leave it there for now….?
===========
Tep:
Thank you for not forgetting to give me your thought on the aspects
of the Abhidhamma that you think make it easier for us to understand
the Dhamma than the Suttas.

1. I fully agree in principle with your following points :

1.1 Ignorance makes the Dhamma difficult to understand the Four Noble
Truths
1.2 One understands the 1st Noble Truth through contemplation of
Nama and Rupa
1.3 Clear understanding of the First Truth leads to penetration of
the other three Truths
1.4 Discerning the rise and fall of Nama and Rupa is for there and
now (present moment), or "understanding can arise any time".

Sukin: I’m not sure about 1.3. I think it is impossible to have clear
understanding of the First Noble Truth without the development of
understanding of the other Truths along the way, the second and the
fourth at least.

============
Tep:
I have two questions for you.

We all know that the Abhidhamma is known as 'Dhamma Theory', while
the Suttas (discourses given to the monks over the 45 years He was
living) are about practice/development of sila-samadhi-panna in
accordance with the Teachings.

Sukin: I’ve heard 'Dhamma Theory', but never made the characterization
myself and still don’t see why I should. And I think I know what you
personally think about the relationship between Sila, Samadhi and Panna,
which as you know I don’t agree with, so my perception of the Suttas is
not the same as yours.

============
Tep:
A. How can the Abhidhamma theory be used to discern the First Noble
Truth?

Sukin: Personally, I found the very concept of the ‘Four Noble Truths’
extremely hard to comprehend. It was with the help of the teaching by
way of citta, cetasika, rupa and Nibbana, and gradually understanding
this better and better that I began to understand, still only
intellectually and very superficially at that, what the First Noble
Truth is about. Likewise I am only beginning to understanding the
second, third and fourth Truths. So I don’t really want to use the word
‘discern’ in relation to my own experience, but just ‘developing
understanding’.

As you have heard many, many times, the reference to the need to
understand seeing, hearing, thinking, sound, visible object etc. this is
what it is all about. So the Abhidhamma in pointing to these realities
“reminds” us about our moment to moment experiences. Also in
distinguishing between the levels of understanding, namely pariyatti,
patipatti and pativedha, it allows us to gradually develop understanding
of them naturally without excuses, i.e. seek anything beyond the present
moment.

============
Tep:
B. How does it deal with practical aspects of the Fourth Noble Truth?

Sukin: Simply put, Pariyatti leads to Patipatti and this to Pativedha.
So in understanding that there are only dhammas and there is ever only
the present moment, one is disinclined to overreach, for example to
‘practice’ / patipatti. In other words one is being encouraged to look
in the right direction and even if little progress is made, at least the
vision about the Path is not distorted due to ambition. This is being
practical, even when patipatti itself arises very rarely.

============
Tep:
2. I disagree with the following points you made:

2.1 The Suttas can lead to the same, but more difficult, since the
various dhammas there, are described in terms of conventional reality.

T: The Buddha taught the monks using conventional language to
practice the Dhamma in "conventional reality" such that the ultimate
truths of the "ultimate realities" could be penetrated. Therefore,
the Suttas are DIRECT and hence easier to follow.
That's why I do not see your point.

Sukin: The point is that I see no “patipatti” when the object of citta
is a concept. There can be kusala such as dana, sila or samatha bhavana,
however when we are talking about the development of satipatthana, we
are talking about the object of understanding at those moments being
characteristic of a paramattha dhamma or khandha or dhatu or ayatana,
through one of the six doorways.

So what I believe to be involve here is that those people who were
direct audience of the Buddha, they had such great panna that when the
Buddha made conventional references, they “knew” what was actually
meant. Unlike us, who have little or no panna, conditioned by nicca
sanna, atta sanna, sukkha sanna or subha sanna rooted in ignorance, the
attention invariably is drawn to “concept” rather than a characteristic
of reality. And this is made worse when Wrong View is involved. But
Abhidhamma can help us here, namely that even though the wisdom
associated with anicca sanna, anatta sanna etc. is lacking, one at least
comes to understand about this at the level of pariyatti and this helps
us not to go wrong.

=================
2.2 Without making a distinction between paramattha dhamma and
pannati, one "does not get to glimpse the true characteristic of
those dhammas including them being anatta"

T: The true characteristics(anicca, dukkha, and anatta) of the kaya,
vedana, citta, and dhamma are contemplated by the method of
Satipatthana that is expounded in the Suttanta-Pitaka, not in the
Abhidhamma books. The Buddha never once mentioned "a distinction
between paramattha dhamma and pannati".

Sukin: You know that there are other ways to interpret what has been
written in the Satipatthana Sutta. But I want to ask you:
What connection do you see between the kind of ‘contemplation’ that you
propose and ‘direct understanding’ of nama and rupa?
Are you actually looking for a direct statement by the Buddha about the
reality / concept distinction? Can you not deduce this from the fact of
his Teachings about the Five Khandhas? If not, what do you understand
Khandha to be and where does ‘person’, ‘long breath / short breath’ and
‘posture’ fit in there?

==================
2.3 The true purpose for studying the Abhidhamma being to apply the
understanding in experience and since this can take place from the
very outset; it then comes to the understanding of the individual how
he proceeds.

T: Where in the Abhidhamma Pitaka can such application be found? The
Abhidhamma is not known for teaching how to apply the Dhamma Theory
(e.g. about the citta-vithi and 121 cittas) to daily experience. It
is Nina who explains how to "apply" the theory. Yet, her "approach"
is still elementary and she never suggests how such approach is going
to lead to yatha-bhuta~nana-dassana. This is the real problem with
Dhamma Theory alone.

Sukin: Perhaps the answer lies in the “understanding” of the reader and
that to seek a ‘method’ and having expectation of results is indication
of ‘wrong’ understanding. Surely Nina, someone who has spent half her
life studying Abhidhamma, stressing on the practical aspect of it,
wouldn’t do so had there not been any practical benefit……?

==============
<snip>
2.4 The Abhidhamma in fact helps to simplify, and by leaving out the
concept of a `person who studies and practices', makes the gap
between theory and practice less difficult to cross over.

T: On which side of the "gap" is the Abhidhamma? Of course, the
answer is the Abhidhamma is on the Theory Side. The Suttas are, on
the other hand, already on the same side with practices.

Sukin: Again this has to do with “understanding”. And we need to ask,
what does the understanding “know” and whether *right now* there is any.

=============
T: Is there an instruction or explanation in the Abhidhamma books how to
leave out the concept of a `person who studies and practices'? I
suspect that it is an Abhidhammika's interpretation of the 'anatta'
principle as seen in the Suttas. The 'tilakkhana' and their
contemplation (known as Vipassana) are only taught in the discourses
of the Second Basket.

Sukin: The very seeking out of “how” is to be caught in the concept of
‘person who studies and practices’.

=============
T:
3. I think the following is a disconnect with the Suttas,
since 'pannati' was not taught by the Buddha.

-- Instead he gets into a habit of thinking about better time, place,
posture and situation, and when he thinks he is understanding the
present moment, namely when involved in meditation, what he takes
for "now" is in fact only concept. After all "now" is related to
understanding and is known by virtue of knowing the characteristic of
a reality.

Sukin: I’ve addressed this to some extent above.

================

T: Well, I am sorry for the several disagreements with you. I am willing
to correct myself, if you can show that I have been wrong.

Sukin: No problem, but I would rather leave this discussion here and
instead concentrate on the other thread.

Metta,

Sukin.


#89418	From: "rinzeee" <rinzeee@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:29 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream 	rinzeee 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder <sukinder@...>
wrote:
Dear Sukin and the rest

> Dear Rinze, (Tep, Nina and all),
>
>
> Welcome to DSG.
> But you will soon associate my name with `loooong posts' and
perhaps
> this will condition each time, some boredom just on seeing my name
in
> the message index. ;-)
>
> Forgive me for the long post, especially since you don't have a
computer
> of your own to use. I won't mind it if you decide not to respond
at all.
>
> Metta,
>
> Sukin
>

Thankyou for troubling to respond in detail. In a discussion, we
cannot solely use Paramatha Dhammas, but have to cloak it in
concepts, in order to convey what is being said. This you will
understand. Hence we use personal pronouns, and various other
similes, that would make things clear to the reader or listener.

Lord Buddha related the `Abhidhamma' to His mother in the Heavenly
abodes, and to no other did He mention it, not even to Ven. Ananda
His librarian, but only to His chief disciple Ven. Sariputta. This
too is a very significant aspect. Moreover, nearly all those, who
realized the Dhamma in that period, listened to the Dhamma as
expounded by Lord Buddha in the Suttas. IMO, the Suttas must have
served as the `funnel' to the Abhidhamma, that leaves nothing to be
said, but to be seen by the Eye of Dhamma.

The genius in Lord Buddha is, His mode of Instructions, which He
used to the utmost, in expounding the Dhamma, even to His most
ardent critic of His time. So much so that, they feared
confrontation, afraid of being `converted'. Of course, He had the
power of sensing those in need and tweaked their minds, just at the
right place and time, with the appropriate phrases. And the similes
He used, brought out the Dhamma He was putting across.

For instance, when He was being chased by Angulimala to cut His
finger, Angulimala asks Lord Buddha to stop. Lord Buddha simply
said, "I have stopped, it's you who should stop!" On another
occasion, passing by a farmer in a paddy field, the farmer tells
Lord Buddha, to work like him in a paddy field in order to reap a
harvest. Lord Buddha said that He has done so and that He is reaping
what he sowed (I can't remember the exact words). Yet another
occasion, when Lord Buddha was going on His arms rounds Bahiya
requested thrice a `kamatahan'. Lord Buddha said that this was not
the time, but on the third time, He simply said, "Bahiya, in the
seen, there is only the seen. In the heard, only the heard, in the
sensed, only the sensed and in the cognized, there is only what is
cognized."

Thinking along those lines they arrived at the higher attainments.
Fortunately for them their Paramis were already in `place', that
conditioned their minds, to arrive at that attainment. What appears
is that He was provoking us to think. He did not teach the Paramatha
Dhammas to them, inspite of the fact that, He must have sensed that
their minds were just right for Awakening! The Suttas is full of
such instances where He directed our thoughts ( how to think / in
which direction) that bridged the gap to the Higher Dhammas. Don't
you think so, Sukin?

May all be Happy
Rinze.


#89419	From: "rinzeee" <rinzeee@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:47 pm 
Subject: Re: An Observation of This Panel 	rinzeee 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" <nidive@...> wrote:
Dear Swee Boon

> Hi Rinze,
>
> > "Cessation of Perception & Feeling Proper" is the suspension of
> > consciousness and therefore no perception and feeling
altogether.
> > Fruition Consciousness is the consciousness that `follows' path
> > consciousness. There is no suspension of consciousness as such.
>
> Thank you once again for your agreeable reply.
>
> If you may pardon my greediness, let me ask you another 2
questions.
>
> Previously you said that arahants could enjoy Fruition
Consciousness
> whenever they advert their minds to it, and that the Buddha abided
in
> this "voidness" whenever he wanted.
>
> Is animitta cetosamadhi in DN 16 (signless concentration of mind)
the
> same as Fruition Consciousness?

A Sign is the characteristic mark in the consciousness of Things.
This is perception, which leads to Thinking.

`Signless Concentration' is `not paying attention to the perception
of'. When we skillfully don't pay attention to the perception of
something, it is not `present' in the mind.

`Signless Concentration of mind – `Of mind' is because all this is
happening in the Mind. (Please don't think that there is someone
doing it!). All thinking (the birth of cetasikas) occurs with `Mind'
as base. Each cetasika dies off giving birth to the following
cetasika of like nature. This arrangement is ok if the feeling is
pleasant.

If unpleasant, this train of unpleasant cetasikas has to be counter-
acted (hence the `signless' or not paying attention). This function
is done by the Intention, another cetasika.

But there are many kinds of thoughts flowing in from our 6 sense
bases. This is where Concentration plays a part! In a given moment,
a concentrated mind is conditioned, with more of what is intended,
than what is arbitrarily sensed. The finer the `focus of attention'
is, the fewer the arbitrarily sensed data, in a given moment.

All these cetasikas, perception, feeling, attention, intention,
tranquility of mind (concentration) etc among others not mentioned
here, are the aggregates of Sankhara.

Now during Path Consciousness, our minds are so conditioned, with
the insight knowledges, that it is ready to take Nibbana as the
object, which is signless, desireless and void, the counterpart to
impermanence, suffering and not-self – the 3 signs of meditation.

If we take the `signless' approach to Nibbana, then that
concentration is called `animitta cetovimukti' not `cetosamadhi'.
Therefore animitta cetosamadhi is not fruition consciousness, but
when in Path Consciousness, it qualifies itself to Frution
Consciousness, and is called animitta cetovimukti, the signless
deliverance of mind!

> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html
>
> "Now I am frail, Ananda, old, aged, far gone in years. This is my
> eightieth year, and my life is spent. Even as an old cart, Ananda,
is
> held together with much difficulty, so the body of the Tathagata
is
> kept going only with supports. It is, Ananda, only when the
> Tathagata, disregarding external objects, with the cessation of
> certain feelings, attains to and abides in the signless
concentration
> of mind (animitta cetosamadhi), that his body is more comfortable.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> It is interesting that the Buddha said that only certain and not
all
> feelings are ceased while in animitta cetosamadhi.

Lord Buddha is able to selectively `cut off' the unpleasant feelings
in the mind, related to the physical sensations in the body, by not
paying attention to the perception of pain, the psychic counterpart
to the physical thing. And that too while feeling the pleasant
company of Ven. Ananda, attending to his needs!

This is something like you looking at your company photograph, with
50 other people in it, but not noticing me, who was also in the
picture, because I provoke unpleasant memories in you! Or like our
son, engrossed in an interesting TV program, and do not hear his
mother, calling him to dine, from a few yards behind him!

But these are instances of unintentional behaviour, unlike Lord
Buddha who intentionally does it through animitta cetosamadhi.
That's how only certain and not all feelings are ceased in animitta
cetosamadhi.

> Also, do the following sutta passages describe Fruition
Consciousness?
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/
> likefire/2-1.html
>
> Ananda: In what way, lord, might a monk attain concentration of
such
> a form that he would have neither the perception of earth with
regard
> to earth, nor of water with regard to water, nor of fire...
wind...
> the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the
> infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness... the
> dimension of neither perception nor non-perception... this
world...
> nor of the next world with regard to the next world, and yet he
would
> still be percipient?
>
> The Buddha: There is the case, Ananda, where he would be
percipient
> of this: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all
> mental processes; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the
ending
> of craving; dispassion; stopping; nibbana.'
>
> — A X.6
>
> [Ananda puts the same question to Sariputta, who responds that he
> himself once had experienced such a concentration.]
>
> Ananda: But what were you percipient of at that time?
>
> Sariputta: 'The stopping of becoming — nibbana — the stopping of
> becoming — nibbana': One perception arose in me as another
perception
> stopped. Just as in a blazing woodchip fire, one flame arises as
> another flame disappears, even so, 'The stopping of becoming —
> nibbana — the stopping of becoming — nibbana': One perception
arose
> in me as another one stopped. I was percipient of the stopping of
> becoming — nibbana.
>
> — A X.7
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Swee Boon
>
Yes, they describe the Fruition Consciousness of Lord Buddha and
Ven. Sariputta. Note that Ven. Sariputta describes the gap, in-
between two consecutive cetasikas. It is said that, only he can
achieve this high level of concentration, apart from Lord Buddha,
which is why Lord Buddha told only him, the Abhidhamma, as only he
could discern the Dhamma, to that extent!

May all beings be Happy
Rinze


#89420	From: "kenhowardau" <kenhowardau@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:53 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Slandering of Venerable Monk. 	kenhowardau 
 
 		Hi Howard,

----------
<. . .>
KH: > > Do
> they grow old and die? If they die are they reborn? Are they not
> reborn? Are they both reborn and not reborn? Are they neither
reborn
> nor not reborn.
> ----------------------------------------------
> Howard:
>     What does the Buddha say? Read the suttas. Ken,  there is more
than one
> level of speech, and so long as one understands the facts  in
adequately full
> detail, there is no problem. If one misapplies the  facts, so that,
for
> example, one thinks that when murder occurs, no one has been
killed, that is drastic
> error.
-----------

I can't force you to agree with me. :-) But I can say once again that
the right view "there are only dhammas" will never lead anyone to
commit murder. Wrong view, however, will lead to all kinds of
akusala.

A wrong view is any belief in the ultimate scheme of things (will I
be reborn, will I not be reborn etc) that is not satipatthana - the
knowledge of paramattha dhammas.

At a moment of satipatthana a dhamma is known to be totally lacking
in self of any kind. At such a moment it can be said "there is no
self, no tree, no 'dynamic assemblage'  in a dahmma. And there are
only dhammas!"

Ken H


#89421	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:53 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma, Logic, Anatta 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Herman

> Well Jon, if you can point to something that is not a dhamma, than
you
> have made a worthwhile point.

The word "dhamma" in the teachings has a very specific meaning.  It
is not a synonym for anything and everything ;-)).

For example, there is no dhamma of "computer".  The idea of *a thing
called a computer* arises based on different moments of experience
(consciousness) through the 6 doors.  Moments of consciousness (for
example, seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness) are dhammas.
The (mere) visible data experienced by seeing consciousness and
audible data experienced by hearing consciousness are other instances
of dhammas, as are the moments of thinking conditioned by such sense-
door experiences.

Jon


#89422	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:55 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Herman

> > And that intellectual understanding is requisite for direct
> > experience to occur.
>
> In circles where expressions of faith are considered to be
admirable,
> this is a great statement. But any fool will realise that no amount
of
> intellectual understanding of any kind of experience can lead to
that
> experience.

I think you have missed the point, which was that direct
understanding of dhammas cannot (according to my reading of the
teachings) arise without there first being an intellectual
understanding of dhammas and the direct understanding of them.  I do
not see any "expression of faith" in this.

Jon


#89423	From: "rinzeee" <rinzeee@...> 
Date: Sun Aug 24, 2008 11:57 pm 
Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream 	rinzeee 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
Dear Alex, Tep and the rest,

> Dear Rinze, and all
>
> --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rinzeee" <rinzeee@>
> wrote:
> > But there actually is no one practicing the Dhamma!
>
> The Blessed One said, "And which is the burden? 'The five clinging-
> aggregates,' it should be said. Which five? Form as a clinging-
> aggregate, feeling as a clinging-aggregate, perception as a
clinging-
> aggregate, fabrications as a clinging-aggregate, consciousness as
a
> clinging-aggregate. This, monks, is called the burden.
>
> "And which is the carrier of the burden? 'The person,' it should
be
> said. This venerable one with such a name, such a clan-name. This
is
> called the carrier of the burden.
>
> "And which is the taking up of the burden? The craving that makes
for
> further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now
> here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for
> becoming, craving for non-becoming. This is called the taking up
of
> the burden.
>
> "And which is the casting off of the burden? The remainderless
fading
> & cessation, renunciation, relinquishment, release, & letting go
of
> that very craving. This is called the casting off of the burden."
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.022.than.html
> ===================================================
>
>
> Notice what the Buddha has said about Puggala (Person).
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
> Alex
>
Consider this scenario…...

Imagine a caveman or an aborigine say, who goes about naked in their
society, happen to drift into our surroundings. Even among us, he
lives his own way, naked, entirely oblivious to the different
environment he is now in. He takes what he wants, he kills animals
for his food, and so on.

Then one of us goes, and advices him, on good principles, and tells
him, "Look, in our society, we don't behave like you do, least of
all being naked. At least why don't you where this cloth around your
waist?"  And so, having wisely listened to the advice we gave, from
then on, he always goes about not being naked. But, since he is not
skillfull, in wearing this cloth around his waist, it occasionally
falls open, exposing his nakedness. But he quickly ties it back
again, before anybody could notice it, ashamed of his brief
exposure!

Would we call ourselves, an un-instructed ordinary common person, a
worldling, not having heard the Dhamma, with no confidence in the
Buddha, Dhamma or Sangha, and not observing the precepts? No.

Would we call ourselves an Arahant, who has "cast off the burden?"
No.

Then we are some thing, in the twilight zone, in-between, right?

Would an Anagami, who has not "cast off the burden" as yet,
think, "I am person, sitting under this tree, meditating to cast off
the burden?"

Would a Sakadagami,.. Sotapanna.. Cula-sotapanna. Bhikku,..Bhikkuni…
Upasika… Upasikaa.. think, "I am person, sitting under this tree,
meditating to cast off the burden?"

Generally, of the three broad categories of people, Lord Buddha says
that a Puthujjana perceives things and conceives, since he DOES NOT
see `the burden'. He is concerned with the mundane world, hence a
worldling.

A Sekha SHOULD NOT conceive, since he has seen `the burden'. He
seeks Nibbana a supramudane thing.

An Arahat NEED NOT conceive, since he has already cast off `the
burden'! He has attained Nibbana.

So, a Puthujjana considers that, there is someone who is meditating,
like Alara Kalama or Uddaca Ramaputra, for instance. They attained
the states of Nothingness and Neither P nor Non P respectively, the
penultimate states to Nibbana. To them the 5 holding aggregates were
a burden, not seen hence operative.

Lord Buddha as Siddhartha Gautama, who trained under them, attained
these same states, but sensed this burden, while meditating. He was
dissatisfied, left them and meditated on His own, as given in the
Suttas.

Ven. Sariputta, under the guidance of Lord Buddha, also meditated.
To him, there is no one who is meditating. It's simply a physical &
mental process. The conditions for the 5 holding aggregates were
progressively eradicated, never to rise again. Ven. Sariputta was
satisfied of Lord Buddha's guidance, saw the `proof of the pudding',
attained Arahantship.

Therefore, should we meditate like Alara Kalama or Ven. Sariputta?
One was ignorant of a `self', the other was wise. Having listened or
discussed the Dhamma wisely, and having confidence in the Buddha,
Dhamma and Sangha, (therefore Faith), and observing the precepts
(Sila), need we STILL consider a self, if not how to cast off `the
burden'?

Although our Sila may not be unbroken, but would be quickly mended
when broken, like the Aborigine, who would instantly wear his cloth,
when it slips off, to cover his nakedness, we are assured, at least
of attaining the stage of Sotapatti when the dependent nature of
things are seen.

May all beings be Happy
Rinze


#89424	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:02 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Herman

> You seem to acknowledge that the commentators have interpreted the
> suttas. But you do not seem to acknowledge that they have derived
> general doctrinal positions from specific examples. If the purpose
of
> commentating was not to distill some essential formulation from the
> raw material of the suttas, why commentate?

Yes, the commentators elaborated on things said by the Buddha.  Those
elaborations date from the time of the Buddha or soon after, and have
long been regarded as the Buddha-word.  Elaborations by modern-day
commentators (the T, D and H's) can hardly be expected to enjoy the
same standing.

But in any event, the point I'm trying to make applies regardless of
those considerations.  I'm saying that the mere mention in the suttas
of enlightenment being preceded by the attainment of jhana, no matter
how frequent, cannot be taken as establishing a doctrine of jhana as
a necessary prerequisite for enlightenment.

Jon


#89425	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:05 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta 	jonoabb 
 
 		Alex

> I agree. No amount of intellectual understanding is equal to direct
> experience.

Agreed ("No amount of intellectual understanding is equal to direct
experience"); and no-one here has ever suggested it was (or did you
think they had?).

What has been said is:
-  that intellectual understanding and direct experience are
different levels of panna in the same continuum; and
-  that the intellectual understanding is a necessary prerequisite
for the direct experience, that is to say, direct experience cannot
occur without there being correct intellectual understanding.

(Just to avoid any possible misunderstanding, the second of these
points is not saying that intellectual understanding *necessarily and
automatically* results in direct experience.)

(Intellectual understanding here means an intellectual understanding
of the development of insight as set out in the teachings (including
an understanding of dhammas and their characteristics).  Direct
experience means the direct experience of the characteristic of
dhammas.)

> Understanding without practice and/or direct seeing is almost
useless.
> And hey, how would we distinguish the understanding of one
tradition vs
> understanding of another Buddhist tradition?

It has never been suggested here that intellectual understanding
itself is the goal.

> Can one develop full "understanding" of the mind without deep
> meditation?
>
> Not a chance as long as other 5 senses are operational.

Two questions for you:
1.   Would you mind explaining what you mean here by "deep
meditation", please.
2.   Do you have any sutta support for the proposition that insight
cannot be developed unless the 5 senses are not "operational"?

> Only when 5 senses shut down can the full force of mindfulness
observe
> the 6th sense. It is like being in a room with 6 tvs, all of them
> showing different programs - too much distraction. But when you
shut
> down 5 TV's and leave one on, only then (the mind) can be fully
seen
> with super mindfulness... ... ...

You speak here as though the development of insight is about
understanding "the mind" to the exclusion of all else.

To my understanding, the development of insight is about
understanding dhammas, including (but not limited to) "the mind".

Jon


#89426	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:14 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is a question? 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Herman

> > According to the teachings, moments of consciousness that
accompany
> > actions are either wholesome or unwholesome by their nature,
> > regardless of any perception as to the goal of the action.
>
> You sound like a blind man describing the colour red, Jon. :-)

But that observation aside, do you have any comment on the substance
of the point, namely that according to the teachings, moments of
consciousness that accompany actions are either wholesome or
unwholesome by their nature, regardless of any perception as to the
goal of the action?

(And as far as not really knowing what I'm talking about, I've never
claimed otherwise!)

>  Craving is an integral part of why anything to do
> with our lives, is the way it is. That is clear from DO and the 4NT.
> There is no goal to craving, but all our actions are in the service
of
> quenching it.

Yes agreed, as a general proposition.  But we should keep in mind
that it is only a generalisation.  In fact, there are also many
moments that are not akusala, namely, the moments of kusala that
arise from time to time (the suttas inform us that these are by no
means insignificant, even 'ordinary' dana) and the seemingly non-stop
moments of experiences through the 5 sense doors (vipaka, resultant
consciousness).

> In the absence of craving, there is no need to do
> anything. What could possibly be the goal of an action that didn't
> want things to be different to what they already are, Jon?

Whoa there.  It may be true that all our actions are accompanied by
craving (generally speaking);  but that doesn't mean that in the
absence of craving there would be no action.  I'd be interested to
know what authority you rely on for that.  Clearly, according to the
teachings, final enlightenment does not bring with it the sudden
ceasing of all action (vipaka plays a role here, I believe) -- that
would only come at parinibbana.

> I know of a path that leads to cessation that is well described. It
> seems to me that a path that  leads to knowledge or understanding of
> some kind is simply a perpetuation of samsara. I do not think this
is
> what Buddhism is about. But you are free to do as you see fit.:-)

I understand the path taught by the Buddha to be a path *consisting
of* understanding, and *leading to* enlightenment and, (at the death
of the arahant), to cessation.  Do you see it differently?

Jon


#89427	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:15 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Scholasticism & hair splitting 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Herman

> You should not expect an answer, because the people you have asked
are
> mainly interested in the psychological theories that were popular in
> Sri Lanka around 500 AD. Jhanas were well out of vogue by then, it
was
> mainly tooth relics and cuttings from the Bodhi tree that kept the
> sangha in business those days.

Any particular basis for the comment that jhanas fell out of vogue?
As far as I know, that has never been the case.

Jon



#89428	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:19 am 
Subject: Of Mice and Men (Re: [dsg] A question on contiguity) 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Herman

> Do you understand the difference between data and information?
>
> If not, then I will accept that it is beyond my capacity to teach
you
> what a pattern is. Which in no way will change the fact that
> everything you do and say is patterned.

Well I understand your last remark ("everything you do and say is
patterned").  But I don't see how that would make what is done and
said a pattern.  To my understanding of the term, that which is
patterned would not be termed a pattern.

Jon


#89429	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 4:29 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Lukas,

--- On Fri, 22/8/08, szmicio <szmicio@...> wrote:
>> S: If there's anything you'd like to quote and discuss further, of
course I'll be glad to do so. Remember, whatever we read about from
any source, there are only dhammas which are anatta.

L:>so this remembering about anatta, can condition understanding of nama
and rupa?
Can you say something about diffrent levels of panja?
....
S: I think that by understanding more about namas and rupas, we appreciate more
and more that all dhammas are anatta. When there's the idea of "I will do
something", or "My experience", it's not the understanding of dhammas.

So, as we often stress, visible object is appearing very often, but usually we
think about all sorts of things without any understanding of it as a dhamma, as
anatta. Anatta means there is no person or thing - just a reality which appears,
no one there at all. For example, it is atta sanna which keeps remembering or
thinking about postures or a whole body. It is panna that understands that only
certain rupas are experienced through the body-sense, one at a time. It is panna
that understands that unpleasant bodily feeling is a nama, not a rupa, not
belonging to anyone. Again it is panna which understands any kind of dosa, such
as 'frustration' or any kind of lobha as again just conditioned dhammas, anatta,
not belonging to anyone and not lasting at all.

So this appreciation now of dhammas as dhammas which are anatta is a kind of
panna. However, the panna has to develop and develop in order to eradicated the
deep-rooted perversions, such as atta-sanna.

As I read Nina's series on 'Sri Lanka' again, I'm reminded of some of K.Sujin's
words that struck me so much at the time, especially the emphasis on "Life
exists in a moment". It is panna which understands there really only ever is one
citta at a time and one object appearing at a time. Very liberating!

Metta,

Sarah
=======


#89430	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 4:50 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Alex & all,

--- On Fri, 22/8/08, Alex <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
>Thank you Sarah for those #s.

>However if they deny conventional trees, cars, people, actions. Then
I disagree based on number of suttas.
....
S: Speaking conventionally, no one has ever denied there are trees etc. We don't
need a Buddha's wisdom to teach us about them.

However, what is actually seen at this moment? When there is the idea of 'trees'
now, what is the reality?
....

A:> How can you hold the view that "There was no Buddha, no teaching, no
one being taught, no caves/forests and abandoned places where the
forest monks liked to develop Arahatamagga & phala".
....
S: There is only ever cittas, cetasikas and rupas. At the moment of thinking
about 'the Buddha', about 'caves', what is real? Is it citta, cetasika or rupa?
....
A:> Conventionally these people and things DO exist. Otherwise who is
reading and writing these?
...
S: Yes, conventionally. No one has denied this. This is why there are
conventional truths and ultimate truths. Conventional refers to that which is
used to communicate and for common understanding. Ultimate refers to what
actually exists now.
....

A:> Before stream, one has Sakkayditthi (even if one keeps saying "No
Ken! No Sarah! No Alex!"
....
S: [Sakkaya ditthi arises - no 'one' has it.] Regardless of how much akusala has
been accumulated, or how much ditthi arises, isn't it time for right
understanding to begin to develop now?
....

A:> Before Arahatship there is STILL delusive conceit "I am".
....
S: So again, better to understand such conceits and wrong views when they arise
and appreciate that they are passing dhammas, not belonging to anyone.
....

A:> To disregard these things (prior to stream) is like sticking one's
head in the ground between railway tracks in front of the train.
...
S: I agree - this is why we emphasise the importance of understanding whatever
dhamma appears now without any selection. As you wrote in a recent post
(#88818), "it is voice of another  & "yoniso manasikara" which preced right
view. [Btw, in MN117, it is not 'conceptual' right view that is being referred
to, but the right view accompanying the development of insight (with
fermentations still not eradicated).]

Metta,

Sarah
=========


#89431	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 5:16 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Sarah and Lukas,

S: "As I read Nina's series on 'Sri Lanka' again, I'm reminded of some
of K.Sujin's words that struck me so much at the time, especially the
emphasis on "Life exists in a moment". It is panna which understands
there really only ever is one citta at a time and one object appearing
at a time. Very liberating!"

Scott: I'm re-reading "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas", this time very
slowly, and am enjoying a rather painstaking look at each reference.
In this case, it so happens, I've just this morning been checking the
SN 61(1) The Uninstructed (1) referenced on page 43, in a section
devoted to the phrase, "[a]ll conditioned dhammas are impermanent".

I was checking the Paa.li for the text (p. 43), in which it is stated:

"...what we call thought, what we call mind, what we call
consciousness [citta]...that we call thought, that we call mind, that
we call consciousness: one {citta arises when another perishes], day
and night."

Since Sarah's statement "there is ever only one citta at a time" is so
central to a certain understanding of things (and so oft stated), I
thought it worth making sure that this is also in the suttas.  The
Paa.li for the text in question is:

"Ya.m ca kho eta.m bhikkhave, vuccati citta.m itipi mano itipi
vi~n~naa.na.m itipi...Ya~nca kho eta.m bhikkhave vuccati citta.m itipi
mano itipi vi~n~naa.na.m itipi. Ta.m rattiyaa ca divasassa ca
a~n~nadeva uppajjati a~n~na.m nirujjhati."

It is clear that the reference is accurately rendered, and that
"citta" does indeed appear as noted.

Bh. Bodhi renders the section thusly:

"...as to that which is called 'mind' and 'mentality' and
'consciousness'...that which is called 'mind' and 'mentality' and
'consciousness' arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and
by night."

The Commentarial explanation:

Note 157: "Spk: By day and by night (rattiyaa ca divasassa ca): This
is a genitive in the locative sense, i.e. during the night and during
the day.  Arises as one thing and ceases as another (a~n~nadeva
uppajjati, a~n~na.m nirujjhati): The meaning is that (the mind) that
arises and ceases during the day is other than (the mind) that arises
and ceases during the night.  The statement should not be taken to
mean that one thing arises and something altogether different, which
had not arisen, ceases.  'Day and night' is said by way of continuity,
taking a continuity of lesser duration that the previous one (i.e.,
the one stated for the body).  But one citta is not able to endure for
a whole day or a whole night.  Even in the time of a fingersnap man
hundred thousand of ko.tis of cittas arise and cease (1 ko.ti=10
million).  The simile of the monkey should be understood thus:  The
'grove of objects' is like the forest grove.  The mind arising in the
grove of objects is like the monkey wandering in the forest grove.
The mind's taking hold of an object is like the monkey grabbing hold
of a branch.  Just as the monkey, roaming through the forest, leaves
behind one branch and grabs hold of another, so the mind, roaming
through the grove of objects, arises sometimes grasping hold of a
visible object, sometimes a sound, sometimes the past, sometimes the
present or the future, sometimes an internal object, sometimes an
external object.  When the monkey does not find a (new) branch but
does not descend and sit on the ground but sits holding a single leafy
branch.  So too, when the mind is roaming through the grove of
objects, it cannot be said that it arises without holding to an
object; rather, it arises holding to an object of a single kind."

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89432	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 5:18 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Hi Tep & all,

--- On Sat, 23/8/08, Tep Sastri <indriyabala@...> wrote:

Questions for discussion,
if you want to discuss. ;-)
------------ --------- ---

Is frustration avoidable in Dhamma discussion?
In case it is unavoidable, how may frustraion be manageed so that a
fruitful/beneficial outcome still is possible?
....
S: A good question!

I think that while there are such tendencies, it's bound to arise. I think it
helps a lot to remember that just like attachment, it's just another conditioned
dhamma, not belonging to anyone.

I think that such an understanding also helps us to have more metta and
understanding for others, because it's so very common- it arises and is gone
immediately. There's no point in clinging to ideas about this or that person who
experiences such a state.

We'd all like to be without certain kilesa (defilements), but isn't this just
more clinging to oneself being a certain way?

These discussions always have fruitful outcomes, I believe as they are very
relevant to dhammas in daily life. Thank you for your sincere sharing which
helps us all to reflect further.

Metta,

Sarah
p.s Thank you for your other kind apology re U.P. It is difficult to know where
to look. Btw, recently you've been discussing the Yuganaddha Sutta in AN 4s with
others and making some good points (i.e ones I agree with:-)) to Alex. More on
this sutta in U.P. under 'Yuganaddha'.
========


#89433	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:27 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Scott (Lukas, Ken H, Sukin & all),

--- On Mon, 25/8/08, Scott <scduncan@...> wrote:


>Since Sarah's statement "there is ever only one citta at a time" is so
central to a certain understanding of things (and so oft stated), I
thought it worth making sure that this is also in the suttas. The
Paa.li for the text in question is:

"Ya.m ca kho eta.m bhikkhave, vuccati citta.m itipi mano itipi
vi~n~naa.na. m itipi...Ya~nca kho eta.m bhikkhave vuccati citta.m itipi
mano itipi vi~n~naa.na. m itipi. Ta.m rattiyaa ca divasassa ca
a~n~nadeva uppajjati a~n~na.m nirujjhati."

It is clear that the reference is accurately rendered, and that
"citta" does indeed appear as noted.
....
Sarah: Thanks for all your good research as usual, Scott. I have another of your
messages to add a note to sometime, but am too jet-lagged/tired now to do more.

"There is ever only one citta at a time" and "Life exists in a moment" seem so
obvious and yet we still go searching for another citta and another moment.

Ken & Sukin, we finally caught up with Vince in Australia while we were sitting
in the plane on the tarmac before take-off! (I'd asked him to call us, but
hadn't given him our number and we had no internet for a couple of days before
leaving Syd, so hadn't seen his email). Nancy (his partner) is on a two month
retreat in the States and he joins her this week to also do a two month retreat.
We joked about how there's as much chance of Jon joining him for this as there
is of his joining Jon for the 5 a.m. beach and freezing sea dips in Sydney in
August!

Anyway, I was probably thinking about retreats and so on, when I started
chatting during the flight to a Thai steward, 'Ekachai', who was interested to
hear about our Bangkok plans and Dhamma discussions without 'meditation' of the
usual kind. We had several chats during the flight about 'life existing at this
moment only', 'meditation now' whilst serving passengers and so on. He had
thought he was too busy for Buddhism and meditation and of course this really
helped me pass the time:-). He (politely??) said he'd attend the Foundation
English discussions sometime, but is not free this week. He'd heard about
A.Sujin before.

It just depends on the accumulations, whether such comments make any sense or
seem as liberating and obviously true when heard.

Anyway, I'm rambling.....

See you tomorrow afternoon, Sukin and others in Bangkok!

Metta,

Sarah
==========


#89434	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:50 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in daily life 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Jon, Sarah, Sukinder and all DSG Abhidhammikas

>---  "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> wrote:
>
> What has been said is:
> -  that intellectual understanding and direct experience are
> different levels of panna in the same continuum; and
> -  that the intellectual understanding is a necessary prerequisite
> for the direct experience, that is to say, direct experience cannot
> occur without there being correct intellectual understanding.
>
> (Just to avoid any possible misunderstanding, the second of these
> points is not saying that intellectual understanding *necessarily
>and automatically* results in direct experience.)
>
> (Intellectual understanding here means an intellectual
>understanding of the development of insight as set out in the
>teachings (including
> an understanding of dhammas and their characteristics).  Direct
> experience means the direct experience of the characteristic of
> dhammas.)

Can you please provide an example of how a person applies this direct
experience? If it is not a secret, can you please tell me
specifically how one uses Intellectual Understanding to get a direct
experience. Do you use mental noting "Nama, Nama."  or do you
mentally go over the experience that has just happened as "This was
just cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising and ceasing".

Thank you very much for your reply,

It was quite good.



Best wishes,


Alex


#89435	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:59 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Jon and all,

>--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...>
>wrote:
>
> Alex
>
> > Can one develop full "understanding" of the mind without deep
> > meditation?
> >
> > Not a chance as long as other 5 senses are operational.
>
> Two questions for you:
> 1.   Would you mind explaining what you mean here by "deep
> meditation", please.

Jhanas, Aruppa levels & cessation

> 2. Do you have any sutta support for the proposition that insight
> cannot be developed unless the 5 senses are not "operational"?

First of all, for some induvidials it may have been possible to have
a limited meditational experience and become awakened.

The commentaries say that today there are only Neyya & Padaparama
induvidials who do need more work to do.


===============================
From Ledi sayadaw
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/individu.htm

""(1) A Ugghatitannu : an individual who· encounters a Buddha
in person, and who is capable of attaining the Holy Paths and the
Holy Fruits through the mere hearing of a short concise discourse.
(2) A Vipancitannu: an individual who · encounters a Buddha in
person, but · who is capable of attaining the Paths and the Fruits
only when the short discourse is expounded to him at some length.

At the present day, only the following Neyya and Padaparama classes
of individuals remain.
(3) A Neyya : an individual who needs · to study the sermon and the
exposition, and then · to practise the provisions contained therein
for 7 days to 60 years, to attain the Paths and the Fruits during
this lifetime if he tries hard with guidance from the right teacher.
(4) A Padaparama : is an individual who cannot attain the Paths and
the Fruits within this lifetime can attain release from worldly ills
in his next existence if he dies while practising samatha or
vipassana and attains rebirth either as a human being or a deva
within the present Buddha Sasana. "" Ledi sayadaw.
================================================

> > Only when 5 senses shut down can the full force of mindfulness
> observe
> > the 6th sense. It is like being in a room with 6 tvs, all of them
> > showing different programs - too much distraction. But when you
> shut
> > down 5 TV's and leave one on, only then (the mind) can be fully
> seen
> > with super mindfulness... ... ...
>
> You speak here as though the development of insight is about
> understanding "the mind" to the exclusion of all else.

In order to get to that stage one must have strong enough
understanding of kaya/vedana anupassana. So one doesn't always refute
the other.


Best wishes,

Alex


#89436	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 10:09 am 
Subject: Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Sarah and all,

>-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote:
> Dear Alex & all,
>S1: Speaking conventionally, no one has ever denied there are trees
>etc. We don't need a Buddha's wisdom to teach us about them.

>S2: There is only ever cittas, cetasikas and rupas. At the moment of
>thinking about 'the Buddha', about 'caves', what is real? Is it
>citta, cetasika or rupa?

>A: Conventionally these people and things DO exist. Otherwise who is
>reading and writing these?

>S3: Yes, conventionally. No one has denied this.

>S4: This is why there are conventional truths and ultimate truths.
>S5: Conventional refers to that which is used to communicate and for
>common understanding.
>S6: Ultimate refers to what actually exists now.
>==========================================================


In S1 you have said:  "nobody ever denied there are trees, etc "
In S2 you are subtly refuting the existence of "'the Buddha' & 'caves'
In S3 you are back at S1 (contrary to S2)
In S4 you say that there are 2 'truths'
In S5 you are saying that CT is for communication & common
understanding

In S6 by saying that Ultimate refers to what actually exists now, you
like in S2 are refuting what in S1 & S3 you've said.

???



Best wishes,


Alex


#89437	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:32 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Alex and Sarah -

In a message dated 8/25/2008 1:09:58 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
truth_aerator@... writes:

Dear  Sarah and all,

>-- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott  wrote:
> Dear Alex & all,
>S1: Speaking conventionally, no one  has ever denied there are trees
>etc. We don't need a Buddha's wisdom  to teach us about them.

>S2: There is only ever cittas, cetasikas  and rupas. At the moment of
>thinking about 'the Buddha', about  'caves', what is real? Is it
>citta, cetasika or rupa?

>A:  Conventionally these people and things DO exist. Otherwise who  is
>reading and writing these?

>S3: Yes, conventionally. No  one has denied this.

>S4: This is why there are conventional truths  and ultimate truths.
>S5: Conventional refers to that which is used to  communicate and for
>common understanding.
>S6: Ultimate refers  to what actually exists  now.
>==========================================================


In  S1 you have said:  "nobody ever denied there are trees, etc "
In S2  you are subtly refuting the existence of "'the Buddha' & 'caves'
In S3  you are back at S1 (contrary to S2)
In S4 you say that there are 2  'truths'
In S5 you are saying that CT is for communication & common
understanding

In S6 by saying that Ultimate refers to what actually  exists now, you
like in S2 are refuting what in S1 & S3 you've  said.

???



Best wishes,


Alex
==============================
     It seems to me that what is missing in all this  conversation is the
matter of patterned aggregates of interrelated namas and  rupas that act in
concert - what I call "aggregations". It is a convention  to speak of these
aggregates as individuals, but in reality they are only  collections. As I see
it, it
is by means of this understanding that one can  bridge the divide between
sammuti vaca and paramattha vaca.
     And whatever the sort of speech one is using,  everything that is
referenced, if it exists in any way at all, is empty of  self.

With metta,
Howard


#89438	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 12:44 pm 
Subject: Re: Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Sarah, -

Thank you for the following helpful comment on how to avoid
frustration.

>Sarah:
>I think that while there are such tendencies, it's bound to arise. I
think it helps a lot to remember that just like attachment, it's just
another conditioned dhamma, not belonging to anyone.

>I think that such an understanding also helps us to have more metta
and understanding for others, because it's so very common- it arises
and is gone immediately. There's no point in clinging to ideas about
this or that person who experiences such a state.

>We'd all like to be without certain kilesa (defilements), but isn't
this just more clinging to oneself being a certain way?

T: You're right. Just be mindful enough to know when a certain kilesa
(say, a sa.myojana) is in the mind then let it go (easier said than
done, though).

>S: These discussions always have fruitful outcomes, I believe as
they are very relevant to dhammas in daily life. Thank you for your
sincere sharing which helps us all to reflect further.

T: Yes, a dhamma discussion like this is fruitful. Simply because it
doesn't involve with the human elements, me and mine.

I thank you too Sarah, very much, for showing "metta and
understanding".

>S: Btw, recently you've been discussing the Yuganaddha Sutta in AN
4s with others and making some good points (i.e ones I agree with:-))
to Alex.

T: It's not easy for us to find a sutta like that everyday! :-)

Tep
===


#89439	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:21 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Introduction to the Dhamma. 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi, Sukin (Nina, Sarah, Alex and anyone), -

You asked me to review the first chapter of the Abhidhamma in Daily
Life by Nina.

In the Introduction Nina very briefly describes the Suttanta-pitaka
and the Abhidhamma-pitaka as follows :

"In the Suttanta, Dhamma is explained to different people at
different places. The Buddha taught about all realities appearing
through the six doors, about cause and effect, about the practice
leading to the end of all sorrow."

"As regards the Abhidhamma, this is an exposition of all realities in
detail."

"While we are studying the different namas and rupas and while we are
pondering over them, we can be reminded to be aware of nama and rupa
appearing at that moment. In this way we will  discover more and more
that the Abhidhamma is about everything which is real, that is, the
worlds appearing through the six doors."

Sukin, please notice that Nina first of all states that the Suttanta
is about the Buddha's teaching and the "practice leading to the end
of all sorrow", while the Abhidhamma is the exposition about "all
realities in detail". Then she gives her own opinion how the student
may become "aware of nama and rupa appearing" through "the six
doors". She essentially gives the definition of "realities" as "the
worlds appearing through the six doors".

Sukin, I cannot help wondering why didn't Nina instead write 'Dhamma
in Daily Life' that was based on the Suttanta's teaching of dhammas
and the 'practice leading to the end of all sorrow'. That would be
very direct and  thus logically easier to do than using the indirect
Abhidhamma route.

Now, I am going to read and ponder over Chapter 1 :  The Four
Paramattha Dhammas. I will jot down some thoughts I may have while
reading through this chapter, paragraph by paragraph. After that I
will give an overall comment and evaluation of the chapter, according
to your requirements, namely :

1. Do not compare it with the Sutta Pitaka.
2. Keep in mind that newcomers are interested in the truth, not the
Teachings yet.
3. Evaluate it whether it "makes sense to the reader in terms of
experience".  Is it good as the "seed for Saddha" for a newcomer?

No problemo, Sukino !  ;-))

I plan to post that review later tonight.

Tep
===


#89440	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:44 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Introduction to the Dhamma. 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Tep,

Awesome review. Please continue writing more of these.


>--- "Tep Sastri"
>
> Hi, Sukin (Nina, Sarah, Alex and anyone), -
>
> You asked me to review the first chapter of the Abhidhamma in Daily
> Life by Nina.
>
> Sukin, I cannot help wondering why didn't Nina instead
>write 'Dhamma
> in Daily Life' that was based on the Suttanta's teaching of dhammas
> and the 'practice leading to the end of all sorrow'. That would be
> very direct and  thus logically easier to do than using the
>indirect  Abhidhamma route.
>
> Now, I am going to read and ponder over Chapter 1 :  The Four
> Paramattha Dhammas. I will jot down some thoughts I may have while
> reading through this chapter, paragraph by paragraph. After that I
> will give an overall comment and evaluation of the chapter,
>according to your requirements, namely :
>
> 1. Do not compare it with the Sutta Pitaka.
> 2. Keep in mind that newcomers are interested in the truth, not the
> Teachings yet.
> 3. Evaluate it whether it "makes sense to the reader in terms of
> experience".  Is it good as the "seed for Saddha" for a newcomer?
  >
> I plan to post that review later tonight.
>
> Tep
> ===

Best wishes,

Alex


#89441	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 6:35 pm 
Subject: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Sukin (and anyone who is interested), -

I have some thoughts about Chapter 1, Abhidhamma in Daily Life.
Please do not think of them as criticism.

1. Nina heavily quotes from the Visuddhimagga as if it were
the 'Abhidhamma'. A newcomer may wonder:  Is this Vism based on the
Abhidhamma-pitaka? Why is there no quotes from the seven Abhidhamma
books that make up the Abhidhamma-pitaka?

2.  What kinds of dhammas did the Buddha discover? Can all these
dhammas be categorized either as nama or as rupa only?

"Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything."

But that may not be sufficiently clear to a newcomer, I think.
Why is it important for s/he to know that? What is experience?
Why is color a rupa, but a mountain is not?
Is seeing a mountain same as experiencing it by the eye?
What things can feeling experience ?
Can nama experience another nama or more than one?
Does a consciousness experience feeling?
But most of all, what is the use of knowing all these?


3. Nama and rupa "arise and fall away".
  What does that mean?

"Nama and rupa are absolute realities, in Pali: paramattha dhammas."

Is a mountain that is seen now, an absolute reality?  Are things that
are not absolute realities, not real? Isn't it true that anything,
that is not an absolute reality, is also impermanent and not self?
Self is a concept. If it is not a rupa, then can citta experience
self?

4. "we do not learn that hearing, ear-sense and sound are realities
which are altogether different from each other, we will continue to
think that it is self which hears."

Any newcomers when they hear a sound, think 'I hear the sound'. S/he
does not think it is a 'self which hears'.  Besides, they don't know
what's wrong about their hearing a sound; it is natural, and it is
real to them. "Hearing is hearing, and I hear sounds all the time. So
what!"  Then how can they be convinced that 'I hear' is a wrong
vision that leads to suffering?

5. "The citta which sees has what is visible as its object. The citta
which hears (hearing-consciousness) has sound as its object."

That sounds like an Axiom in Geometry to me. A newcomer is possibly
confused. How can the understanding that 'there is a citta which
hears' help someone get the right vision that abandons dukkha? Why is
there any advantage of knowing it is a 'citta which hears' over that
of 'I hear'. How do I know which citta is acting now?

Why do I need to know those cittas that arise and fall away all the
time, since I can never keep track of them anyway? So why bother?

6. A newcomer may not understand why getting to know, with more and
more detail of the various kinds of 'citta', can "motivate
unwholesome or wholesome deeds" by him. Why is knowing drawbacks of
the various kinds of akusala dhammas NOT more effective in motivating
someone to stop unwholesomeness? Isn't it true that clear knowing
about the wonderful advantages of kusala dhammas is usually
sufficient to motivate someone to develop wholesomeness?

Same questions as above (that a newcomer may ask) also apply to the
following cases :

-- classifying citta by plane of consciousness (bhumi).
-- considering the different intensities of citta ..
-- classification of citta into a hundred and twenty-one types ..

7. I like the elaboration on 'cetasikas'; Nina did a good job here.
Questions that a newcomer may possibly ask are as follows.

Are cetasikas not separate from cittas? What makes cittas and
cetasikas "arising together with the citta and falling away
together"? Why are cittas and cetasikas that arise in one person
different from those of anybody else, and yet there is no ownership?

"When we do not have a pleasant or an unpleasant feeling, there is
still feeling: at that moment the feeling is neutral or indifferent.
There is always feeling; there isn't any moment of citta without
feeling."

That sounds like a hypothesis or a theory that should be readily
accepted without proof. A newcomer may ask: Did the Buddha sat that?

8. The rest of the chapter is about the same as before: i.e. there is
this; there is that; there are several kinds of this; there are
several kinds of that; these are paramattha dhammas; these are not
paramattha dhammas; this is how they arise or pass away.

"All dhammas are anatta, not-self (in Pali: sabbe dhamma anatta).
Thus, the conditioned dhammas are impermanent and dukkha. But all
dhammas, that is, the four paramattha dhammas, nibbana included, have
the characteristic of anatta, not-self."

In short, take her words for everything she said as truthful, because
that's the way they are and will ever be.


Sincerely,


Tep
===


#89442	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:16 pm 
Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi, Alex, Jon, Sarah, Sukin, Scott and more -

In AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta: In Tandem, there are four kinds of
path. These four paths all lead to arahantship.

..........................

Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares the
attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of
one or another of four paths. Which four?

"There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by
tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the
path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he
follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are
abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

"Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity
preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight,
the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As
he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are
abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

"Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in
tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with
insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues
it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters
are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed.

"Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness
concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under
control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly,
settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is
born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows
the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned,
his obsessions destroyed.

"Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my
presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four
paths."
.............................

The 1st through 3rd path require both samatha and vipassana. Is the
fourth one similar to the DSG Abhidhamma Path?  ;-))


Yours truly,


Tep
===


#89443	From: "kenhowardau" <kenhowardau@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:30 pm 
Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' 	kenhowardau 
 
 		Hi Tep,

Sorry for the delay, I had meant to send this reply earlier, but
it got lost in my filing system.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri"
<indriyabala@...> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Kenh, Sukin, Sarah (Attn: Alex, Howard), -
>
> It is important to see the BIG difference between 'no self' and 'no
> individual' as Howard points out today.
>

<snip>


> T:  The Buddha made it very clear when there was a
(fleeting) 'self'
> and when there was no (permanent)self; also He made it clear
> when 'not self' in nama-rupa/khandhas/ayatanas should be
> contemplated. We have to pay wise attention to the Dhamma.
>
> I) Self in the Sense of Individual /Oneself
> (in Buddha's own words) :
> ---------------------------------------
> 'Attaa hi attano naatho, ko hi naatho paro siyaa.
> Attanaa hi sudantena, naatham labhati  dullabham.'
>
> "One indeed is one's own refuge; how can others be a refuge to one?
> With oneself thoroughly tamed, one can reach a refuge which is so
> difficult to attain."
>
> II) A Not-self Strategy of Contemplation
> (as told by the Lord Buddha):
> --------------------------------------
>
> 'Cakkhum aniccato vavattheti no niccato,
> dukkhato vavattheti no sukhato,
> anattato vavattheti no attato,
> nibbindati no nandati,
> virajjati no rajjati,
> nirodheti no samudeti,
> patinissajjati no aadaayati.'
>
> "He defines the eye as impermanent, not as permanent;
> he defines it as painful, not as pleasant;
> he defines it as not self, not as self;
> he becomes dispassionate, he does not delight;
> he causes the fading of greed, he does not inflame it;
> he causes cessation, he does not originate;
> he relinquishes, he does not grasp.
> .......................................
>
> What can be made clearer than the above Buddha's words?
>
-----------

KH: It is not the Buddha's words that need to be made clearer, it is
your (and Ven Thanissaro's) interpretations of them. What exactly
the "not-self strategy?" I have tried many times to give my
understanding of it, but you have always reacted angrily saying I
was "slandering a venerable monk!".

The two points you have made seem to be (1) there is a self, but (2)
we should consider the self as 'not in the five khandhas.'

Is that right? If that is the correct summary of the not-self (as
distinct from no-self) teaching how is it so different from the
versions I have been giving?

Ken H



> Thank you Alex and Howard for trying again and again and AGAIN; but
> your effort is NOT fruitfull simply because the other side clings
to
> the inflexible & extreme view 'ONLY THIS IS RIGHT'.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
> Tep
> ===
>


#89444	From: "Phil" <philco777@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:37 pm 
Subject: The importance of behaviour 	philofillet 
 
 		Hi all


   Hope you've been well. I had a nice long trip to Canada and I'd like
to jot down some thoughts...


    I am feeling these days more than ever that it is behaviour, the
kind of behaviour that can be observed by oneself and others, that is
important for me as a Buddhist. I think I was strongly influenced by AN
III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise person.":

     "His action marks the fool, his action marks the wise person, O
monks. Wisdom shines forth in behaviour.
      By three things the fool can be known: by bad conduct of bodyy,
speech and mind.
      By three things the wise person can be known: by good conduction
of body, speech and mind."

    I think it is fair and good that people question the citta that is
behind behaviour and point out that seemingly wholesome actions make be
in fact akusala because of ulterior motives lurking. But I don't worry
about that. I'm sure there are many cases where the above is true, but
I feel confident that seemingly wholesome behaviour is far more often
than not the result of wholesome cittas at work. If abhidhamma says
elsewise, fine, but as a busy householder prone to gross defilements,
the simple formula "whole behaviour comes from wholesome citta" is just
fine for me and if I can live the rest of this rare human birth in the
light of such a simple idea, I'll have a good refuge when facing death.

     I remember when my mother was first diagnosed with Alzheimer's,
Sarah shared a story about how she was worried about it because of a
relative, and A.S said  something along the lines of "who knows what is
really going on in the mind." What I would say now is that we *do* know
what is going on in the mind when we observe behaviour, though, again,
not to a perfect degree. So when I spent time with my mother and saw
how very rapidly cravings for food were replaced by somewhat angry
outbursts when made to wait a moment, and things like that, I could see
quite clearly that there was a lot of intense dosa and lobha at work.
I've heard of a story of a Japanese woman who had Alzheimer's, and
spent all her time saying "arigatou, arigatou" and smiling. There we
could assume, I believe, wholesome cittas at work. That's my opinion.
Behaviour is an indication of the cittas at work. Behaviour is really
important. (Sorry if it sounds like I am slagging my mother - she is a
wonderful woman and if there is a lot of dosa and lobha at work, all I
can say is like mother, like son.)

    BTW, I have only read a few posts over the last few weeks, but as
usual dear old Sukin made me gasp in astonishment when he said that
thinking has no real important, or something like that. Thinking can be
in the form of mental deeds of the degree of akusala kamma patha, and I
would say that unbridled thinking adds gasoline to the dosa, lobha,
moha blaze so I really wonder how dear Sukin could think that thinking
has no import! Just as behaviour of body and speech reflect cittas, the
content of our thinking reflects cittas. If I am thinking of spraying a
roadside community with machine gun fire as I pass, which is something
I've done in the past, well, just try to tell me that that thinking is
of no real import! Te content of our thinking reflects cittas at work.
Mental behaviour is very, very important!

    Naomi is being wonderfully strict about keeping me off the computer
so I won't be able to follow up on this, will be popping in now and
then to post unilatteraly. Thanks, and looking forward to the day when
I can discuss things with you in a proper way with a luxury of time.

   Metta,

   Phil


#89445	From: "Phil" <philco777@...> 
Date: Mon Aug 25, 2008 11:49 pm 
Subject: We are all very worthy beings 	philofillet 
 
 		Hi all


    I'd like to share something very, very helpful I've come up with
through my reflections.

    It started when I was meditating every morning at my country
house, down in a field full of wildflowers just before sunrise,
surrounded by sweet fragrances, birdsong, soft breezes and so on,
and I reflected on all the pleasant vipaka. I wondered, as I have in
the past, how kind of paradoxical it is that wholesome kamma that
leads to this pleasant vipaka usually conditions a lot of
unwholesome behaviour (when things are going well, we become
careless and are more prone to a lot of greed, in my experience)
whereas unpleasant vipaka which results from unwholesome kamma is
more likely to condition disenchantment and samvega and whatnot.
Anyways, it occured to me that the pleasaant vipaka I was receiving
was because of good deeds in the past or some past life, as was my
human birth. As you know, human birth is very, very rare so there
was very good kamma at work at some point to lead to our human
births. When I got back to Japan and was back to my routine of
wishing well to all the people I came across as I walked to the
station, it occured to me that *all the people I was coming across
were also very worthy beings in the sense that they had human
births.* There was very good kamma at work for all of us in past
lives to be born human, and in fact we were probably helping each
other in some way in one of our countless previous existences. This
gave me a very very friendly feeling toward people. In the past  few
years, my world view has been shaped by the "Burning" sutta - the
all is burning with the fires of greed, hatred and delusion. And
that's still true. We were all blessed, so to speak, through our own
deeds with human birth, but we are almost all of us almost
inevitably making a botch of it because of the terribly powerful
conditions at work in "the all." Reflecting on this made me want to
be as harmless as possible with my fellow very worthy beings. We are
all in this together, and all making a botch of it together. Let's
be as harmless as possible to add as little fuel to the fire as
possible, that sort of thing.

   Anyways, if the occasion comes up, I enourage you to reflect on
the worthiness of all the people around you. Good kamma was at work
to lead to their human birth, as it was for you. That sort of thing.

   Metta,

   Phil


#89446	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:03 am 
Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear KenH ,

We had been discussing and reconciling the different views on the not-
self strategy (good for you, believe me) and the lack of it (bad for
you, I say again). And I referred to the well-spoken Buddha's words:

> "He defines the eye as impermanent, not as permanent;
> he defines it as painful, not as pleasant;
> he defines it as not self, not as self;
> he becomes dispassionate, he does not delight;
> he causes the fading of greed, he does not inflame it;
> he causes cessation, he does not originate;
> he relinquishes, he does not grasp.
> .......................................
>
> What can be made clearer than the above Buddha's words?
>
-----------

>KH: It is not the Buddha's words that need to be made clearer, it is
your (and Ven Thanissaro's) interpretations of them. What exactly
the "not-self strategy?" I have tried many times to give my
understanding of it, but you have always reacted angrily saying I
was "slandering a venerable monk!".

T: Indeed, what should be made clearer is the muddy mind state, not
the well-spoken words of the Blessed One ! Indeed the subtle message
He was conveying to the lucky disciples is as follows :

Whenever seeing  occurs, "the eye" (eye-consciousness) just sees
while the mind is comprehending the three characteristics and letting
go of seeing (not grasping it with upadana). This mindful, equanimous
mind-state is free from 'dukkha samudaya' here and now.

Ken, please try to see meanings of those words without first becoming
self defensive or offensive. Ajaan Thanissaro wisely calls the
application of the above message in daily life as "Not-self
Strategy". It is a strategy to win the Mara's battle.

........................

>KH: The two points you have made seem to be (1) there is a self, but
(2) we should consider the self as 'not in the five khandhas.'

>KH: Is that right? If that is the correct summary of the not-self (as
distinct from no-self) teaching how is it so different from the
versions I have been giving?

T: That is partially right and muddy, Ken. I'll explain.
The two points I have made are:
(1) there is a self in the colloquial sense, but no reliable and
lasting self;
(2) whenever there is no grasping (upadana) in the khandhas, then the
khandhas are seen as 'not self' (anatta). The self is there whenever
there is upadana in the khandhas; that's why a self-view is a wrong
view.

As a consequence of not grasping and letting go of the khandhas,
there is no mud in the eye due to arisen right view.


Peace,


Tep
===


#89447	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:52 am 
Subject: Re: Relentless Training: No Retreat, No Surrender! No pain, no gain! 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Tep

> > T: Superficially-thin metta, similar to the "few drops of water"
> as explained before, does not accumulate or "develops" further to be
> > powerful unlike the metta-cetovimutti case in the suttas.

I think it goes without saying that weak kusala cannot accumulate to
become well-developed kusala in a short time.  Are you suggesting
there is any way around this?  I don't think so!

As I said in my previous post, if the accumulated (i.e., inherited)
kusala is weak, any further development in this lifetime is bound to
be slow.  So there would be no point in aspiring to highly developed
kusala within this lifetime.

> T: Your saying that "accumulated kusala (or akusala) does not
> dissipate but remains accumulated" is the same as saying
> that "accumulations are PERMANENT". Did the Buddha ever state that
> kind of contradiction to the 'anicca' principle?

Not permanent, because kusala and akusala that are occurring
continuously are adding to the accumulations.

In any event, anicca is a *characteristic of dhammas* (not a
doctrinal *principle*).  As far as I know, it has no application to
(latent) accumulated tendencies.

> ..........................
>
> > § 110. {Iti IV.11; Iti 115}
> > This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have
> > heard: "If, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought
> of sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness,
and
> > he does not quickly abandon, dispel, demolish, or wipe that
thought
> > out of existence, then a monk walking with such a lack of ardency
&
> > concern is called continually & continuously lethargic & low in
his
> > persistence.
> > ...
> > "But if, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought of
> > sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness,
and
> > he quickly abandons, dispels, demolishes, & wipes that thought out
> > of existence, then a monk walking with such ardency & concern is
> > called continually & continuously resolute, one with persistence
> > aroused.
> ...
> More seriously out of 10 points your above reply is worth 2. Why?
> Because your reverse logic missed the most important point : the
> Buddha only allows his monks to maintain samma-sankappa (the 2nd
> magga factors) 100% of the time. There is no tolerance for akusala
> vitakka in the Dhamma-vinaya. And more importantly such maintenance
> of kusala REQUIRES samma-viriya and samma-sati that are guided by
> samma-ditthi [see MN 117].

Sorry, but you've lost me here.  Grateful if you could explain what
you mean by "the Buddha only allows his monks to maintain samma-
sankappa 100% of the time."

Jon


#89448	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:56 am 
Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

> But if they have heard 1000x less then you did, they'd be Arahats.
> What made them so ready to recieve Dhamma?

What made Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta so ready to receive
dhamma could only be panna developed in previous lifetimes.  The
development of jhana does not make one ready to receive Dhamma.  As
you know, jhana can be developed by someone who has never heard any
Dhamma, and who holds strong views that are contrary to the Dhamma.

> Please forgive me, and in how many (and which) suttas does Samadhi
as
> a factor of the path means other than Jhana.

It's important to understand what the path factors are.  They are not
a list of skills to be separately developed in order to reach the
path.  They are the *components of the actual path-moment*, i.e.,
mental factors accompanying the magga-citta.

Samma-samadhi is given as the 4 jhanas because at the moment of path
consciousness the samadhi is of the level of jhana (by virtue of
being fixed on nibbana).

> And even if it does, it
> still does not take away the requirement for Jhana.

The path factors are not stipulations or *requirements* to be
fulfilled, so there is no "requirement for jhana".  They are
*descriptions* of the very highly developed states that arise at path-
moment, following insight that has penetrated the characteristics of
conditioned dhammas.

> "Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine
step-
> by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this
way,
> I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-
awakening
> unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its
> contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as soon
as
> I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling-
> attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did
claim
> to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in
> the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its
contemplatives
> & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose in
> me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is now
> no further becoming.'"
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html

This is the Buddha talking about his own enlightenment.  The
enlightenment of a Buddha (and of the great disciples) is based on
jhana, since the attainment is of the highest order

It would be wrong to draw any inference from this as to jhana being a
prerequisite for enlightenment generally.

Jon


#89449	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:03 am 
Subject: Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

> How many times do I need to quote the same passage where samma-
> samadhi is 4 Jhanas?

I have given some comments on this in an earlier post.  The path-
factors are integral factors of the path-moment, and the descriptions
of their functions should be read in that context.

> How many times do I need to remind that 4 fruits of Jhana are:
stream-
>Arahatship

Which sutta do you have in mind here?

> > Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and
clarity?
>
> Everywhere where 4th Jhana is mentioned.
>
> Regarding Cultivation:
>==============================================
> And of this pleasure I say that it is not to be cultivated, not to
be
> developed, not to be pursued, that it is to be feared.
>
> "Now, there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from
> sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters &
> remains in the first jhana... he enters & remains in the fourth
> jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor
pain.
> This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-
> pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that
it
> is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not
> to be feared.
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html

This passage talks about the jhana consciousness itself.  There is no
mention here of post-jhana brightness and clarity.

Jon


#89450	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:07 am 
Subject: Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

> Please forgive me for implying that Buddha didn't focus much on
> understanding reality. He did teach understanding [AN 9.41].

Well it was rather more than an implication! ;-))  What you said was:
> Infact I doubt that Buddha really taught "vipassana" or insight
> practice. That could be later additions, or reinterpretations of
> results from Samadhi.

This comment seems to reflect a deeply held view on your part that it
is the development of samatha (alone) that leads to enlightenment.
Perhaps this is why it's difficult for you to hear some of the things
that are mentioned here concerning the differences between samatha
bhavana and vipassana bhavana.

> The Buddha has said that until he didn't fully understand the
> drawbacks of sensuality and *understood* the reward of
renunciation,
> he couldn't enter and remain in the first Jhana.

Yes, this is understanding, but it's understanding of the kind
necessary for the development of samatha/jhana.

However, the understanding/panna associated with the development of
insight is of a different kind altogether, since it has as its object
dhammas and their characteristics (vs. a mental image, and the
dangers of akusala for samatha/jhana).

> Through understanding the drawbacks of sensuality one can enter 1st
> Jhana. ...
>
> Through understanding the drawbacks of rupa on can enter Base of
> infinite space. ...
>
> Through understanding the drawbacks of base of neither perception
nor
> non-perception, one can enter Cessation of Perception &
feelings. ...

Yes, all these are instances of understanding in relation to samatha/
jhana.  This understanding is available to all persons regardless of
views held or previous exposure to Dhamma.  It has nothing to do with
insight, which is concerned with the true nature and characteristic
of dhammas.

Jon


#89451	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:05 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Introduction to the Dhamma. 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Dear Tep (and Nina),

You are giving me a lot of work to do!! But I’ll be busy the next few
days so please do expect some gaps.

=================
<snip>
Tep quote from ADL:
  > "In the Suttanta, Dhamma is explained to different people at
  > different places. The Buddha taught about all realities appearing
  > through the six doors, about cause and effect, about the practice
  > leading to the end of all sorrow."
  >
  > "As regards the Abhidhamma, this is an exposition of all realities in
  > detail."
  >
  > "While we are studying the different namas and rupas and while we are
  > pondering over them, we can be reminded to be aware of nama and rupa
  > appearing at that moment. In this way we will discover more and more
  > that the Abhidhamma is about everything which is real, that is, the
  > worlds appearing through the six doors."

Tep:
  > Sukin, please notice that Nina first of all states that the Suttanta
  > is about the Buddha's teaching and the "practice leading to the end
  > of all sorrow", while the Abhidhamma is the exposition about "all
  > realities in detail". Then she gives her own opinion how the student
  > may become "aware of nama and rupa appearing" through "the six
  > doors". She essentially gives the definition of "realities" as "the
  > worlds appearing through the six doors".
  >
  > Sukin, I cannot help wondering why didn't Nina instead write 'Dhamma
  > in Daily Life' that was based on the Suttanta's teaching of dhammas
  > and the 'practice leading to the end of all sorrow'. That would be
  > very direct and thus logically easier to do than using the indirect
  > Abhidhamma route.

S: Firstly, Nina has no reason to think the two, Abhidhamma and the
Suttas, one to be superior to the other. Perhaps from her perspective,
Abhidhamma besides being reference to the seven books also means the
same as what “Dhamma” means, namely reality / truth and the Teaching of
the Buddha. Perhaps it is also that because she uses and builds upon the
exposition of Dhamma as found in the Abhidhamma, that she must
acknowledge this. Or perhaps she is responding to the general
misunderstanding that most people have about the Abhidhamma being dry
and academic. Maybe it is all these reasons and more.

However I am not sure why you say that the Suttas is more direct than
Abhidhamma. Is it because you are more confident about the Sutta being
direct words of the Buddha and do not have the same kind of confidence
when it comes to the Abhidhamma? Or is it because you take Nina’s
statement about the Sutta being about the “practice leading to the end
of all sorrow" to imply that the study of the Abhidhamma can’t lead to
the same? Or is there some other reason?

===============
TeP;
  > Now, I am going to read and ponder over Chapter 1 : The Four
  > Paramattha Dhammas. I will jot down some thoughts I may have while
  > reading through this chapter, paragraph by paragraph. After that I
  > will give an overall comment and evaluation of the chapter, according
  > to your requirements, namely :
  >
  > 1. Do not compare it with the Sutta Pitaka.
  > 2. Keep in mind that newcomers are interested in the truth, not the
  > Teachings yet.
  > 3. Evaluate it whether it "makes sense to the reader in terms of
  > experience". Is it good as the "seed for Saddha" for a newcomer?

Sukin: I’ll see if I get time to respond to some parts later.
But I want to express here, my sincere appreciation for your giving so
much consideration and time to the project. Thank you. :-)

Metta,

Sukin


#89452	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:52 am 
Subject: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 1 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Friends,

It was a lively discussion this afternoon with Ven Pannabahulo, Sukin,
Azita,Robert, Ivan, Betty and ourselves contributing to the discussion with
A.Sujin.

1.Azita started with an anecdote about metta and smiling and the response,
following a discussion on metta last Saturday. K.Sujin later made a comment
about 'not letting go'. She meant (as I later understood her), that we cling to
the story about what happened.
Metta is being friendly, ready to help, whether smiling or not! When we're
concerned to make others happy, is it for their sake or our own? Sincerity!
'Better to understnd."

2.Ven P set the ball rolling with the subject of meditation. K.Sujin stressed
that the purpose of meditation is to understand reality now. Ven P referred to
particular practices and the subduing of the hindrances. Again, K.Sujin stressed
that the Buddha taught the development of understanding right now. The time is
now. The teachings are not for postponing. "Who knows when death will come?",
she said leaning forward. "The recollection of death is for the understanding of
reality right now." She stressed (in response to a comment of Ven P's about
particular disciples) that she didn't mind who has what kind of accumulations,
the purpose of the Buddha's teachings is to understand realitities in daily
life, not to change them at all, but to understand their characteristics.
Otherwise, "it is you who is doing, not panna."

3. Ven P asked about the first threeVisuddhis, sila visuddhi, citta visuddhi,
ditthi visuddhi. The third refers to the first stage of insight - nama-rupa
pariccheda nana, so how can we say that sila visuddhi refers to the development
of purity of sila with right understanding? It has to develop, like now, in
order to become ditthi visuddhi, insight knowledge. Beginning now with the
awareness of realities as not self.

4. Qus about satipatthana and vipassana. As sati develops, satipatthana becomes
a bhojjanga (enlightenment factor). Sati, panna and the other factors are
indriyas. They become balas when awareness is aware of any reality at all, such
as fear or aversion with detachment. In response to the discussion here about
indriyas becoming balas and then indriyas again,perhaps referring to the
arahant, KS said she wasn't familiar with this and indicated it didn't sound
right. Even a sotapanna has developed indriyas.

Vivassana refers to insight as in the vipassana nanas. However, it is the
development of satipatthan which leads to such insights, so it (the development
of satipatthana) can be referred to as the development of vipassana.

Han asked me to raise any points relating to our discussions here. In #86135, he
rightly concluded that 1) the arising of satipatthana presupposes the
development of panna. However we cannot say that "satipatthana and panna are two
separate entities." This is because satipatthana already refers to sati,
accompanied by panna, which understands realities, so the second reference to
panna is redundant.

Is there satipatthana now? Only panna can know whether it is the awareness of a
reality itself or a lesser degree of panna and sati arising.

5. Qus about sila and discussion about different kinds of sila, actions or deeds
through body, speech and mind. Kusala, akusala and avyakata sila. Akusala sila
when deeds, such as going to the temple, are motivated by akusala cittas.
Avyakata sila referring to the deeds of the arahants. We follow as many precepts
and Vinaya rules as we have accumulations for.

Indriya samvara sila - different kinds and levels, but must be with panna. For
example, following the Patimokkha rules must be with understanding, with indriya
samvara sila, but not necessarily satipatthana. A monk must have the intention
to follow all the rules, by understanding the value in order for satipatthana to
develop. These help him to have less and less akusala. A very different way of
life and purpose than for the lay person.

to be contd


#89453	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:55 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 1 contd 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		contd.

6. I asked about the development of calm and whether we can refer to the 8-fold
path without this development. We cannot. It develps naturally with right
understanding. The eightfold path refers to the development of samatha and
panna. The first two factors refer to panna and the other six to the development
of samatha. The 8-fold path is also divided into sila, samadhi and panna. In
this case, again the first two factors refer to panna, the 3 abstinences to sila
and the other factors to samadhi.

7. Ven P referred to a revered monk's experiences with chakras, kundalini,
nirodha and so on. K.Sujin's response was that it's not samatha because it's not
calm. There were also questions about stopping sanna, but this is not the
understanding of realities. Sanna cannot be stopped. "Naturally" was stressed
many times.....It's not a matter of doing anything special at all. Just
listening, considering and developing understanding.

8. Samvega as referring to panna and all wholesome factors including right
effort. The accumulations of all kinds of kusala rouses (right) effort. I
wondered why there are so many translations of samvega with the word 'agitated'
such as in the Expositor: "He being agitated, makes a rational effort." It
refers to the 'rousing' aspect of samvega, the accumulation of all kinds of
sobhana mental factors with panna. The reference to "energy, as proximate cause"
refers to when there is panna, it leads to such rousing or right effort which
conditions further kusala. I also asked about the term 'viriya arambha' or
"effort called 'aarambha; because it is striving." [see #86783]. "What kind of
striving?.....bearing the continuity of kusala...." . In other words, the
beginning again and again of kusala.

9. Sutta in AN about Anathapindika, as I recall, which refers to how much more
precious a small amount of metta is than the greatest dana. (Also see another
sutta on this quoted by Nina from SN in #86495), I asked why. KS's answer: "What
harms?" In other words, the dosa when there is a lack of metta harms others.

10. I asked why metta is referred to as a meditation subject when actually when
metta is being developed, person or people are the object. 'Meditation' means
'having more' or developing. So it is the development of metta which is being
referred to.

11. Robert & Azita asked questions about developing metta and the perfections
other than panna as well as panna itself. "Just develop understanding", KS
stressed again and again. When understanding develops, all kinds of other
realities will be known and the value of all kinds of kusala will be understood.

Perhaps Ven P and others will recall other topics and points later of special
interest. [Also, I jotted down very few notes, so pls let me know if there are
any errors here, anyone and also help me with any responses!]

Always back to now and the understanding of visible object which appears now. If
there are any particular questions anyone would like raised, please let us know.

Metta,

Sarah

p.s Phil, good to see your back!
========
 


#89454	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 1:11 am 
Subject: The "Zen" of Tennis 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, all -

     Something trivial ... yet perhaps not:
     It is common for people to speak and write of the  relationship between
Dhamma practice, most especially from the Zen Buddhist  perspective, and the
practice of sports, most especially martial arts. I have  noticed something for
a while that was impressed most strongly on me last night  while playing
tennis - so that I came home and said to my wife that I had  learned a lot of
good
Dhamma at the courts!
     What I have noted for a while, but most  strongly last night, is that
when there is no "Howard",  no "me",  involved in the activity is when the play
is at its very best - even excellent.  So long as there is just clear, relaxed,
but heightened attention,  without significant intervention of sense of self,
the play runs smoothly  and very efficiently, but every time "I" get into the
action with thinking and  planning or even just with the *sense* of "me
playing tennis," the play suffers  and mistakes occur. Really fascinating, I
find.

With metta,
Howard



#89455	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 1:16 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] We are all very worthy beings 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Phil -

     I very much like what you write in the following.  It seems that your
mind is taking a lovely turn - wonderful for you and for  others. Right on! :-)

With metta,
Howard


In a message dated 8/26/2008 2:50:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
philco777@... writes:


Hi all


I'd like to share something  very, very helpful I've come up with
through my  reflections.

It started when I was meditating every  morning at my country
house, down in a field full of wildflowers just  before sunrise,
surrounded by sweet fragrances, birdsong, soft breezes and  so on,
and I reflected on all the pleasant vipaka. I wondered, as I have  in
the past, how kind of paradoxical it is that wholesome kamma that
leads to this pleasant vipaka usually conditions a lot of
unwholesome  behaviour (when things are going well, we become
careless and are more  prone to a lot of greed, in my experience)
whereas unpleasant vipaka which  results from unwholesome kamma is
more likely to condition disenchantment  and samvega and whatnot.
Anyways, it occured to me that the pleasaant  vipaka I was receiving
was because of good deeds in the past or some past  life, as was my
human birth. As you know, human birth is very, very rare  so there
was very good kamma at work at some point to lead to our human
births. When I got back to Japan and was back to my routine of
wishing  well to all the people I came across as I walked to the
station, it  occured to me that *all the people I was coming across
were also very  worthy beings in the sense that they had human
births.* There was very  good kamma at work for all of us in past
lives to be born human, and in  fact we were probably helping each
other in some way in one of our  countless previous existences. This
gave me a very very friendly feeling  toward people. In the past  few
years, my world view has been shaped  by the "Burning" sutta - the
all is burning with the fires of greed,  hatred and delusion. And
that's still true. We were all blessed, so to  speak, through our own
deeds with human birth, but we are almost all of us  almost
inevitably making a botch of it because of the terribly powerful
conditions at work in "the all." Reflecting on this made me want to
be  as harmless as possible with my fellow very worthy beings. We are
all in  this together, and all making a botch of it together. Let's
be as harmless  as possible to add as little fuel to the fire as
possible, that sort of  thing.

Anyways, if the occasion comes up, I enourage you to  reflect on
the worthiness of all the people around you. Good kamma was at  work
to lead to their human birth, as it was for you. That sort of  thing.

Metta,

Phil


#89456	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:24 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sila Always Comes First ! 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Scott,

--- On Fri, 15/8/08, Scott <scduncan@...> wrote:

>Sarah: There are different kinds and levels of samvara sila (sa.mvara
siila). Samvara refers to 'guarding'. For example, Patimokkha samvara
sila, which I just referred to, is the guarding or observing of the
Patimokkha rules for bhikkhus.

When the reference is to indriya samvara sila (as in the sutta quote
above), I understand it to always be referring to the development of
satipatthana.
....
Sarah: let me refine this a little (in the light of today's discussion) and say
that indriya samvara sila always refers to sila accompanied by panna. Usually,
as in the sutta being discussed, it is to the development of satipatthana, I
believe (#89078):

"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 concentration, then the basis for knowledge
and vision of things as they really are is destroyed for one who
lacks concentration. " [AN VI, 50]
....

>Sarah: It is the understanding of the danger of not being aware
of moments of seeing and so on, to the guarding of the sense doors.
Without the development of right understanding, therefore, which
'guards', sila won't be developed and purified, nor will right
concentration and the path won't be followed."
....
>Scott: Getting fooled by the Paa.li aside (and what better way to
learn?) I think I was getting at the above in what I was trying to
say. I think this is so important - the part about satipa.t.thaana.

I understand 'abstinence' , for example, to be the result of an
'active' dhamma (I guess)
....
Sarah: the 3 virati cetasikas to be precise, i.e the sila part of the 8-fold
path. They arise when there is the opportunity for akusala. For the arahant, no
virati.
....
>Scott: and not merely the absence of behaviour. In
the 'understanding of the danger of not being aware of moments of
seeing and so on, to the guarding of the sense doors' it can't be
without the true knowing of the nature of what is arising to be
'abstained' from.
....
S: Exactly...the training in seeing the danger in the smallest faults. [Connie
recently quoted an interesting commentary note relating to this point and
details about processes.....awareness of the kilesa (after it has arisen) and
then the abstention immediately following. The roles of rt understanding and
effort etc are of importance here.]
....
>Scott: And this is the guarding. It can't be just me
thinking about it - the guarding is not a function of thoughts about
situations,
....
Sarah: Well, degrees and kinds. Sati guards with all kusala. Wise reflection
with panna would be a kind of indriya samvara sila, I learn.
....
>Scott: although these thoughts, as I put forward in the example I
gave to Jon about the aborted 'act of kindness', would of necessity
have to have been conditioned by some dhamma or other arising.
...
Sarah: I'm thinking of the comment today about 'not letting go'. I enjoyed the
anecdote and as Jon said, mixed cittas as now. No use trying to 'work it out'
when it's gone.....another story about the past kindness or the past
frustration... back to now!
...
>Scott: The guarding or not guarding occurs long before thoughts about guarding
or not guarding have arisen. Such events can be contemplated, I think, and such
contemplation is good.
....
Sarah: good or bad depending....always back to the present citta and
understanding the present reality.

Thanks for helping me to reflect further, Scott. Also for your recent excel.
quotes with Pali.

Metta,

Sarah
=========


#89457	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:28 am 
Subject: Re: The importance of behaviour 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Nina and connie, (and Phil who can't reply),

Regarding:

AN III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise person.":

"His action marks the fool, his action marks the wise person, O
monks. Wisdom shines forth in behaviour..."

Scott: Can you help with the Paa.li?  It is:

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no pa.n.dito,
apadaanasobhinii pa~n~naati..."

Scott: In particular, what is the compound 'kammalakkha.na'?  What is
the compound 'apadaanasobhinii'?  Is it a negated 'padaana' or is it
'apadaana'?  'Pa~n~naati' is from 'pajaanaati', I think, which relates
to a function of pa~n~naa somehow.  'Baalo' is the fool; 'pa.n.dito'
is the wise person.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89458	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 1:33 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The importance of behaviour 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Scott -

In a message dated 8/26/2008 8:29:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
scduncan@... writes:

Dear  Nina and connie, (and Phil who can't reply),

Regarding:

AN  III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise person.":

"His action  marks the fool, his action marks the wise person, O
monks. Wisdom shines  forth in behaviour..."

Scott: Can you help with the Paa.li?  It  is:

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no  pa.n.dito,
apadaanasobhinii pa~n~naati..."

Scott: In particular,  what is the compound 'kammalakkha.na'?  What is
the compound  'apadaanasobhinii'?  Is it a negated 'padaana' or is  it
'apadaana'?  'Pa~n~naati' is from 'pajaanaati', I think, which  relates
to a function of pa~n~naa somehow.  'Baalo' is the fool;  'pa.n.dito'
is the wise  person.

Sincerely,

Scott.
============================
     As regards 'kammalakkha.no', this Pali ignoramus  guesses that it means
"kamma quality" or "type of kamma".

With metta,
Howard



#89459	From: "abhidhammika" <suanluzaw@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:33 am 
Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream 	abhidhammika 
 
 		Dear Scott D, Nina, Sarah, Bob K, Jon, Mike N, Howard, Herman,
connie, Alex, Phil,

How are you?

Scott asked:

"Scott: Thanks. What about 'types' for cittaani, as in 'types of
consciousness'?"

Suan answered:

"Yes, the plural case `cittaani' can cover types of consciousness as
satta cittaani also refers to seven types of consciousnesses or
mental events."

Scott also asked:

"Or by 'event', do you refer only to a momentary arising and not to
a series of moments?"

Suan answered:

The above question may contain ideologically impure or unsound
assumptions or implications, I am afraid.

In my original reply to your questions, I wrote:

"So, as you put it, we are remaining at the level of healthy
consciousness events (kusalacittuppaadaa) or at the level of
unhealthy consciousness events (akusalacittuppaadaa)."

In the above statement, the readers such as you were expected to
have noticed the Pali terms "kusalacittuppaadaa"
and "akusalacittuppaadaa". They are in a plural case.

We can also see them in a singular case as in `kusalacittuppaado'
or `akusalacittuppaado'.

Now, we can have an expression like cittuppaado. This
expression `cittuppaado' is one of the most important teachings of
the Buddha in the history of psychology.

A cittuppaado is the phenomenon of a mental arising or a mental
happening or a mental event depending on relevant conditions.

In the absence of those conditions, a mental event that could arise
only by depending on them does not exist.

As soon as you understood the nature of a cittuppaado as I explained
above, such expressions as `a momentary arising' and `a series of
moments' in your question were found to fail to do justice to the
Buddha's teachings.

Why was that so? That was because those expressions may imply a pre-
existing mind or a pre-existent consciousness. But, the Buddha's
teachings indicate that there was no such thing as a pre-existent
mind or a pre-existent consciousness.

Or put it another way, the Buddha's teachings always indicate that a
mind or a consciousness does not exist before depending on the
relevant conditions.

Yes, even though a mind or a cosciousness is a paramatthadhamma, one
of the ultimate realities, that does not mean that it exists.

Therefore, I have no choice but to decline your second question as
unanswerable because it is ideologically ambiguous or impure.

With regards,

Suan Lu Zaw

www.bodhiology.org


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" <scduncan@...>
wrote:



Dear Suan,

Thanks for the reply:

S: "No, Scott, I do not mean the term in the sense of
`thoughts'...990. There, what are seven mental events or seven
consciousness events? Visual consciousness, auditory consciousness,
olfactory consciousness, taste consciousness, tactile consciousness,
mental element, and mental consciousness element � these are called
seven consciousness events...translating cakkhuvi~n~naa.nam as visual
consciousness is better than translating it as visual thought...
translating `satta cittaani' as seven consciousness events is better
than translating that phrase as seven thoughts."

Scott: Thanks. What about 'types' for cittaani, as in 'types of
consciousness'? Or by 'event', do you refer only to a momentary
arising and not to a series of moments?

S: "...at this stage, I am unable to provide textual support and Pali
translations for those creative efforts."

Scott: No problem, Suan.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89460	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 5:56 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] The importance of behaviour 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Hi Phil & all,

--- On Tue, 26/8/08, Phil <philco777@...> wrote:
>I remember when my mother was first diagnosed with Alzheimer's,
Sarah shared a story about how she was worried about it because of a
relative, and A.S said something along the lines of "who knows what is
really going on in the mind."
....
S:  I don't think it was quite that.

Just checked in #46690.

>P: As for the Alzheimer's,
....
>S: I once asked K.Sujin about the development of awareness if one has such
a condition and her response was along the lines of 'it's not Alzheimer's
all the time'. Different moments again.
....
Metta,

Sarah
p.s the symptoms you mention do seem very typical at these times. My sympathies
for all your family.
=======


#89461	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:07 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Dear Tep and all,

===========
  > I have some thoughts about Chapter 1, Abhidhamma in Daily Life.
  > Please do not think of them as criticism.
  >
  > 1. Nina heavily quotes from the Visuddhimagga as if it were
  > the 'Abhidhamma'. A newcomer may wonder: Is this Vism based on the
  > Abhidhamma-pitaka? Why is there no quotes from the seven Abhidhamma
  > books that make up the Abhidhamma-pitaka?

Sukin: Perhaps we should then factor in the fact that most newcomers to
Buddhism would not have any preconceived expectations regarding
references to other texts such as the commentaries or the Suttas? And
maybe Nina indeed wants to stress ‘Abhidhamma’ as in “study of
realities” and not “book study”? Besides I did imply a student who is
interested in learning about Reality / Truth / Dhamma and not one who
would a more or less scholarly study of the Abhidhamma texts proper.

===========
  > 2. What kinds of dhammas did the Buddha discover? Can all these
  > dhammas be categorized either as nama or as rupa only?

Sukin: As I understand it, the Buddha was enlightened to all the
realities which arise at and can be experienced by, the five senses and
the mind. In the Suttas this is said to be the “All”. I have no reason
not to believe this to be true or that the Abhidhamma texts explain in
greater detail, in fact comprehensively, about all this. And yes, the
division into the broad categories, one Nama and the other Rupa makes
sense, since this covers the All.

===========
  > "Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything."

Tep:
  > But that may not be sufficiently clear to a newcomer, I think.

Sukin: Or to a long time so-called Buddhist. ;-) I think it depends on
the ‘understanding’, including being aware of one’s tendency to
complications. The message itself is very simple in terms of
intellectually understanding it.

===========
  > Why is it important for s/he to know that? What is experience?

Sukin: Because whether he realizes it or not, he is constantly making
statements about this and wrongly, and this leads him to accumulate more
causes for suffering. He mixes nama and rupa and needs to develop his
understanding starting with such intellectual understanding. And
remember, the first stage of vipassana is namarupaparicheda nana.

===========
  > Why is color a rupa, but a mountain is not?

Sukin: Because ‘mountain’ is clearly a product of thinking. This
thinking takes place following the experience of visible object or
color. One can therefore understand that the visible object itself is
experienced by one kind of reality, different from that which is
involved in thinking about mountain.

But I know this only intellectually, I don’t know the characteristic of
rupa as rupa nor consciousness as consciousness. A newcomer can also
have the kind of beginning intellectual understanding.

===========
  > Is seeing a mountain same as experiencing it by the eye?

Sukin: No a mountain is never “seen”, it does not have the
characteristic that visible object has. It is object of javana citta
only, whereas visible object must first arise as object of vipakka citta.

===========
  > What things can feeling experience ?

Sukin: Feeling is one of the seven universal cetasikas, in other words
it arises with all cittas. Citta experiences rupa, cetasika, another
citta, concept and Nibbana, therefore feeling must experience all these
as well.

===========
  > Can nama experience another nama or more than one?

Sukin: Citta experiences as above, and since cetasika experiences the
same object as the citta it accompanies, it follows that cetasika can
experience the same objects as well.

===========
  > Does a consciousness experience feeling?

Sukin: Otherwise how can feeling be known?

===========
  > But most of all, what is the use of knowing all these?

Sukin: Without the Dhamma we have only wrong view about experiences.
Akusala and kusala both are taken for ‘self’. Rupas are not known as
they are and concepts are taken for real. Perception of permanence,
happiness, self and beauty dictate all our thinking and verbal and
bodily actions. In short being ignorant of “reality”, we add to samsara
and are lost. Being pointed to about what goes on through the five sense
and the mind, our attention can gradually turn to the experiences
through each of these doorways and we can thereby grow to have some
understanding about them.
What more can you ask for?!! ;-)

<End of Part I>
I don’t know when I’ll be able to respond to the rest.

Metta,

Sukin.


#89462	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:20 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: The importance of behaviour 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Howard,

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no  pa.n.dito,
apadaanasobhinii pa~n~naati..."

H: "As regards 'kammalakkha.no', this Pali ignoramus  guesses that it
means 'kamma quality' or 'type of kamma'."

Scott: This Paa.li ignoramus checked in the PTS PED; it has:

"[Kamma]-lakkha.na having kamma as distinctive characteristic".

Scott: Atthasaalinii (p.84) suggests:

"Moral Good defined by way of characteristic, etc., has faultless,
happy results as its characteristic; the destruction of immoralities
as its essential property; purity as its recurring manifestation; and
rational attention as it proximate cause.  Or, by being opposed to
fault, it the characteristic of faultlessness; the property of purity;
the recurring manifestation of desirable results; and the proximate
cause of rational attention as said above.  As regards
characteristics, etc., the specific or generic attributes of these, or
those states, are termed the 'characteristic' (lakkhana.m)."

Scott: Would this suggest that the 'wise person' refers to the knowing
- a function of pa~n~naa, not a person - of the kusala or akusala
characteristic of kamma as condition for subsequent 'behaviour' (a
conventional term), which I would, characteristically, take to be
subsequent mind-produced ruupa in the form of conventional bodily
movement and speech?

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89463	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:28 am 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 1 	hantun1 
 
 		Dear Sarah,

Thank you very much for presenting some topics at the meeting on my behalf.

You wrote:
Quote: [Han asked me to raise any points relating to our discussions here. In
#86135, he rightly concluded that 1) the arising of satipatthana presupposes the
development of panna. However we cannot say that "satipatthana and panna are two
separate entities." This is because satipatthana already refers to sati,
accompanied by panna, which understands realities, so the second reference to
panna is redundant.
Is there satipatthana now? Only panna can know whether it is the awareness of a
reality itself or a lesser degree of panna and sati arising.] End Quote.

Despite the above explanation (for which I thank you very much), the arising of
Satipa.t.thaana is very confusing for me. Therefore, can I ask another question,
please?

In A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaaya by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu
Bodhi, under the chapter on Satipa.t.thaana Sutta I read the following:

----------------------------
Quote:
4. “And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu abide contemplating the body as a body?
Here a bhikkhu, going to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty hut,
sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, and established
mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes
out. Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing
out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he
understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands:
“I breathe out short.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing
the whole body [of breath]’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out
experiencing the whole body [of breath].’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe
in tranquillizing the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe
out tranquillizing the bodily formation.’ Just as a skilled turner or his
apprentice, when making a long
  turn, understands: ‘I make a long turn’; or, when making a short turn
understands: ‘I make a short turn’; so too, breathing in long, a bhikkhu
understands: ‘I breathe in long’ … he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out
tranquillizing the bodily formation.’

(INSIGHT)

5. In this way he abides contemplating the body as a body internally, or he
abides contemplating the body as a body externally, or he abides contemplating
the body as a body externally, or he abides contemplating the body as a body
both internally and externally. Or else he abides contemplating in the body its
arising factors, or he abides contemplating in the body its vanishing factors,
or he abides contemplating in the body both its arising and vanishing factors.
Or else mindfulness that ‘there is a body’ is simply established in him to
the extent necessary for bare knowledge and mindfulness. And he abides
independent, not clinging to anything in the world. That is how a bhikkhu abides
contemplating the body as a body.
End Quote.
----------------------------

Han: Now, my question is when does Satipa.t.thaana actually arise? Does it arise
when a yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 4 above, or does it arise
when the yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 5 above?

Thank you very much.
Respectfully,
Han


#89464	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:33 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The importance of behaviour 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Scott -

In a message dated 8/26/2008 9:21:44 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
scduncan@... writes:

Dear  Howard,

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no   pa.n.dito,
apadaanasobhinii pa~n~naati..."

H: "As regards  'kammalakkha.no', this Pali ignoramus  guesses that it
means 'kamma  quality' or 'type of kamma'."

Scott: This Paa.li ignoramus checked in  the PTS PED; it has:

"[Kamma]-lakkha.na having kamma as distinctive  characteristic".

Scott: Atthasaalinii (p.84) suggests:

"Moral  Good defined by way of characteristic, etc., has faultless,
happy results  as its characteristic; the destruction of immoralities
as its essential  property; purity as its recurring manifestation; and
rational attention as  it proximate cause.  Or, by being opposed to
fault, it the  characteristic of faultlessness; the property of purity;
the recurring  manifestation of desirable results; and the proximate
cause of rational  attention as said above.  As regards
characteristics, etc., the  specific or generic attributes of these, or
those states, are termed the  'characteristic' (lakkhana.m)."

Scott: Would this suggest that the  'wise person' refers to the knowing
- a function of pa~n~naa, not a person  - of the kusala or akusala
characteristic of kamma as condition for  subsequent 'behaviour' (a
conventional term), which I would,  characteristically, take to be
subsequent mind-produced ruupa in the form  of conventional bodily
movement and speech?
---------------------------------------------
Howard:
     I never view 'person' as referring to a single  phenomenon.
--------------------------------------------



Sincerely,

Scott.
========================
With metta,
Howard

P. S.  The form of the sentence "His action marks the fool, his action marks
the wise  person, O
monks." (or "Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no  pa.n.dito") is a
common one in the teachings of the Buddha, as for example in  the Pabhassara
Sutta:


"Luminous, monks, is the mind And it is defiled by incoming defilements."
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming  defilements."



#89465	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:46 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: The importance of behaviour 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Howard,

So quickly we run aground:

Howard: "I never view 'person' as referring to a single phenomenon."

Scott: I always view 'person' as pa~n~natti.  Therefore, I consider
conventional reference to 'person' to have a deeper meaning, that
being a particular moment of consciousness with concomitant mental
factors.  Can you discuss any of the other points or must we stand down?

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89466	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:01 am 
Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Tep and all,

> "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> wrote:
>
> Hi, Alex, Jon, Sarah, Sukin, Scott and more -
>
> "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness
> concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under
> control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly,
> settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path
>is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he
>follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are
>abandoned,  his obsessions destroyed.

> .............................
>
> The 1st through 3rd path require both samatha and vipassana. Is the
> fourth one similar to the DSG Abhidhamma Path?  ;-))
>
>
> Yours truly,
>
>
> Tep
> ===


It seems to me that 4th still has samatha, but its difference is that
it is started from restlessness that is gotten under control.

"There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly,  settles
down, and becomes unified & concentrated."



Regarding DSG Abhidhamma:
In what way is it better than  Abhidhamma in Daily life by
ASHIN JANAKABHIVAMSA ?
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/abdmjnka.htm?


If we are talking about Abhidhamma, then which one?



Best wishes,

Alex



#89467	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:01 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The importance of behaviour 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Scott -

In a message dated 8/26/2008 9:46:41 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
scduncan@... writes:

Dear  Howard,

So quickly we run aground:

Howard: "I never view  'person' as referring to a single phenomenon."

Scott: I always view  'person' as pa~n~natti.  Therefore, I consider
conventional reference  to 'person' to have a deeper meaning, that
being a particular moment of  consciousness with concomitant mental
factors.  Can you discuss any of  the other points or must we stand  down?

Sincerely,

Scott.
============================
     I suggest standing down as the more useful  approach. :-)

With metta,
Howard




#89468	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:11 am 
Subject: Re: Just studying & Sariputta 	truth_aerator 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Alex
>
> > But if they have heard 1000x less then you did, they'd be Arahats.
> > What made them so ready to recieve Dhamma?
>
> What made Alara Kalama and Udakka Ramaputta so ready to receive
> dhamma could only be panna developed in previous lifetimes.

Any sutta quotes?


>  The development of jhana does not make one ready to receive
>Dhamma.

But being Kusala Kamma it IS very helpful. And


Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29)

Ending of Mental Fermentations depend on Jhana (it would be YOUR
inference to claim that this sutta is applicable only to 'them')
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html


Samadhi is proximate condition to "knowledge and vision of things as
they really are"
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.bodh.html

Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions thay Buddha praised.
MN108
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html

Jhana blinds mara -MN25



MN Suttas that mention Jhana:
1,4,6,8,13,19,35,30,31,36,38,43,45,53,53,59,64,65,66,76,77,78,79,85,
106, 107,108,111,112, 113, 119,121, 128, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141,152

DN# 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,16,17,22,19,26,27,29,31,32
===================================================================


I guess we need to stop Studying Buddhism because it all talks about
something uneeded or 'not for us' sort of thing...


> > Please forgive me, and in how many (and which) suttas does
Samadhi
> as a factor of the path means other than Jhana.
>
> It's important to understand what the path factors are.  They are
not a list of skills to be separately developed in order to reach the
> path.  They are the *components of the actual path-moment*, i.e.,
> mental factors accompanying the magga-citta.


Then what about all the suttas where Ariyan aren't described merely
as path moments?


>
> The path factors are not stipulations or *requirements* to be
> fulfilled, so there is no "requirement for jhana".

So according to this, there isn't requirment to abstain from killing
either -  abstention from killing, stealing, lying, rape, etc is
merely a path moment....  We better change the Vinaya then...


>  They are
> *descriptions* of the very highly developed states that arise at
>path- moment, following insight that has penetrated the
>characteristics of  conditioned dhammas.

Sorry to burst your bubble but things don't just arise out of blue
sky.


>
> > "Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine
> step-
> > by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this
> way,
> > I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-
> awakening
> > unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with
its
> > contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as
soon
> as
> > I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling-
> > attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did
> claim
> > to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled
in
> > the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its
> contemplatives
> > & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose
in
> > me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is
now
> > no further becoming.'"
> > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html
>
> This is the Buddha talking about his own enlightenment.

Not just his own. Similiar steps were followed by others.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The enlightenment of a Buddha (and of the great disciples) is based
on jhana, since the attainment is of the highest order It would be
wrong to draw any inference from this as to jhana being a
prerequisite for enlightenment generally.
>
> Jon

I think that the inference is that "those attainments are required
only for Buddha and those monks".



Best wishes,


Alex


#89469	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:15 am 
Subject: Re: Just studying... How to properly study Abhidhamma> 	truth_aerator 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...>
wrote:
>
> Hi Alex
>
> > How many times do I need to quote the same passage where samma-
> > samadhi is 4 Jhanas?
>
> I have given some comments on this in an earlier post.  The path-
> factors are integral factors of the path-moment, and the
descriptions
> of their functions should be read in that context.
>
> > How many times do I need to remind that 4 fruits of Jhana are:
> stream-
> >Arahatship
>
> Which sutta do you have in mind here?

DN29


> > > Is there any textual support for post-jhana brightness and
> clarity?
> >
> > Everywhere where 4th Jhana is mentioned.
> >
> > Regarding Cultivation:
> >==============================================
> > And of this pleasure I say that it is not to be cultivated, not
to
> be
> > developed, not to be pursued, that it is to be feared.
> >
> > "Now, there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from
> > sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters &
> > remains in the first jhana... he enters & remains in the fourth
> > jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor
> pain.
> > This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-
> > pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say
that
> it
> > is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is
not
> > to be feared.
> > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html
>
> This passage talks about the jhana consciousness itself.  There is
no mention here of post-jhana brightness and clarity.
>
> Jon
>

1st), those who have experienced Jhanas say that there is post Jhana
brightness and clarity.

Even if not then,

2nd)  So this Brightness is during the jhana consciousness. During or
immedetely after one uses it for destruction of fetters.



Best wishes,


Alex


#89470	From: "Robert" <avalo1968@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:20 am 
Subject: The Real Practice of Mindfulness 	avalo1968 
 
 		Hello DSG,

The current (Fall) issue of Buddhadharma magazine has an article entitled 'The
Real Practice
of Mindfulness' by Andrew Olendzki.   The article is a discussion of mindfulness
practice from
a perspective of the Abhidharma teachings, as the author sees them.  I didn't
see any
discussion of this article in earlier posts, and I was interested in the
opinions of the members
here.   Has anyone read it and have any comments on its content?

Thank you,

Robert A


#89471	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:22 am 
Subject: Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Hi Jon and all,

> "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex
>
> This comment seems to reflect a deeply held view on your part that
>it is the development of samatha (alone) that leads to
>enlightenment.

Those who have not seriously done "Samatha" (or meditation in
general) don't understand that there can't be only samatha. It is
only through certain wisdom can one get to Jhana and higher.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>Perhaps this is why it's difficult for you to hear some of the
>things that are mentioned here concerning the differences between
>samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana.
>

Jon, no disrespect meant but,

How much Vipassana & Samatha Bhavana have you done? Can you speak
from your own experience (and what was it?)


> > The Buddha has said that until he didn't fully understand the
> > drawbacks of sensuality and *understood* the reward of
> renunciation,
> > he couldn't enter and remain in the first Jhana.
>
> Yes, this is understanding, but it's understanding of the kind
> necessary for the development of samatha/jhana.

AND Noble 8Fold path.  Intention of Renunciation is directly linked
to Right Intention and indirectly present in ALL other 7 factors.

Kamaraga is destroyed AT ANAGAMISHIP. So it is well planted in
Buddhist path.

If anything, Buddha taught MORE "samatha" than other ascetics since
he went further then 8th Jhana, he taught irodha Samapatti (cessation
of perception & feelings).

Jon, what experience did you have? It appears to me that you are
merely talking from theory, and as we know the theoretical aspects of
Buddhist path were argued even when Buddha was alive.


Best wishes,


Alex


#89472	From: "szmicio" <szmicio@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 7:30 am 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 1 	szmicio 
 
 		Dear Sarah,
I am very happy that you wrote this. It's relly helpful. Ajan Sujin is
great teacher. She always teaches what is important.

I want so much meet her.

can you ask her a question?
"Should we do anything to have a first stage of insight. Sholud we
discern nama and rupa, to have nama-rupa insight?"

Best wishes
Lukas


#89473	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:20 am 
Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Alex & Sukin (and Nina, Jon, Sarah, Howard, Swee), -

Some people say that jhana enthusiasts are extraordinarily energetic,
and I never question them!
..............................

<1st post of this thread>

> The 1st-through-3rd paths require both samatha and vipassana. Is the
> fourth one similar to the DSG Abhidhamma Path? ;-))
>
>
> Yours truly,
>
>
> Tep
> ===

Alex:
It seems to me that 4th still has samatha, but its difference is that
it is started from restlessness that is gotten under control.

"There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles
down, and becomes unified & concentrated."

T: Abhidhammikas generally don't think so, Alex.
I am sure that Jon has repeatedly (but unsuccessfully) tried to
convince us that samadhi is not limited to tranquillity (samatha) and
that right concentration is NOT defined by the four jhanas ! [He is
incredible, isn't he?]

Other Abhidhammikas (here and at other discussion groups) have
claimed that (intellectually) listening & considering the ultimate
realities "in daily life" can help accumulate pa~n~na (or "right
understanding") that leads to Nibbana. They joyfully embrace the
Yuganaddha Sutta and claim it to be the total validation of their
belief (bypassing samatha completely to Nibbana).
...........................

Alex: Regarding DSG Abhidhamma:
In what way is it better than Abhidhamma in Daily life by
ASHIN JANAKABHIVAMSA ?
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/abdmjnka.htm?


If we are talking about Abhidhamma, then which one?


T: A great question, Alex.
I skimmed through the suggested article. And I have a problem trying
to understand how the author relates "the mind" to ultimate
realities. Is 'mind' equivalent to citta (consciousnes), according to
Ashin Janakabhivamsa?

If it is allright with you, can you do an "awesome" review of this
article for me?

I would love to see Sukin compare it to the 'Abhidhamma in Daily
Life' too.

Hoping that I did not ask too much,


Tep
===


#89474	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:26 am 
Subject: Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi Sukin, -

I am glad that it was over.

..............
<End of Part I>
I don't know when I'll be able to respond to the rest.

Metta,

Sukin.
.............

I understand why you said so. But, frankly I only want to know if my
review has met the expectation that was stated in your previous post.

Sincerely,


Tep
===


#89475	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:37 am 
Subject: Re: Andrew L's pic and the usual round-up call 	purist_andrew 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott
<sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew L, Alex & all,
>
> Just seen the nice pic which you must have recently put in the DSG
album!
>
> How are you? How's New York? How are your dhamma studies and
> various practices/treatments going?

===Re: Books===
I'm OK for the most part.  I'm waiting on a lot of books that various
places like Metta Forest Monastery and the Barre Center for Buddhist
Studies to send out.

One of the books I got was 'Wings to Awakening' which deals with the
37 factors or 'aids' to enlightenment.  It started off good,
Thanissaro Bhikkhu was explaining the path in more psychological and
practical terms, with little or no dogma or doctrine, like seeing
experience in terms of the Four Noble Truths, examining the processes
of the mind and working skillfully with them and even skillfulness
itself until you get so refined to the point where intention itself
is disbanded and release occurs, with the old karma playing itself
out in a feedback loop until death.

It was good at first, but it became kind of complex and hard to
follow, lots of talk about discernment and effort and balancing
skillful qualities very carefully.

For reference, the book is available online
<http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/index.htm
l>.

Some of the other books are available for free, with information
about them at <http://www.accesstoinsight.org/outsources/books.html>.

===Re: New York and life===

Other than that, I could gossip but I won't do so much, save to say
that there's a girl at my day hospital program that I've been
exchanging Dharma and other spirituality books with for over a year
now.  She doesn't believe in kamma or rebirth but still likes the
practical, therapeutic, day-to-day aspect of it.  I recommended a few
books including Bhikkhu Bodhi's semi-new anthology for her.

As for New York, I'll remind you again that I don't actually live in
the city, although I am typing this from my new treatment program in
Hollis, Queens.  I went into Manhattan the other day to pick up a
book ("Beyond the 120 Year Diet") on Calorie Restriction, a diet
regimen, perhaps even lifestyle, shown to be effective in slowing the
aging proces and decreasing and postponing the incidence of aging-
related disease.  While I was there, I could see the towers and
bridges over Lex. Ave connecting the towers of my previous school,
CUNY Hunter College, where I hope to return this January.  I really
like being in the boroughs and I was almost nostalgic.

I can't wait to get back to college.  Right now I'm waiting on word
from my father about financial help.

My treatment is going OK, the switch of program seems to be helping,
I feel somewhat less depressed, and I'm noticing it's bringing back a
lot of meditation, which I think is good, because if meditation is
working, I'm less inclined to keep accumulating Dhamma books with the
intent of having another opportunity of practice, rather, for
practice itself to show and continue.

I take the city bus and the bus stop is only two to three blocks from
my house so it's pretty convenient.

I have a friend who I hang out with, in fact the only friend I hang
out with, who I think is kind of a bad influence, and I keep mindful
of the fact that "right association" was /almost/ a factor in the
8fold path but I don't get out of the house unless I hang out with
him, so it's kind of a dilemma I'm trying to deal with.

==Re: Dhamma practice==

For a long time I've been accumulating Dharma books considering that
each reading of a new book presents a new opportunity for practice.
One of the latest books, "The Four Foundations of Mindfulness" by
Silananda, was very helpful, I felt re-established in spiritual
practice which is something I *very* much desire to come back to, but
I wasn't able to keep it up with all going around me, security guard
asking me what I'm doing when I was meditating outside the store
waiting for my friend, so I lost the meditation.

I'm trying to think if dana can be extended to certain Dharma books,
too.  I know in the old days they used to say relinquish everything,
but today no one has the memory powers attributed to the people
earlier in the dispensation (Buddha, Ananda, and so on), so the books
are kind of like an instruction manual, needed to the end.  Therefore
I think Dharma books might be an exception to some extent to
generosity, some of them anyway.

I have gladly given out computer books both on request and without
request, but I feel the Dhamma books are a need, for now.

One of the things I picked up was "The Way of Mindfulness" by Soma
Thera, which was pretty comprehensive.  My doctor and I think I have
a knack for picking these things up pretty quickly, I felt
established in this type of mindfulness down to the letter while I
was grocery shopping with my mom.  So one of these days I think while
I'm by myself the meditation will spontaneously manifest and I'll be
good to go.

Other than that, I kind of feel that there's not much going on, just
waiting for a more Dharmic future and taking things as they come,
expanding my reading for one.  I've been taking out different books
from the library.


> If you're reading this, please give us an up-date and perhaps
> another brief intro to remind friends who you are. I remember the
> great discussions we had before.

==Re: "Quick intro"==

My name is Andrew, Andrew L. from Long Island, New York.  I attend a
day program five days a week for a psychiatric illness where I get my
treatment.  I'm 25 years old, a high school graduate looking to
resume taking classes at college, commutting to Manhattan for the
semester starting in late January 09.

My hobbies have mostly been computer programming and spirituality,
the former less so and the latter moreso since I became ill.

I consider myself a renunciant in the Theravada Buddhist tradition,
my experience in Theravada being mostly what I've learned from books
(both general-appeal and scripture) and doing vipassana (insight)
meditation.  I became interested in Buddhism as a result of my
experience with and practice of Vipassana meditation, without going
into too much detail.  I liked what I saw with vipassana and so I
looked to the tradition it came from, which I found out was Theravada
Buddhism, and it seemed to make sense to me, and since I've found a
lot of truth in it, leading me to have confidence in the
enlightenment experience of the historical Buddha, as he desribed it.

I like reading scripture but sometimes I think it's OK for a modern
perspective or explanation or instruction on the ancient practises,
the most notable example of this being the Visudhimagga, which
elucidates the training of the Buddhist path into very practical
steps to be followed.

I have a lingering interest in Mahayana and Zen, but not nearly as
much of one as my interest with and conviction in Theravada.

I recently picked up a copy of "No Time to Lose" by Pema Chodron, a
commentary on the work of Shantideva "The Way of the Bodhissatva",
which is in addition to the one I already own by HHDL.  I think they
are useful for attitudes and general practice instructions but I
doubt the feasibilty of the prospect of attaining ultimate
realization with the path, but that's another post.


Hopefully that will do Sarah.  Expect other posts from me soon.

> Metta,
>
> Sarah
> =========
>

Regards,
Andrew L.



#89476	From: "connie" <nichicon@hotmail.com> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 1:57 pm 
Subject: Re: The importance of behaviour 	nichiconn 
 
 		dear scott,

Regarding: AN III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise person." & being
the lakkha.nasutta.m of baalavagga, which begins with bhayasutta.m.
{so, who is a chapter of fools?  (delighting in fear)}

"His action marks the fool, his action marks the wise person, O monks. Wisdom
shines forth in behaviour..."

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no pa.n.dito, apadaanasobhinii
pa~n~naati..."

scott: In particular, what is the compound 'kammalakkha.na'?  What is the
compound 'apadaanasobhinii'?  Is it a negated 'padaana' or is it 'apadaana'? 
'Pa~n~naati' is from 'pajaanaati', I think, which relates to a function of
pa~n~naa somehow.  'Baalo' is the fool; 'pa.n.dito' is the wise person.

connie:
..cscd's blue notes:
    [apadaane sobhati (syaa. ka.m. pi.)]
    pa~n~nati [pa~n~natti (?)]

..mine:  pa~n~nati makes known, meaning and apprehension of marks; beautiful
citta - the brightest ; "the working postures" of wisdom & folly, monks.
dunno, but my vote is for padaana; not negation though.  could our 'a' be < the
augment (sign of action in the past), prefixed to the root in pret., aor. &
cond. tenses; > ?

but the work out compound!  aayatana <2. exertion, doing, working, practice,
performance (comprising Bdhgh's definition at DA i.124 as pa~n~natti), usually
-- °, viz. kamm° Nd1 505; Vbh 324, 353; >

peace,
connie



#89477	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:01 pm 
Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Tep and all,

> "Tep Sastri" ><indriyabala@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Alex & Sukin (and Nina, Jon, Sarah, Howard, Swee), -
> Other Abhidhammikas (here and at other discussion groups) have
> claimed that (intellectually) listening & considering the ultimate
> realities "in daily life" can help accumulate pa~n~na (or "right
> understanding") that leads to Nibbana. They joyfully embrace the
> Yuganaddha Sutta and claim it to be the total validation of their
> belief (bypassing samatha completely to Nibbana).
> ...........................

Please don't forget the difference between "minimum required" and
sufficient for *US*.



> Alex: Regarding DSG Abhidhamma:
> In what way is it better than Abhidhamma in Daily life by
> ASHIN JANAKABHIVAMSA ?
> http://web.ukonline.co.uk/buddhism/abdmjnka.htm?
>
>
> If we are talking about Abhidhamma, then which one?
>
>
> T: A great question, Alex.
> I skimmed through the suggested article. And I have a problem
trying
> to understand how the author relates "the mind" to ultimate
> realities. Is 'mind' equivalent to citta (consciousnes), according
>to  Ashin Janakabhivamsa?
>
> If it is allright with you, can you do an "awesome" review of this
> article for me?

TO tell you the truth, I haven't much read that article. What I
wanted to show was that there are other "Abhidhamma in daily life"
approaches.

As far as I am aware, there are these Abhidhamma studies:

1) Burmese Abh studies and intensive Vipassana retreats (no reading
during this time).

2)The DSG approach, where one doesn't do retreats or even meditates.
It reminds me of "The life is meditation/bhavana" approach. The monk
with whom I had a 28 day retreat strongly disagreed with the above.

3) The Ajah Chah's Abhidhamma teaching:

==============================================================
"One day, a famous woman lecturer on Buddhist metaphysics came to see
Achaan Chah. This woman gave periodic teachings in Bangkok in the
abhidharma and complex Buddhist psychology. In talking to Achaan
Chah, she detailed how important it was for people to understand
Buddhist psychology and how much her students benefited from their
study with her. She asked him whether he agreed with the importance
of such understanding.
	 "Yes, very important," he agreed.
	 Delighted, she further questions whether he had his own
students learn abhidharma.
	 "Oh, yes, of course."
	 And where, she asked, did he recommend they start, which
books and studies were best?
	 "Only here," he said, pointing to his heart, "only here." "
	    (Kornfield & Breiter 1985:12)
==============================================================

Guess about whom was the Venerable speaking?  He totally went through
her.



Best wishes,


Alex



#89478	From: "connie" <nichicon@hotmail.com> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 2:08 pm 
Subject: Re: Ancient Life & sensual distractions 	nichiconn 
 
 		dear colette, alex,

Alex: When some women sees a $5 purse & $200 dollar purse, the reaction is
different!

colette:  It invites the question, 'empty of what'?

connie:  thanks for that precious reminder of the immediate & mediocre nature of
our pedestrian lives.  paritta as in mundane and limited; pedestrian, as in the
sense of viithi  <>

Alex: Please don't forget about the specifics of the visual (or any other)
object.
While ugly & pleasant sight are both "sight" - the content of the sight and its
effect on someone with latent tendencies is different.

connie: I think some of this "content" might be a later addition.  Certainly,
ruupa aaramma.na and not "people" are seen by vipaakacitta, but other minds
'consider' and treat as convention warrants < the abstractions formed by mano,
or mind proper, from the objects of sense presented by the sense-organ when
reacting to external objects. > (PTSD dhamma).

also, as we have already overheard (: somewhere in the dsg mall but i've
misplaced the receipt now, one of the Sisters, anyway:

RD - << Seen in the midst of the crowd; thou deemest of value and genuine
Conjurer's trickwork, trees all of gold that we see in our dreaming. >>
and
Pruitt - <<  Just as you might see a picture painted on a wall, smeared on with
yellow orpiment, your view of this is wrong.
The perception they are human beings is groundless.  >>

and taxing, no doubt! <w>

peace,
connie


#89479	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:13 pm 
Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream .. Feeling like a fool ... 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi Rinze and Alex, -

The anatta-dhamma is often misunderstood even by those who always
claim that they understand it.


> Tep:
> > It refreshed me and relieved me from "accumulated
> > frustrations" (akusala citta) after having heard so often that
> > right understanding of 'anatta' means "no-one practices the
  > > Dhamma".
> Rinze:
> But there actually is no one practicing the Dhamma!
>

Our friend Alex then posted this sutta quote:

The Buddha: "And which is the burden? 'The five clinging-
aggregates,' it should be said. ... And which is the carrier of the
burden? 'The person,' it should be  said. This venerable one with
such a name, such a clan-name. This is  called the carrier of the
burden. ..."

Rinze:  "Having listened or discussed the Dhamma wisely, and having
confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, (therefore Faith), and
observing the precepts (Sila), need we STILL consider a self, if not
how to cast off `the burden'?

T: You said before: 'no one is actually practicing the Dhamma', yet
you also say you observe the precepts -- that is a Sila practice by
a "carrier of the burden".

Do you have a clearly defined position? Are you arguing against the
Buddha's words above, while maintaining the no-person-practices-the-
Dhamma proposition at the same time?

No hurry. It takes time and a lot of contemplation before the anatta
meaning in the Buddha's words above becomes clear.

Metta,

Tep
===


#89480	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 3:47 pm 
Subject: Re: What is a path in Buddhism? .. Abhidharma At Heart ... 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Alex, -

You quoted a story about Ajaan Chah, a woman, and the "abhidharma" :

This woman gave periodic teachings in Bangkok in the
abhidharma and complex Buddhist psychology. In talking to Achaan
Chah, she detailed how important it was for people to understand
Buddhist psychology and how much her students benefited from their
study with her. She asked him whether he agreed with the importance
of such understanding.
"Yes, very important," he agreed.
Delighted, she further questions whether he had his own
students learn abhidharma.
"Oh, yes, of course."
And where, she asked, did he recommend they start, which
books and studies were best?
"Only here," he said, pointing to his heart, "only here." "
(Kornfield & Breiter 1985:12)
==============================================================

>Alex: Guess about whom was the Venerable speaking? He totally went
through her.

T: I can guess who you think she is. However, there might be more
than one woman who taught abhidharma in Bangkok during that time.

As a famous Ajaan in Buddhist meditation, it is no surprise to me
that he did not carry Dhamma books around, or quoting heavily from
them. No Kung Fu masters carry weapons.

BTW what is the 'abhidharma' at heart that he was talking about?


Tep
===



#89481	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 4:32 pm 
Subject: Re: Buddha taught UNDERSTANDING. Here is what it means. 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi, Jon and Alex, -

Jon, let me talk to you as a friend. I hope now you understand why
Alex gets frustrated when you keep insisting 'Only my idea is right,
but yours is wrong.', even after he already has given you lots and
lots of relevant sutta quotes. It is unbearable when one's efforts
and reasonings, based on the Buddha's words, are stubbornly
questioned, ignored & denied again and again and again ... Believe
me, 'cause that happened to me before.
........................................

> >Jon: Perhaps this is why it's difficult for you to hear some of the
> >things that are mentioned here concerning the differences between
> >samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana.
>

Alex: Jon, no disrespect meant but,

>How much Vipassana & Samatha Bhavana have you done? Can you speak
from your own experience (and what was it?)

>Jon, what experience did you have? It appears to me that you are
merely talking from theory, and as we know the theoretical aspects of
Buddhist path were argued even when Buddha was alive.
..........................................

Forgive Jon, Alex. He possibly didn't even read the tons of your
relevant sutta quotes; he just repeated what he wanted to believe in.
Jon did the same to me occasionally over the years (and lately too).
To prove my point, just search the DSG archive for my past
discussions with Jon. Use the following keywords : concentration,
samadhi, jhana, jon, tep.

May our hearts be with metta,


Tep
===


#89482	From: "Phil" <philco777@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:07 pm 
Subject: Re: The importance of behaviour 	philofillet 
 
 		Hi all (p.s to Howard and Sarah)

>    I am feeling these days more than ever that it is behaviour, the
> kind of behaviour that can be observed by oneself and others, that is
> important for me as a Buddhist. I think I was strongly influenced by
AN
> III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise person.":


   I see there is discussion happening related to the post I wrote
yesterday. Great! Look forward to reading it later.

   I just wanted to add an afterthough to what I wrote yesterday, which
probably goes without saying, but just in case.

   Obviously the point of the Dhamma's teaching is not to perfect our
behaviour/morality in ways that are easily observable by oneself and
others. It is not an end in itself. There is a sutta somewhere in which
the Buddha asks a follower how he should answer if he is asked "is it
for the perfection of virtue that the Buddha taught?"or words to that
effect. And he is told no, it is not for that purpose, it for the sake
of understanding (which is defined in terms of the suffering inherent
in the ayatanas in the sutta in question, if I recall correctly.)

   So of course we have to go deeper, panna has to go deeper into
understanding cittas. But the sorting out of behaviour/virtue helps
provide conditions for that deeper understanding, that sort of thing.
There are many suttas to that effect, and they are not just offered for
the sake of providing some kind of authority in a debate as someone
suggested is how people use suttas, they can be confirmed in experience
and are therefore offered with confidence. (Not all suttas are like
this, many refer to the accomplishments of the great ones, but it is
possible to sort out which suttas do so.)

    Ok, that's all I wanted to add.

    Metta,

    Phil

   p.s thanks Howard for your encouraging comment re "we are all worthy
beings" and clarification noted, Sarah, re the alzheimers. And thanks
for your kind wish...



#89483	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 6:44 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Dear Tep (and Alex),

You wrote:

==========
I am glad that it was over.
..............
<End of Part I>
I don't know when I'll be able to respond to the rest.
.............
I understand why you said so. But, frankly I only want to know if my
review has met the expectation that was stated in your previous post.


S: I must have not read your post carefully then. I thought to add that
you should not take the conditions I laid out too seriously, because I
think it may hinder a natural flow of ideas. But I was happy with your
response, and as I said, just the fact that you made an effort to do so,
was good enough for me. But from what you have written above, am I to
understand that your questions in the previous post were just a test?
Should I then wait for the more serious ones?

Anyway, since you have been so willing to go along with my suggestions,
I would like to reveal the main motive behind why I invited you to this.

Believing that the way the Dhamma as laid out in ADL for example is most
helpful, since it starts from the most basic and understandable concepts
and builds up from there; I thought to lead some of those who read in,
and also myself actually, to question whether our own present
understanding is with firm foundation. We tend to use certain concepts
as if we understand them well, but in fact don’t really or even
altogether wrong. So I believe that if we went back to the beginning, we
may get a chance to correct our mistakes.

Take for example Alex’s insistence on Jhana. I believe sincerely that he
does not understand Jhana at all and is doing himself much harm by
clinging to it and throwing it at others the way he does. I expect that
were he to look at the basics, including about the different Jati of
cittas, object conditioning, what is samatha and what is vipassana, then
I believe that he may begin to question his present understanding about
Jhana and the Path.

Now that I have revealed my motive, I possibly spoiled my own plan. :-/
But I thought that it was fair that I should tell you about it.

Metta,

Sukin


#89484	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:10 pm 
Subject: What is more noble than Knowledge & Vision? Take a look. :) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Sukin, Tep and all,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinder <sukinder@...>
wrote:
> Take for example Alex's insistence on Jhana. I believe sincerely
>that he  does not understand Jhana at all and is doing himself much
>harm by clinging to it and throwing it at others the way he does.

I have provided a ton of sutta quotes attribute to the Buddha.

Please provide sutta quotes that you think refute not even mine
statements.

=====
Brahmin, what thing is more noble and exalted than knowledges and
vision. Here brahmin, the bhikkhu, secluded from sensual desires and
secluded from demerit, with thoughts and thought processes and with
joy and pleasantness born of seclusion attained to abides in the
first jhana. Brahmin, this thing is more noble and exalted than
knowledges and vision

Again the bhikkhu overcoming all the sphere of neither-perception -
nor non-perception attained to abides in the cessation of perceptions
and feelings. Seeing this with wisdom, desires are also destroyed.
Brahmin, this too is more noble and exalted than knowledges and
vision.

http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-
Nikaya/Majjhima1/030-culasaropama-sutta-e1.html
============================================



Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, non-concentration the
no-whither way.
Samadhi Maggo, asamadhi kummaggo
Anguttara Nikaya The Lion Roar text iii, 414, Vi, vi, 64



Jhana:
IS the path to awakening - MN36
Is what Buddha awakened to. AN9.42 & SN2.7
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html\

Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29)


MN Suttas that mention Jhana:
1,4, 6, 8, 13, 19, 35, 30, 31, 36, 38, 43, 45, 53, 53, 59, 64, 65,
66, 76, 77, 78, 79, 85, 106, 107, 108, 111, 112, 113, 119, 121, 128,
137, 138, 139, 140, 141,152

DN# 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,16,17,22, 19,26,27, 29,  31,  32




"Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we must
do." - Bruce Lee

"Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings.
Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into
regret. This is our message to you."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html


Best wishes,

Alex


#89485	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:24 pm 
Subject: Re: [Relentless Training:] .. Reverse Logical Thinking.. 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Jon (and others), -

This conversation reveals some reverse logics that are NOT surprising
to me.

>Jon: I think it goes without saying that weak kusala cannot
accumulate to become well-developed kusala in a short time. Are you
suggesting there is any way around this? I don't think so!

T: I am suggesting that weak metta is not powerful like metta-
cetovimutti; the same way that a few drops of rain are not powerful
like a torrential rainfall. Plain and simple! Strong kusala can be
developed now given that there are right kinds of nutriment to
support the development, regardless of an existing weak kusala. The
accumulations idea does not make sense; it is a reverse logic.
........................

>Jon:  As I said in my previous post, if the accumulated (i.e.,
inherited) kusala is weak, any further development in this lifetime
is bound to be slow. So there would be no point in aspiring to highly
developed kusala within this lifetime.

T: Not true. You are comparing a weak accumulated kusala to a small
container that cannot hold a lot of water! That is a lazy, born-loser
attitude : "Oh, I was born in a poor family, so I'd rather not have a
strong ambition to become highly successful in this life."

  That "reverse-logic theory" is poorly formulated for two reasons.
1) there is no way for you the worldling to know if you inherited a
weak or strong kusala at birth; 2) new kusala kammas CAN be developed
because they are conditioned dhamma; so they can become powerful
given plenty of powerful supporting conditions.  This is known as
darkness at beginning (due to old kamma) but brightness at the end
(because of new kusala kammas are developed in this life).

AN 2.19 : "Develop what is skillful, monks. It's possible to develop
what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is
skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But
because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to
you, 'Develop what is skillful.'
MN 9: "And what are the roots of skillful things? Lack of greed...
lack of aversion... lack of delusion... These are termed the roots of
skillful things."
........................

> >T: Your saying that "accumulated kusala (or akusala) does not
> dissipate but remains accumulated" is the same as saying
> that "accumulations are PERMANENT". Did the Buddha ever state that
> kind of contradiction to the 'anicca' principle?

>Jon: Not permanent, because kusala and akusala that are occurring
continuously are adding to the accumulations. In any event, anicca is
a *characteristic of dhammas* (not a doctrinal *principle*). As far
as I know, it has no application to (latent) accumulated tendencies.

T: You are contradicting yourself, Jon ! If a newly occurred kusala
dissipates sooner or later through time, i.e. it is not permanent,
AND the previously occurred kusala is NOT permanent either, then how
could there be accumulations? On the other hand, if neither an old
kusala nor a new kusala ever dissipates (i.e. never dies out), then
what else can you say except that accumulations are permanent and
GROWING?
> ..........................

> >Tep:
> >More seriously out of 10 points your above reply is worth 2. Why?
> >Because your reverse logic missed the most important point : the
> >Buddha only allows his monks to maintain samma-sankappa (the 2nd
> >magga factors) 100% of the time. There is no tolerance for akusala
> >vitakka in the Dhamma-vinaya. And more importantly such maintenance
> >of kusala REQUIRES samma-viriya and samma-sati that are guided by
> >samma-ditthi [see MN 117].

>Jon: Sorry, but you've lost me here. Grateful if you could explain
what you mean by "the Buddha only allows his monks to maintain samma-
sankappa 100% of the time."

T: First, recall that 'samma sankappa' means "no thought of
sensuality, no  thought of ill-will, and no thought of harmfulness".
Secondly, the Buddha said in this Itivuttaka-sutta {Iti IV.11; Iti
115} : "But if, while he is walking, there arises in a monk a thought
of  sensuality, a thought of ill-will, or a thought of harmfulness,
and he quickly abandons, dispels, demolishes, & wipes that thought
out of existence, then a monk walking with such ardency & concern is
called continually & continuously resolute, one with persistence
aroused.". Putting the two reasons together, it means the monks must
strive for perfection in the three right thoughts. Clear now?

Tep
===


#89486	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:36 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is more noble than Knowledge & Vision? Take a look. :) 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Hi Alex,

========
  > Take for example Alex's insistence on Jhana. I believe sincerely
  >that he does not understand Jhana at all and is doing himself much
  >harm by clinging to it and throwing it at others the way he does.

I have provided a ton of sutta quotes attribute to the Buddha.

Please provide sutta quotes that you think refute not even mine
statements.


S: The Sutta quotes you give only prove that the Buddha said those
things, and being the Buddha he must be right. Also this may reflect
your ability to look up Texts and to interpret them in a way that
satisfies you and some other people. However as far as I’m concerned,
your understanding is such that you are “right” only perhaps when you
quote such persons as Bruce Lee, but when it comes to the Buddha, you
gravely misrepresent him. Sorry.

Please be patient and follow my discussion with Tep and perhaps we can
discuss this on another day.

Metta,

Sukin


#89488	From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" <bhikkhu0@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:15 pm 
Subject: Craving + Ill Will = Envy + Jealousy... 	bhikkhu0 
 
 		Friends:

     Envy and Jealousy is a mix of own egoistic Greed & Hate!

How to cure these painful mental states of  Envy & Jealousy:

1: Review the Danger in Envy & Jealousy like this:
'Ooh this is the very Acid eating up my mind from within... All Happiness is
Destroyed!'

2: Know that Envy & Jealousy arise because one wants something that another has!
The aversion towards that person arise. Wanting (greed) is Craving towards an
object.
Aversion (hate) is Craving away from an object. All forms of Craving causes
Suffering!
Know that Envy & Jealousy is the proximate cause of Discontentment.

3: Envy & Jealousy is cured by rejoicing in other's success & gains: Mutual Joy!
(Mudita)
'How good that this being, having done good in the past, now earns the well
deserved fruit!!!'
Thus one substitutes an disadvantageous mental state with an advantageous mental
state.
Know that Mutual Joy! (Mudita) is the proximate cause of Contentment.

4: Begin and Cultivate meditation on Infinite
<http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Rejoicing_Bliss_is_Mudita.htm>  Mutual Joy:
Sit down a silent & empty place with closed eye and beam from this the heart:
'May I be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent, popular, and
praised!' then:
'May my friends be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent, popular,
and praised!'
'May my enemies be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent, popular,
and praised!'
'May all in this village be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent,
popular, and praised!'
'May all in this country be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent,
popular, and praised!'
'May all in this earth be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent,
popular, and praised!'
'May all in this galaxy be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent,
popular, and praised!'
'May all in this universe be successful, rich, beautiful, famous, intelligent,
popular, and praised!'
beaming this tender sympathy out from the heart first out in front, the right,
left, back, above as
below, so gradually expanding up to and beyond the limitations of space and into
the infinitude!!!

5: Keep on doing that 15-45 min every day. Note the difference in joyous
mentality during the day!

May all beings rejoice in Mutual Joy
<http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Mutual_Joy.htm>  celebrating all beings
success, since any real progress is good!


One should not despise giving.
One should neither envy others.
One who envy others cannot attain absorption and will never enter any
concentrated trance.
Dhammapada <http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/KN/Dhammapada.htm>  365

Neither nice speech nor serene behaviour make one accomplished, if one is still
possessed of envy, miserliness or deceit.
Dhammapada <http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/KN/Dhammapada.htm>  262

Absorbed in distractions,
not paying appropriate attention,
giving up the goal, following the pleasant,one come to envy those who of right
effort!
Dhammapada <http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/KN/Dhammapada.htm>  209


see also: Rejoicing
<http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/Rejoicing_Bliss_is_Mudita.htm>  Bliss =
Mudita and Mutual Joy <http://what-buddha-said.net/drops/IV/Mutual_Joy.htm>

Have a nice day!


  Friendship is the Greatest *
  Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-)
  ....


#89489	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:58 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The importance of behaviour 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Hi Phil,

--- On Wed, 27/8/08, Phil <philco777@...> wrote:

>p.s thanks Howard for your encouraging comment re "we are all worthy
beings" and clarification noted, Sarah, re the alzheimers. And thanks
for your kind wish...
....
S: and, of course, I had meant to say 'happy to see you're back', not 'happy to
see your back':-)

Metta,

Sarah
=======


#89490	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:02 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] The Real Practice of Mindfulness 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Robert A,

Happy to see you're back (not your back) too!

--- On Tue, 26/8/08, Robert <avalo1968@...> wrote:
>The current (Fall) issue of Buddhadharma magazine has an article entitled 'The
Real Practice
of Mindfulness' by Andrew Olendzki. The article is a discussion of mindfulness
practice from
a perspective of the Abhidharma teachings, as the author sees them. I didn't see
any
discussion of this article in earlier posts, and I was interested in the
opinions of the members
here. Has anyone read it and have any comments on its content?

....
S: I haven't seen or heard about it before. If it's in English (I'm not clear
from your note above), would you consider posting it in short installments for
discussion? Maybe a para or two at a time.

If that's too much trouble, perhaps it's on-line and you have a link. What did
you think about it? I'd be interested to hear your comments.

Metta,

Sarah
=========


#89491	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:07 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Andrew L's pic and the usual round-up call 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Hi Andrew L,

Just a 'holding' note to thank you very much for your detailed message and for
re-introducing yourself to friends here. I've only had a quick skim, but look
forward to reading your post more carefully later as we'll be going out soon.

Meanwhile, look forward to any more of your contributions and further discussion
with you.

Really great to hear from you again and see 'you're back' too!

Metta,

Sarah
--- On Wed, 27/8/08, purist_andrew <purist_andrew@...> wrote:

>My name is Andrew, Andrew L. from Long Island, New York. I attend a
day program five days a week for a psychiatric illness where I get my
treatment. I'm 25 years old, a high school graduate looking to
resume taking classes at college, commutting to Manhattan for the
semester starting in late January 09.

My hobbies have mostly been computer programming and spirituality,
the former less so and the latter moreso since I became ill.

I consider myself a renunciant in the Theravada Buddhist tradition,
my experience in Theravada being mostly what I've learned from books
(both general-appeal and scripture) and doing vipassana (insight)
meditation. I became interested in Buddhism as a result of my
experience with and practice of Vipassana meditation, without going
into too much detail. <....>


#89492	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:49 pm 
Subject: Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	indriyabala 
 
 		Hi Sukin, -

>Suk: Now that I have revealed my motive, I possibly spoiled my own
plan. :-/  But I thought that it was fair that I should tell you
about it.

T: Thank you for revealing the true motive behind your request. So
you wanted to use me as a guinea pig for your research, huh? It
doesn't make me feel noble to perform such role, but it is okay since
it is  the first time I am given an opportunity to formally evaluate
the DSG Abhidhamma.
......................

>Suk: But from what you have written above, am I to understand that
your questions in the previous post were just a test? Should I then
wait for the more serious ones?

T:  More than just a test; they represent my real-time thought while
reading through the chapter. No reason to wait for more questions;
there will be no more questions, since the review is done.
.......................

Please feel free to make other requests about other things, anytime.


Tep
===


#89493	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:56 am 
Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Suan,

Thanks for the reply and the clarifications:

Me: "Or by 'event', do you refer only to a momentary arising and not
to a series of moments?"

S: "The above question may contain ideologically impure or unsound
assumptions or implications, I am afraid......A cittuppaado is the
phenomenon of a mental arising or a mental happening or a mental event
depending on relevant conditions. In the absence of those conditions,
a mental event that could arise only by depending on them does not
exist..."

Scott:  I was imprecise.  I take it as given that any cittuupaado (and
please correct me if I'm using the term poorly) is conditioned.
Referring to a 'momentary arising' is a manner of speech and, for me,
shorthand with the implication that it has to be conditioned.  Any
dhamma, I've come to learn, is not only 'sa"nkhaara' but also
'sa"nkhata'; that is, a present dhamma is dependent on relevant
conditions - including but not limited to conditions related to prior
dhammas which have already arisen and fallen away.

You yourself, well over a year ago now, gave me the following - I take
the quote from the commentary to SN 61(1) Uninstructed (1) - to consider:

"Because this body...is seen standing for a hundred years, or even
longer. Spk: (Query) Why does the Blessed One say this?  Isn't it true
that the physical form present in the first period of life does not
last through to the middle period, and the form present in the middle
period does not last through to the last period?...Isn't it true that
formations break up right on the spot, stage by stage, section by
section, just as sesamum seeds pop when thrown on a hot pan?  (Reply)
This is true, but the body is said to endure for a long time in
continuous sequence (pave.nivasena), just as a lamp is said to burn
all night as a connected continuity (pave.nisambandhavasasena) even
though the flame ceases right where it burns without passing over to
the next section of the wick."

S: "...such expressions as `a momentary arising' and `a series of
moments' may imply a pre-existing mind or a pre-existent
consciousness. But, the Buddha's teachings indicate that there was no
such thing as a pre-existent mind or a pre-existent consciousness.
Or put it another way, the Buddha's teachings always indicate that a
mind or a consciousness does not exist before depending on the
relevant conditions.  Yes, even though a mind or a consciousness is a
paramatthadhamma, one of the ultimate realities, that does not mean
that it exists..."

Scott: I think that here you refer to some sort of  pre-existent
meta-consciousness existing over-and-above some lesser level of
consciousness and this was, of course, not at all what I was implying.

No, I was simply curious as to the implications related to the
speculation about certain special cittupaadaa during dreams, and
you've addressed this concern quite well.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89494	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:13 am 
Subject: Re: The importance of behaviour 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear connie,

c: "Regarding: AN III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise
person." & being the lakkha.nasutta.m of baalavagga, which begins with
bhayasutta.m.  {so, who is a chapter of fools?  (delighting in fear)}

"His action marks the fool, his action marks the wise person, O monks.
Wisdom shines forth in behaviour..."

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no pa.n.dito,
apadaanasobhinii pa~n~naati..."

connie:  "..cscd's blue notes:
              [apadaane sobhati (syaa. ka.m. pi.)]
              pa~n~nati [pa~n~natti (?)]

..mine:  pa~n~nati makes known, meaning and apprehension of marks;
beautiful citta - the brightest ; "the working postures" of wisdom &
folly, monks."

Scott: From whence get you 'the working postures' - I like the above.
  I don't think that this is referring to 'pa~n~natti' as in concepts,
but what do I know?

c: "dunno, but my vote is for padaana; not negation though..."

Scott:  Okay.  "Padaana (nt.) [fr. pa+daa] giving, bestowing; but
appears to have also the meaning of "attainment, characteristic,
attribute" (PTS PED)

Here's the possible connection to lakkha.na - 'the meaning of
attainment, characteristic, attribute'.

c: "could our 'a' be < the augment (sign of action in the past),
prefixed to the root in pret., aor. & cond. tenses; > ?"

Scott: dunno either.

c: "but the work out compound!  aayatana <2. exertion, doing, working,
practice, performance (comprising Bdhgh's definition at DA i.124 as
pa~n~natti), usually -- �, viz. kamm � Nd1 505; Vbh 324, 353;"

Scott: Or: "(3) is Bdhgh's definition of aayatana at DA i.124 as
sa~njaati and as kaara.na (origin & cause, i. e. mutually occasioning
& conditioning relations or adaptations)." - but as usual I'm always
trying to keep up...

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89496	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:55 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is more noble than Knowledge & Vision? Take a look. :) 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear friends Alex, Sukin, Jon, KenH, -

Given that someone carefully reads the posts written by the three of
you over the last 6 months, it will dawn on him (as it dawns on me)
that DSG abhidhammikas like KenH, Jon and Sukin do not read the suttas
and/or even when they try (once in while, perhaps) they do not
understand the words. That's one reason why they prefer Khun Sujin's
teachings over the suttas; it does not mean they do not have faith in
the Budha-dhammas. But "that" is similar to using only the rear
mirror to guide the driving forward.


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Sukin, Tep and all,
>
... ...
>
> I have provided a ton of sutta quotes attribute to the Buddha.
>
> Please provide sutta quotes that you think refute not even mine
> statements.
>
[Tep: tons of sutta quotes follow, except Bruce Lee's philosophy !!]
>
>
> "Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Willing is not enough; we
must do." - Bruce Lee
>
> "Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings.
> Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into
> regret. This is our message to you."
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Alex
........................
>
> Sukin: The Sutta quotes you give only prove that the Buddha said
those things, and being the Buddha he must be right. Also this may
reflect your ability to look up Texts and to interpret them in a way
that satisfies you and some other people. However as far as I'm
concerned, your understanding is such that you are "right" only
perhaps when you  quote such persons as Bruce Lee, but when it comes
to the Buddha, you gravely misrepresent him. Sorry.
>
> Please be patient and follow my discussion with Tep and perhaps we
can discuss this on another day.
>
.........................

Alex, isn't it the right time to leave them alone so that you may
have peace of mind as a consequence?

Just a friendly and constructive suggestion.


Yours truly,


Tep
===


#89497	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:27 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Dear Friends,

Another lively discussion this afternoon with the same active participants.

1. Lukas's question (#89472):
"Should we do anything to have a first stage of insight. Should we discern nama
and rupa, to have nama-rupa insight?"
KS: Understand! Without such understanding, who can have such (insight or)
enlightenment?

2. Han's qu. on the Satipatthana Sutta (#89463), paras 4 & 5:
"Now, my question is when does Satipatthana actually arise......4 ....or
...5..."
(summary of ) KS's response: What is contemplation? Not just thinking over, but
understanding what appears.. Contemplation at this moment - characteristics (of
realities) mentioned in the sutta, just to be understood. If there is no
understanding of, for example, kaaya, there cannot be contemplation. So, always
back to understaning, otherwise there'll always be an idea of 'what shall I do?'
or 'wanting to do something.'

There cannot be the understanding of reality only by reading, but there is
reality now. Kaaya refers to any rupa of the body, experienced through the
body-sense. If we don't appreciate this, we cannot understand kaaya. Instead
there will be (wrong) ideas of postures and parts of the body to be known. All
the teachings lead to the understanding of reality, otherwise they're useless.
They're also pointing to the characteristic of not self, anatta. There's no
body, each kalapa (of rupas) arises and falls away in direct succession all the
time.

3. Ven P to KS (In response to the last comment):  Has she ever experienced just
one reality rising and falling away? Her response was along the lines that
everyone does all the time, but it depends on understanding what is known.
Understanding has to develop in order to be freed from clinging (clinging to the
nimittas and stories about what is experienced, taking us away from the
understanding of realities themselves).

4. Ven P's concern about how we'd cross the road and not get run over by a bus
when understanding realities. Life goes on as usual.... This is a topic that is
often returned to.

5. I raised the often-confusing topic of kamma as spoken of conventionally and
in an absolute sense (partly referring to Howard's and Nina's discussion). For
example, yesterday we referred to how dosa harms. It accumulates and we say
conventionally it harms others. Actually, only our own akusala cittas cause
mental suffering. Again, conventionally we say others acts harm us bodily or are
the proximate cause of physical hardship or death, but again this is just
speaking conventionally as we all do. In an ultimate sense, it is kamma that
brings these about. Again, conventionally, the Buddha and we refer to the
importance of good friends and so on, but in an ultimate sense, just moments of
vipaka and wise consideration, panna etc.

6. Kinds of dukkha - Rinze had referred to 5 kinds. KS: Never mind how many -
100 or 1000. just understand reality! A little more on Han's previous comments
on illness, separation and so on. Illness as referring to unpleasant bodily
feeling, separation as referring to unpleasant mental feeling.

to be contd.



#89498	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:38 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2b 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		contd.

7. Ven P's letter -parts of it read out by him after I suggested he raise any
questions from it with KS directly :
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/88564
a) His comments about only one method or many ways. To suggest there is one way
seems a  narow-minded approach. For example, yesterday he'd referred to the
teacher who had developed chakras as part of his samatha practice, 9th chakra-
nirodha, then practiced vipassana on it. KS had 'rubbished' it, he said.
Discussion about realities.
Betty: is the chakra a reality or a concept?
Ven P: (strongly) that's an off-the-wall comment!

b) His comments about the Visuddhimagga and other Abhid and commentary texts
being 'heartless'.
KS: is citta now arising?
Where? Outside the body or where?
There's a rupa on which citta arises. Heart-base even at the moment of birth.
Ven P: A comment about jhana and teachers with high attainements.
KS: "I'd like to understand every term such as jhana."
Ven P: We need to have the hindrances under control first.
KS: "Who controls?"
Ven P: The Bodhisatta managed to do it.

Later KS stressed that ideas about suppressing the hindrances shows a lack of
understanding. We can say the hindrances are akusala cittas, that's all.

c) His comments about the Theravada tradition - people seem miserable in temples
and elsewhere (not us!). Concern with appearances and other people rather than
with dhammas appearing now.
Ven P - we should include more on DNA, link with animals, 'Science of the mind'
(Dalai Lama), health and so on.
KS: It depends what we are talking about.
J: The Buddha taught enlightenment to what?

8. In relation to the comments above about control, I raised Han's comments (end
of #85195) on atta.
Sakkaya ditthi (relating to me, here) and attanuditthi including these and those
'things' outside, not taken for me. Who controls? Self.

9. Buddhas ill at ease (discussion with Mike # 88108 ). Bodily unpleasant
feeling as we concluded as conditioned by all kinds of things
Connie's #87939, "Buddhas.....those desiring little sound". KS: referring to
jhana, mind-objects only. Ven P reminded us of the Vinaya rule about not wearing
wooden shoes which disturb people.

10. The Perfumed Chamber as just a term for the Buddha's kuti. Other kutis maybe
perfumed too.....just depends on vipaka.

11.Rob K & Ven P raising qus on khanika samadhi, samatha and jhana.
Ekaggata - settling on one object at a time, sets the mind on the object.
Samatha, calm with each kusala citta.
In the development of insight, concentration firm, so panna can understand
reality, esp. at vipassana nanas. Other times, concentration doesn't appear as
strong. Reality appears with the aid of samadhi.

12. Derek's question (#87815 & 87723). I said he'd referred to 6 upacaras, was
KS familiar with this? " I don't mind at all. Never mind what this person saidor
thinks. It hinders reality to be concerned about it. It has to be one's own
understanding." Discussion about only one upacara in anuloma ('approaching')
javana process, prior to enlightenment.  With regard to samatha bhavana prior to
jhana attainemnt, who can say which level is called upacara. No one can tell us.
Must be with detachment.

13. I asked about D.O. with regard to 2 and 5 past causes. (See Nina's Vism
messages #89288, 89198) "Hence it is said: 'In the previous kamma-process
becoming, there is delusion, which is 'ignorance'; there is accumulation [S:
ayuhana], which is 'formations'[S: sankhara]; there is attachment, which is
'craving'; there is embracing, which is 'clinging'; there is volition[S:
cetana], which is 'becoming'[S: bhava]; thus these five things in the previous
kamma-process becoming are conditions for rebirth-linking here...."

Are sankhara and bhava the same? Yes, they both refer to cetana (kamma). (Auhana
also refers to kamma accumulated). Sankhara refers to past kamma which brought
(and brings) results in this life. Bhava refers to kamma in this life which
brings results in future. When the Vism refers to both as included in past
causes, the bhava refers to kamma already past in this life as cause of future
birth and results.

Ven P asked about the relevance to this moment and Sukin stressed that we'd been
discussing this moment all afternoon. Ignorance now, kusala, akusala now, vipaka
like seeing now, on and on.

14. Connies' Atth. reference (#88214) with regard to how "for three months he
lived only by way of the aggregate of feeling "and so on. Can be according to
accumulations. If it happens like that, can be.

15. Ken H's qu (#86439) on odour and the answer he'd been given before
suggesting that it must be visible object rather than odour appearing now. A
misunderstanding, I think.

KS: "Anything!". Anything can appear anytime. If one has ideas of 'it's most
likely to be this' and so on, clinging and expectation are there. Usually people
want to know something in particular instead of what appears like now. This is
important to decrease craving for something so very special.  Even that
'wanting' can be known. All dhammas are anatta.

16. Ven P's  scepticism about bhavanga cittas and other intricate points in the
teachings and relevance to practice now.
KS: What is bhavanga?
Ven P: no clear answer
KS: Citta has the faculty of experiencing an object
Are cittas different by function and object and cetasikas? All different, one
arising at a time.
Because of the paccaya of each citta, each one conditions the next one by
anantara paccaya.
Patisandhi is the first citta, the second one performs the function of bhavanga,
like when we're fast asleep. When it doesn't experience an object of this world,
it is bhavanga. One knows it must arise then.

17. I raised Nina's comments from the Thai tape (#88373) about being intoxicated
with life. KS: Can the intoxicated one know anything? S: No, lost in lobha. KS:
We live in a world of nimitta. The reality has gone all the time. Thinking about
nimitta, lost in the world of thought, drunk on nimitta. What conditions the
reality to arise and fall away? How many realities are gone? Uncontrollable.
This is why it's so important to understand the reality on which the nimitta is
based - only the reality can be known in a day. Otherwise we carry on
intoxicated.

Is there awareness now or are we intoxicated, lost in dreams with lobha about
this and that object now?
*****
Again any corrections or further comments from fellow-participants most welcome.

Metta,

Sarah
p.s I'd like to stress that there are always many other discussions and other
topics raised, but I tend to recall those I've raised for obvious reasons.
That's why I'd like others to give their own (very different) impressions.
===========


#89499	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:45 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is more noble than Knowledge & Vision? Take a look. :) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Tep,

>-- "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> wrote:
>
> Dear friends Alex, Sukin, Jon, KenH, -
>
> Alex, isn't it the right time to leave them alone so that you may
> have peace of mind as a consequence?
>
> Just a friendly and constructive suggestion.
>
>
> Yours truly,
>
>
> Tep
> ===

You are right. I should stop all posting re: meditation as it is
obvious that for the amount of sutta quotes that I've provided I have
not recieved even 1/10 of same quality rebuttals - But I've recieved
lots of strawman arguments instead. Furthermore some members have
expressed desire not to study the suttas in such a degree ( no doubt
as to why).  I have 100% desire to improve my views and so if anyone
can provide sutta (not Comy, not Abh, Not KS) quotes to the contrary
I would gladly improve my views.



Re: Online websites.

Apparently I am not the only one: ->
-----------------------------------------
For a time now I have been visiting websites and reading posts from
some of the other Buddhist boards out there. I have decided to
discontinue this practice as it is just placing myself in a state of
continuous aggravation and anxiety for the Dhamma and for what can
only be characterized as brave, intelligent, admirable individuals
being mislead and misleading others by flawed methodology and
corrupted dhamma. Bad conditions are increasing and good conditions
are in danger!

Nearly all the people out there make the same sort of methodological
error: they begin by accepting authority. Accepting the Zen or
Tibetan or Mahayana or Theravada School as the true teaching of what
the Buddha Taught is accepting authority. Accepting the Vipassana
school, accepting the Abhidhamma, accepting the commentaries,
accepting any of these is accepting authority.

Starting out to study what the Buddha taught should not be equated
with accepting even what the Buddha taught at the start, let alone
some interpretation of what it is that he taught.

You study the Original Sources to determine what the Buddha Taught by
comparing sutta with sutta and eliminating anything that is not
completely without conflict with anything else in the suttas (that
means even if it is in the core suttas!). (Later you may find you
have misunderstood and need to re-introduce things, but the method
says that until you see the harmony, disgard the discord).

I say: "If you are going to study what the Buddha Taught, Go to the
Original Sources." What are the Original Sources?
The only real clue we have about what can be considered "original
sources" is what the Buddha states to be original sources in the
works accepted by ALL Buddhists as original sources: the core Suttas
and the Vinaya[1].

http://halfsmile.org/buddhadust/www.buddhadust.org/dhammatalk/beginner
s_questions/compare_sutta_with_sutta.htm
======================


Best wishes,

Alex


#89500	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:30 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Dear Tep,


=============
Everybody seems to have a hidden agenda all the time. :-)

  >Suk: Now that I have revealed my motive, I possibly spoiled my own
plan. :-/ But I thought that it was fair that I should tell you
about it.

T: Thank you for revealing the true motive behind the review request.
So you wanted to use me as a guinea pig for your research, huh?

S: Not really Tep. There were several motives and the one I stated was
one of them, in fact it wasn’t the first one that popped into my mind. I
don’t plan things, but many stories are created as I go along, and even
though most must have been akusala, some I believe, were however kusala.

=========
  >Suk: But from what you have written above, am I to understand that
your questions in the previous post were just a test? Should I then
wait for the more serious ones?

T: More than just a test; they represent my real-time thoughts while
reading through the first chapter. No reason to wait for more
questions, since the review is done.

S: Good.

=========
T: An advantage for me is that I had a chance to formally express how I
feel about the DSG Abhidhamma approach.

S: So I shouldn’t feel bad about anything. ;-)

=========
T: Feel free to make another request about other things, anytime.

S: Thanks. I’ll try to respond to the rest of your questions tomorrow.
Since I expected a response from you to the answers I give to your
questions, could you please do so for Part I in the meantime? I think
that we will both learn something in the process.

Metta,

Sukin


#89501	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:41 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is more noble than Knowledge & Vision? Take a look. :) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Sukinder and all,

>--- Sukinder <sukinder@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> ========
>  > Take for example Alex's insistence on Jhana. I believe sincerely
>  >that he does not understand Jhana at all and is doing himself much
>  >harm by clinging to it and throwing it at others the way he does.
>
> I have provided a ton of sutta quotes attribute to the Buddha.
>
> Please provide sutta quotes that you think refute not even mine
> statements.
>
>
> S: The Sutta quotes you give only prove that the Buddha said those
> things, and being the Buddha he must be right.

So you believe other teachers?  Ok, I should stop discussion with you.
I've made my choice.


> Also this may reflect
> your ability to look up Texts and to interpret them in a way that
> satisfies you and some other people.

Find sutta quotes refuting the quotes that I've found and I'll gladly
be corrected.


> However as far as I'm concerned, your understanding is such that
>you are "right" only perhaps when you quote such persons as Bruce
>Lee, but when it comes to the Buddha, you  gravely misrepresent him.
>Sorry.

It is not *my* opinions. Those are sutta quotes from Sutta Pitaka. If
you have problem with them, all complaints to the author of them.


Best wishes,

Alex


#89502	From: "Tep Sastri" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:53 am 
Subject: Confession of An Earnest Buddhist 	indriyabala 
 
 		Dear Alex and All, -

I wrote earlier :

> Alex, isn't it the right time to leave them alone so that you may
> have peace of mind as a consequence?
>
> Just a friendly and constructive suggestion.
>

Alex: You are right. I should stop all posting re: meditation as it is
obvious that for the amount of sutta quotes that I've provided I have
not recieved even 1/10 of same quality rebuttals - But I've recieved
lots of strawman arguments instead.

Tep: Thank you for humbly accepting the friendly suggestion and also
for showing me the confession made by "Beginner" at the other
discussion group. It is an eye-opener that explains one wrong
motivation of an earnest Buddhist, who (sincerely) tries to explain
the "right" Dhamma (as he sees it) to others who are "being misled
and misleading others by flawed methodology and corrupted dhamma".

But that view, although it is probably sincere and well intended, is
both naive and arrogant. As a consequence, instead of getting his
message across, it always precipitates challenges and denials.

Thank you very much, Alex. I will scale down my posting too, while
trying to become less naive and less arrogant. :-)


Tep
===


#89503	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:08 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] What is more noble than Knowledge & Vision? Take a look. :) 	sukinderpal 
 
 		Hi Alex,

Thanks for your response. It allowed me to see one thing that I need to
make clear.

============

  > S: The Sutta quotes you give only prove that the Buddha said those
  > things, and being the Buddha he must be right.

Alex:
So you believe other teachers? Ok, I should stop discussion with you.
I've made my choice.

Suk: The part of my statement above “and being the Buddha he must be
right”, seem to come across as saying that I question ‘your’ regard for
the Buddha as authority. However it is meant to be a statement about ‘my
own’ regard for the Buddha’s words.

Sorry about that.

Metta,

Sukin


#89504	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:25 am 
Subject: MN74, views. Rejection of views. 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Hello all,

Summary of Dighanakha sutta MN74:

DN holds a view "All is not pleasing to me" .

Buddha says that these 3 sorts of "views" are:
"All is pleasing to me" - This is close to bondage, lust.
"All is not pleasing to me" - This is close to non-bondage, not lust.
"Some is pleasing to me, some not".

All is/isn't pleasing to me may mean a number of things.
Liking or disliking "The All". All exists or not exists. Certain
knowledge is or isn't possible.

At first DN thinks that the Buddha praises his view. However the
Buddha proceeds to refute even this view. It is interesting how
Buddha refutes the view. The Buddha does not proceed to use logic,
as there were already plenty of arguments for every and against any
viewpoint.

Buddha appeals to pragmaticism. How does holding a view "X" affects
the person? If person who dogmatically holds and clings to "A is
true, all else is false" will clash with someone who holds "Not
-A, or B, is true, all else is false".

========
"Where there is a clash, there is dispute. Where there is a dispute,
quarreling. Where there is quarreling, annoyance. Where there is
annoyance, frustration.' Envisioning for himself clash, dispute,
quarreling, annoyance, frustration, he both abandons that view and
does not cling to another view. Thus there is the abandoning of these
views; thus there is the relinquishing of these views."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html
==========================================

Thus there are:
a) clinging to the view
b) Vexations, arguments and generally not too peaceful states of mind.

So a wise disciple should abolish clinging to views. Clinging is not-
peaceful, even if clinging to "right" views. The issue isn't about
whose view is right, the view (inference) is already an act of
clinging (SN ditthisamyutta).

Then the Buddha proceeds to describe the physical Body, it is
conditioned, inconstant, has many drawbacks and thus isn't something
totally perfect to be clung to. The feelings can be generally
classified into "pleasant, unpleasant, and neutral". When one is
present, the other 2 are absent. Furthermore, just as with the
body, we directly see the inconstancy and dependency on causes &
conditions. So even the feelings are not worth to cling to.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeing this, an instructed disciple of the noble ones grows
disenchanted with pleasant feeling, disenchanted with painful
feeling, disenchanted with neither-pleasant-nor-painful feeling.
Disenchanted, he grows dispassionate. From dispassion, he is
released. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He
discerns, 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done.
There is nothing further for this world.' A monk whose mind is thus
released does not take sides with anyone, does not dispute with
anyone. He words things by means of what is said in the world but
without grasping at it."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html
==========================================

Notice one of the qualities that make one an Arahant that was the
major area of discussion in this Sutta:

"A monk whose mind is thus released does not take sides with anyone,
does not dispute with anyone. He words things by means of what is
said in the world but without grasping at it."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html

Notice, no need for an Arahant to create or use a special vocabulary
or a "right" ontology.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Now at that time Ven. Sariputta was sitting behind the Blessed One,
fanning him. The thought occurred to him, "Indeed, it seems that the
Blessed One speaks to us of the abandoning of each of these mental
qualities through direct knowledge. Indeed, it seems that the One
Well-gone speaks to us of the relinquishing of each of these mental
qualities through direct knowledge." As Ven. Sariputta was reflecting
thus, his mind was released from fermentations through not-clinging.
While in LongNails the wanderer there arose the dustless, stainless
Dhamma eye: "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to
cessation."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.074.than.html

Ultimately one needs to stop clinging even to "the best". All has to
be relinquished through wisdom to make the final breakthrough to
Arhatship.

Those who have read a bit about Buddhist History will find a sad
tendency of speculations, refutations and so on. After reading this
and (ditthisamyutta) I really question the so called "advanced"
teaching of "how things actually are".

The speculative books that aim to refute heretical doctrines using
logic, proofs, syllogism, inductions, deductions and so on, is a
great indicator of one not being an Arahant or an Awakened one. As
far as I am aware, in the sutta the Buddha has NOWHERE even ttempted
to prove Kamma, Rebirth, Nibbana, atta, anatta and so on. He did
however supply one with pragmatic methods to be able to verify for
oneself, at least the most important issues, and one of the reasons
why these issues are important is how they make one act. Part
of "right" view is its pragmatic effect on one who holds it.
Ultimately it is impossible to logically prove beyond any reasonable
and unreasonable doubt, anything to anyone. Almost any, if not any
theoretical standpoint can be countered by an equally or better
skilled logician. This is one of the sad drawbacks of theory,
inferences and so on.

However direct experience is direct experience and it is what
pragmatically matters.

Pragmatic steps of identifying and letting go of stress is what
ultimately matters to those tired of philosophy - and these pragmatic
steps don't require 'logical proof'. The cessation of stress is
proof in an of itself. IMHO.

Any comments, additions, ideas?


Best wishes,

Alex


#89505	From: "connie" <nichicon@hotmail.com> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:26 am 
Subject: Re: The importance of behaviour 	nichiconn 
 
 		dear Scott,
my disordered "pali" is equally self-evidently dysfunctional as sanya's art.  
orpiment?!   what is the nimitta to yellow? (don't ask)   anyway, yes, the cure:
believe paa.li to mean sadhamma.  gulp...o yeah, definitely, i am looking at
getting Gair (given the answers and BB's lectures are already out there -) but
like "they" suggest, first the Collins.  evidently i work under the delusion
(taboo induced phobia) that warder is to be seen but not read.  but is it fair
to say what is seen cannot be touched?  not just the sun, either.  depends on
what is touch?  anyway, i was looking at Nina's (#87420) Commentarial example of
this 'lakkhanial' sorta supervision:

<< All of them, trained in the three kinds of training, sat motionless, like the
flame of a light not moved by wind. Thus he looked at their postures with his
physical eye. He looked with his divine eye after having increased his
clearvoyance, and saw their heartbase (hadaya ruupa), he looked at their siila
that was inside, within their hearts. He saw the siila of several hundreds of
monks that had reached the level of arahatship, like a light that shines inside
a vessel. These monks had accomplished vipassanaa. When he had seen here their
siila, he thought: "these monks are pleasing to me and I am pleasing to them."
>>

And just for fun, the Sub-co sentence that mentions the heart-base & the
nimittas:

Cakkhutalesu nimitta.m .thapetvaati bhaavanaanuyogasampattiyaa sabbesa.m tesa.m
bhikkhuuna.m cakkhutalesu labbhamaana.m
santindriyavigatathinamiddhataakaarasa'nkhaata.m nimitta.m attano hadaye
thapetvaa sallakkhetvaa.

which i fake:  "considered standing heart-mind-grasped innerpeace;  ceased:
thina middha mine condition.  that successful development. "

what do you think happens to people who read backwards?   probably walk funny,
too... gimpin' wailers.  (stand down!:

"the working postures"   of nama and ruupa.  i dunno panyatti from nimitta?  but
yeah, those indoor and outdoor gyms... what's the difference from aayatana and
'mine' --

off to the real world i go,  through your door #3: Bdhgh's definition of
aayatana at DA i.124 as sa~njaati and as kaara.na (origin & cause, i. e.
mutually occasioning & conditioning relations or adaptations).

see ya,
connie



#89506	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:21 am 
Subject: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	purist_andrew 
 
 		Greetings,

Considering most if not all of you on this list are admirable,
intelligent people and
very knowledgeable of the Dhamma, I thought I could get some good
feedback
on something that's been on my mind.

I consider myself a Theravada Buddhist or at the very least someone
who
tries to be faithful to the teachings of said tradition.  I have
conviction in the
enlightenment experience of the Buddha, and all the consequential
principles, such as the law of kamma, the phenomenon of rebirth and
past
and future lives, beings being related to their merit and demerit,
and so
on.

I have a moderate amount of experience with vipassana meditation, and
believe I have 'tasted' emptiness through that meditation and it was a
storng enough experience to further my interest in and belief of the
tenets of the tradition to which that type of meditation belongs,
namely,
Theravada Buddhism.

I find the scriptures of Mahayana interesting, complementing the
Theravada
scriptures, but for some reasons I will outline below I do not
believe them to be entirely authentic or pragmatic,
although, they seem backed by a lot of theory and similar laws of
cause and effect to Theravada.

I am very interested in Mahyana and the nature of its altruistic
aspiration to Buddhahood.  I also have a book by His Holiness Dalai
Lama called "Stages of Meditation" which begins by telling us that
omniscience can be brought into being by fulfilling sufficient causes
and conditions.  I find this intriguing.  Even if one does not want
to liberate all other beings (which I still consider a worthy goal),
but try to be a "Solitary" Buddha, but attain omniscience, it seems
like something worthwhile to acheive and I could imagine it would
bring quite a lot of a sense of well-being, more even than one who is
an arahant experiences, just as, for example, I feel when I do
programming or some other creative activity, or an artist feels when
reviewing a creative project, which he is happy with and is better
than just happiness without the extra well-being aspect.

So there are steps to be taken as it is taught but I am skeptical.
Correct me if any of the following is wrong please.  For one thing,
the Mahayana teachings are generally not considered as provably
authentic, as they did not originate from the time of the historic
Buddha Siddartha Gotama, but started appearing a few hundred years
later.  Therefore although they may seem on the surface alluring and
attractive but if they do not have integrity, it seems to me to be
folly to try to pursue and develop them through the course of an
infinite number of births and rebirths.  We should need assurance we
can reach that goal.

But primarily, and this is getting closer to the subject line of this
post, what is the Theravada view on the Mayahana scriptures and with
what degree of assurance can we have that when put into practice
these teachings will yield the promised result?

I would like to hear the viewpoint on this from Theravadans, as I
consider myself one, and would not want to give up an extremely
fortune chance to pursue the dhamma in this dispensation, to set my
sights on something that won't pan out in the end.

The essential question would be, do Theravadans consider it  possible
to have assurance that one will realize Buddhahood, having the
(Bodhisattva) vow made at a time in a Buddha's dispensation (now),
but not in the presence of a living Buddha (as he has passed 2500
years ago), but instead of the presence of a respectable teacher or
any other similar person, short of someone who has attained
Buddhahood.

My cites for this position would be as follows, from a similar post I
made on E-sangha (Buddhist discussion forum at lioncity.net/buddhism)

>>>

In Wheel 409/411 of the Buddhist Publication Society, "A Treatise on
the Paramis" by Acariya Dhammapala, edited by Bhikkhu Bodhi, (as far
as I can tell a commentary to add a Theravada take on the Mahayana
idea of the perfections leading to Buddahood), I read under "What is
their [paramis] condition?":


>>>>>>>
The condition of the paramis is firstly, the great aspiration.  This
is the aspiration supported by the eight qualifications which occurs
thus:  "Crossed I would cross, freed I would free, tamed I would
tame, calmed I would calm, comforted I would comfort, attained to
nibbana I would lead to nibbana, purified I would purify, enlightened
I would enlighten!" This is the condition for all the paramis without
exception.

The eight qualifications through which the aspiration succeeds are:
the human state, the male sex, the cause, the sight of the master,
the going forth, the acheivement of noble qualities, extreme
dedication, and strong desire.
>>>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>
4) The sight of the master: The personal presence of the master. The
aspiration only succeeds when made by one aspiring in the presence of
a living Buddha. When made after the Exalted One has passed into
parinibbana-- before a shrine, at the foot of a Bodhi-tree, in front
of an image, or in the presence of paccekabuddhas or the Buddha's
disciples-- the aspiration does not succeed. Why?  Because the
recipient lacks the power (necessary to confirm the aspiration).  The
aspiration only succeeds when made in the presence of the Buddhas,
for they alone possess spiritual power adequate to the loftiness of
the aspiration.<<<<<<<


>>>>>>>>

A.L.:

The following thread had a lot of posts, many unintelligent, and
didn't really go anywhere.  I think that you guys would be a much
more receptive and intelligent bunch to pose this question to.

Check out the thread below if you want to see the discussion, but you
don't have to.

I'd be happy to have your thoughts on the subject.

Regards in the dhamma,
Andrew L.

==================
If you are willing to sign up for a few account, the thread is
available at <http://www.lioncity.net/buddhism/index.php?
showtopic=65623&hl=>

If not, you can read the first few dozen of the posts from Google's
Cache at <http://74.125.95.104/search?q=cache:Sgfx-
Q_Afh8J:www.lioncity.net/buddhism/lofiversion/index.php/t65623.html+Di
pankara+Feasibility&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us>
==================


#89507	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:52 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Hi Andrew.


>--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "purist_andrew"
><purist_andrew@...> wrote:
> I find the scriptures of Mahayana interesting, complementing the
> Theravada
> scriptures, but for some reasons I will outline below I do not
> believe them to be entirely authentic or pragmatic,
> although, they seem backed by a lot of theory and similar laws of
> cause and effect to Theravada.

You are correct here. I'd like to add that there is plenty of proto
Mahayana in later, Theravadin book found in KN.

The thing is that "Bodhisatta to be" became a Buddhist only when he met
Buddha Kassapa.

http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/081-ghatikara-e1.htm


Then we know that he was reborn in Tusita after which he was reborn on
Earth for his final time.

Become an Ariya (no further than sotopanna) and you have a chance of
becoming a Buddha - although the chance is slim.  You'd have to be most
likely reborn as Sakadagamin (or a sotopanna on his 7th existence) on
Earth when there isn't Buddha's sassana and then when you will *have
to* become an Buddha (silent or teaching).
==============

As for meditation, there are Brahmaviharas. You will need them.

However, if you are already a sotopanna, then you are "risking"
becoming an Anagami and never be reborn on Earth (thus no Buddhahood).


Best wishes,

Alex


#89508	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:14 am 
Subject: Self Defence and precepts 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Here is a question:


Lets say someone a person loves is brutally attacked. What should that
person do?

If a person is attacked, what should he do?


You may say about precept "not to harm/kill", but by doing nothing,
what in effect a person may be doing is allowing harm being done to the
victim! So the one who abstains is the one allowing harming/killing to
happen.




Best wishes,


Alex


#89509	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:53 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Self Defence and precepts 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Alex -

In a message dated 8/27/2008 2:14:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
truth_aerator@... writes:

Here is  a question:


Lets say someone a person loves is brutally attacked.  What should that
person do?

If a person is attacked, what should  he do?


You may say about precept "not to harm/kill", but by doing  nothing,
what in effect a person may be doing is allowing harm being done  to the
victim! So the one who abstains is the one allowing harming/killing  to
happen.




Best  wishes,


Alex
===================================
     My opinion:
     Try to do what will serve to protect the  innocent one, and no more than
that, but DO act if possible. One's action, as I  see it, should optimally be
motivated by love, not anger, and one's intent  should be to save the innocent
victim with as little harm to the aggressor as  possible. But there is no
virtue, as I see it, in capitulating to evil and  sacrificing a victim on the
altar of rigid, pacifist "morality". Ajahn  Chah was once asked what he would do
if physically attacked, and he replied,  pointing at his umbrella, that he
would lovingly hit his attacker with it!  ;-) The Buddha once encountered an
angry elephant on the road  heading right towards him. Being a buddha, he needed
only to use his mental  powers, causing the elephant to bow to him rather than
attack him, but act  - the Buddha DID.

With metta,
Howard



#89510	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 4:03 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 
 		Dear Sarah,

Thank you very much for taking up my questions again with Khun Sujin.

You wrote:
2. Han's qu. on the Satipatthana Sutta (#89463), paras 4 & 5:
"Now, my question is when does Satipatthana actually arise......4 ....or
...5..."
(summary of ) KS's response: What is contemplation? Not just thinking over, but
understanding what appears.. Contemplation at this moment - characteristics (of
realities) mentioned in the sutta, just to be understood. If there is no
understanding of, for example, kaaya, there cannot be contemplation. So, always
back to understaning, otherwise there'll always be an idea of 'what shall I do?'
or 'wanting to do something.'

There cannot be the understanding of reality only by reading, but there is
reality now. Kaaya refers to any rupa of the body, experienced through the
body-sense. If we don't appreciate this, we cannot understand kaaya. Instead
there will be (wrong) ideas of postures and parts of the body to be known. All
the teachings lead to the understanding of reality, otherwise they're useless.
They're also pointing to the characteristic of not self, anatta. There's no
body, each kalapa (of rupas) arises and falls away in direct succession all the
time.

------------------------------

Dear Sarah, my questions were very specific, something like ‘yes’ or
‘no’ questions.
But the answers given by Khun Sujin were not specific.
Let’s us look at my questions once again.

------------------------------

In A New Translation of the Majjhima Nikaaya by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu
Bodhi, under the chapter on Satipa.t.thaana Sutta I read the following:

Quote:
4. “And how, bhikkhus, does a bhikkhu abide contemplating the body as a body?
Here a bhikkhu, going to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty hut,
sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, and established
mindfulness in front of him, ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes
out. Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing
out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he
understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands:
“I breathe out short.’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe in experiencing
the whole body [of breath]’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out
experiencing the whole body [of breath].’ He trains thus: ‘I shall breathe
in tranquillizing the bodily formation’; he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe
out tranquillizing the bodily formation.’ Just as a skilled turner or his
apprentice, when making a long
  turn, understands: ‘I make a long turn’; or, when making a short turn
understands: ‘I make a short turn’; so too, breathing in long, a bhikkhu
understands: ‘I breathe in long’ … he trains thus: ‘I shall breathe out
tranquillizing the bodily formation.’

(INSIGHT)

5. In this way he abides contemplating the body as a body internally, or he
abides contemplating the body as a body externally, or he abides contemplating
the body as a body both internally and externally. Or else he abides
contemplating in the body its arising factors, or he abides contemplating in the
body its vanishing factors, or he abides contemplating in the body both its
arising and vanishing factors. Or else mindfulness that ‘there is a body’ is
simply established in him to the extent necessary for bare knowledge and
mindfulness. And he abides independent, not clinging to anything in the world.
That is how a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body as a body.
End Quote.

Han: Now, my question is when does Satipa.t.thaana actually arise? Does it arise
when a yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 4 above, or does it arise
when the yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 5 above?

------------------------------

Han: Now, the definition of satipa.t.thaana given in your last post was that it
already refers to sati, accompanied by pa~n~naa, which understands realities.
Therefore, if satipa.t.thaana arises when a yogi is practicing as described in
paragraph 4 above, it means that pa~n~naa also arises when a yogi is practicing
as described in paragraph 4. My understanding before I joined DSG was that
pa~n~naa may or may not arise when a yogi is practicing as described in
paragraph 4. But pa~n~naa definitely arises when a yogi is practicing as
described in paragraph 5 above. That’s why Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi
put the word INSIGHT in brackets above paragraph 5. I asked these questions with
you to confirm or otherwise of my previous understanding.

But it doesn’t matter. I will not ask any more questions on this topic.
I thank you very much for your kind efforts.

Respectfully,
Han


#89511	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:47 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	dhammanusarin 
 
 		Dear Sukin and All, -

The post is much longer now, after the inclusion of my reply. :-)

Suk: (#89500): Since I expected a response from you to the answers I
give to your questions, could you please do so for Part I in the
meantime? I think that we will both learn something in the process.

T:  I hope so too.
................................


> 1. Nina heavily quotes from the Visuddhimagga as if it were
> the 'Abhidhamma'. A newcomer may wonder: Is this Vism based on the
> Abhidhamma-pitaka? Why is there no quotes from the seven Abhidhamma
> books that make up the Abhidhamma-pitaka?

Sukin: Perhaps we should then factor in the fact that most newcomers
to
Buddhism would not have any preconceived expectations regarding
references to other texts such as the commentaries or the Suttas? And
maybe Nina indeed wants to stress `Abhidhamma' as in "study of
realities" and not "book study"? Besides I did imply a student who is
interested in learning about Reality / Truth / Dhamma and not one who
would a more or less scholarly study of the Abhidhamma texts proper.

T: Saying nothing casts doubt in the mind of educated readers who
keep wondering, "Is this the same as the Abhidhamma that the Buddha
taught only to His Chief Disciple? Why did He not teach householders
too, so they could use it in the daily life?"

The Vism refers to the "Abhidhamma" only a few times: Chapter XII
paragraph 72; XIII n.20; XIV 24, 58, 185; XXI 72, 126.  Is the Vism a
good representation of  the Abhidhamma?

===========
> 2. What kinds of dhammas did the Buddha discover? Can all these
> dhammas be categorized either as nama or as rupa only?

Sukin: As I understand it, the Buddha was enlightened to all the
realities which arise at and can be experienced by, the five senses
and
the mind. In the Suttas this is said to be the "All". I have no reason
not to believe this to be true or that the Abhidhamma texts explain in
greater detail, in fact comprehensively, about all this. And yes, the
division into the broad categories, one Nama and the other Rupa makes
sense, since this covers the All.

T:  You know that the All does not include Nibbana. Then how can
Nibbana be experienced at Enlightenment? As an Abhidhammika I believe
you can use your Abhidhamma knowledge to answer my question. However,
by saying " I have no reason not to believe this to be true or that
the Abhidhamma texts explain in greater detail, in fact
comprehensively, about all this", it shows that you have not yet
completely read "the Abhidhamma texts". Aren't you disqualified as an
Abhidhammika? ;-))
===========

  "Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience anything."

Tep:
> But that may not be sufficiently clear to a newcomer, I think.

Sukin: Or to a long time so-called Buddhist. ;-) I think it depends on
the `understanding', including being aware of one's tendency to
complications. The message itself is very simple in terms of
intellectually understanding it.

T: "Intellectually understanding it" does not one free from doubts. I
think any understanding that is muddled is not satisfying. Yet, I
agree that being aware of one's drawback is better than knowing
nothing.
===========

> Why is it important for s/he to know that? What is experience?

Sukin: Because whether he realizes it or not, he is constantly making
statements about this and wrongly, and this leads him to accumulate
more
causes for suffering. He mixes nama and rupa and needs to develop his
understanding starting with such intellectual understanding. And
remember, the first stage of vipassana is namarupaparicheda nana.

T: I agree that having attained 'namarupaparicheda~nana', the
knowledge distinguishing between nama and rupa, the meditator can
overcome the doubt about nama & rupa. But it is beyond me why just by
knowing that "Nama experiences something; rupa does not experience
anything", you and I can attain "the first stage of vipassana"
through reading/thinking of such definition. If it is that easy,
those readers of ADL, including the DSG Abhidhammikas, must have
attained namarupaparicheda~nana by now.
===========
> Why is color a rupa, but a mountain is not?

Sukin: Because `mountain' is clearly a product of thinking. This
thinking takes place following the experience of visible object or
color. One can therefore understand that the visible object itself is
experienced by one kind of reality, different from that which is
involved in thinking about mountain.

But I know this only intellectually, I don't know the characteristic
of
rupa as rupa nor consciousness as consciousness. A newcomer can also
have the kind of beginning intellectual understanding.

T: The mountain is for sure a visible object. You know, Sukin, I
think I can see and immediately recognize a mountain without a
thinking like, ' Ah, that is a mountain'.  It is also very easy to
see several colors of mountain rocks. If those colors of the rocks
are rupa, then why are the rocks, an aggregate of rupas, not rupa?
Newcomers who are not smarter than I possibly have a hard time
figuring it out.

  But I think a more useful discussion is about the usefulness of
calling colors rupa. Is such definition useful for a meditator to
see 'rupam aniccam', for example?
===========
> Is seeing a mountain same as experiencing it by the eye?

Sukin: No a mountain is never "seen", it does not have the
characteristic that visible object has. It is object of javana citta
only, whereas visible object must first arise as object of vipakka
citta.

T: You are reciting something I cannot follow, Sukin. Does
that "understanding" help you see 'rupam aniccam'?
===========
> What things can feeling experience ?

Sukin: Feeling is one of the seven universal cetasikas, in other words
it arises with all cittas. Citta experiences rupa, cetasika, another
citta, concept and Nibbana, therefore feeling must experience all
these
as well.

T: Does that help you see 'vedana anicca'?
===========
> Can nama experience another nama or more than one?

Sukin: Citta experiences as above, and since cetasika experiences the
same object as the citta it accompanies, it follows that cetasika can
experience the same objects as well.

T:  I think it would be useful if we could see the dukkha sacca (1st
Noble Truth) from such reasoning. What's your thought?
===========
> Does a consciousness experience feeling?

Sukin: Otherwise how can feeling be known?

T: True.
===========
> But most of all, what is the use of knowing all these?

Sukin: Without the Dhamma we have only wrong view about experiences.
Akusala and kusala both are taken for `self'. Rupas are not known as
they are and concepts are taken for real. Perception of permanence,
happiness, self and beauty dictate all our thinking and verbal and
bodily actions. In short being ignorant of "reality", we add to
samsara
and are lost. Being pointed to about what goes on through the five
sense
and the mind, our attention can gradually turn to the experiences
through each of these doorways and we can thereby grow to have some
understanding about them.
What more can you ask for?!! ;-)

<End of Part I>

T: I agree with you that the Dhamma helps one to overcome miccha-
ditthis and also to abandon kilesas (akusala). Without uprooting
clinging (upadana) one cannot gain Release (vimutti). I agree that
right seeing & knowing the 'All', the way they really are, is the
beginning for more knowledges (~nana) to develop.  But I learn all
this and MORE from the Suttanta-pitaka, not by reading the Abhidhamma
in Daily Life. Do you see my point?

Regards,


Tep
===


#89512	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 8:52 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	dhammanusarin 
 		Dear Han (Sarah), -

>Han:
Now, my question is when does Satipa.t.thaana actually arise? Does it
arise when a yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 4 above, or
does it arise when the yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 5
above?

>Han:
>My understanding before I joined DSG was that pa~n~naa may or may
not arise when a yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 4. But
pa~n~naa definitely arises when a yogi is practicing as described in
paragraph 5 above. That’s why Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi put
the word INSIGHT in brackets above paragraph 5.

T: In my humble and cheap opinion (imhaco), the paragraph #4 is about
samatha (serenity, tranquillity) and the paragraph #5 is about
vipassana (insight). It is the case where concentration supports
knowledge and vision as stated in Upanisa Sutta [SN 12.23].
Since "knowledge and vision" is pa~n~na, I believe our understandings
are mostly the same, except one thing.

Satipatthana to me means 'established mindfulness' in one of the four
foundations, which is 'kaya' (in & out breaths) in this case, and it
corresponds to the paragraph #4. Thus the answer to your question to
KS is Satipatthana arises in the 4th step of the anapanasati, which
is tranquillizing the bodily formation (in & out breaths).

Tep
===


#89513	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:24 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 		Dear Tep (Sarah),

I welcome and appreciate your kind contribution.

Tep: In my humble and cheap opinion (imhaco), the paragraph #4 is about samatha
(serenity, tranquillity) and the paragraph #5 is about vipassana (insight). It
is the case where concentration supports knowledge and vision as stated in
Upanisa Sutta [SN 12.23]. Since "knowledge and vision" is pa~n~na, I believe our
understandings are mostly the same, except one thing.
Satipatthana to me means 'established mindfulness' in one of the four
foundations, which is 'kaya' (in & out breaths) in this case, and it corresponds
to the paragraph #4. Thus the answer to your question to KS is Satipatthana
arises in the 4th step of the anapanasati, which is tranquillizing the bodily
formation (in & out breaths).

------------------------------

Han: I generally agree with your comments.

Actually, I did not fully present my understanding of the subject matter, not to
further confuse the issue. My understanding may be correct or not, but I believe
that there is no such thing as the arising of ‘satipa.t.thaana’ because I
consider the ‘satipa.t.thaana as a ‘process’ and not a ‘product’ or
‘outcome’ of the process. To me, the satipa.t.thaana means the establishment
of mindfulness on kaaya, vedanaa, citta and dhamma. So the entire process, from
the beginning to the end, is satipa.t.thaana. What arises is the ‘pa~n~naa’
or insight at the appropriate stage.

Anyway, I do not want to confuse the matter any further.
So I better withdraw my questions.

Respectfully,
Han


#89514	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:49 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	nilovg 
 		Dear Tep and Sukin,
I do appreciate your dialogue on ADL. Very good questions Tep, and
very good answers, Sukin. I do not need to add anything and anyway, I
am just back and Connie is going to give me homework with the
Sangiitisutta! So will Larry with the Visuddhimagga. Besides, I am
reading from the web posts that were sent in my absence.

Nina.
Op 28-aug-2008, om 2:47 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven:

>
> ................................
>
> > 1. Nina heavily quotes from the Visuddhimagga as if it were
> > the 'Abhidhamma'. A newcomer may wonder: Is this Vism based on the
> > Abhidhamma-pitaka? Why is there no quotes from the seven Abhidhamma
> > books that make up the Abhidhamma-pitaka?
>
> Sukin: Perhaps we should then factor in the fact that most newcomers
> to
> Buddhism would not have any preconceived expectations regarding
> references to other texts such as the commentaries or the Suttas? And
> maybe Nina indeed wants to stress `Abhidhamma' as in "study of
> realities" and not "book study"?



#89515	From: "Robert" <avalo1968@...> 
Date: Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:10 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] The Real Practice of Mindfulness 	avalo1968 
 		Hello Sarah,

Sorry, but I don't do not have the time to try to type the article in, even
in installments, and it is not online as far as I can tell.

If anyone is interested, I guess they will have to buy the magazine.

Best regards,

Robert A.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott
<sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Robert A,
>
> Happy to see you're back (not your back) too!
>
> --- On Tue, 26/8/08, Robert <avalo1968@...> wrote:
> >The current (Fall) issue of Buddhadharma magazine has an article
entitled 'The Real Practice
> of Mindfulness' by Andrew Olendzki. The article is a discussion of
mindfulness practice from
> a perspective of the Abhidharma teachings, as the author sees them.
I didn't see any
> discussion of this article in earlier posts, and I was interested in the
opinions of the members
> here. Has anyone read it and have any comments on its content?
>
> ....
> S: I haven't seen or heard about it before. If it's in English (I'm not
clear from your note above), would you consider posting it in short
installments for discussion? Maybe a para or two at a time.
>
> If that's too much trouble, perhaps it's on-line and you have a link.
What did you think about it? I'd be interested to hear your comments.
>
> Metta,
>
> Sarah
> =========
>


#89516	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:40 am 
Subject: Vis. texts 	nilovg 
 		Dear Connie,
N: <<each of the volitions accompanying the seven javanacittas can be
called
bhava, becoming, and the accumulations, aayuhanaa, associated with these
volitions can be called sa"nkhaara.>>

c: i would add: the first javanas of each set are too weak to execute
the
commission of verbal or bodily kamma nor do these succesive javanas
all ripen at
the same future times, but whichever, kusala or akusala, that first
one is, so
are other six.
------
N: Yes, you are right. Sa"nkhaara has a different meaning in
different contexts, and the tiika speaks oof three meanings. That
makes it so complicated.
The Pali: yaa kaaci pana cetanaa bhavo, sampayuttaa aayuhanaa. It
quotes Vis. 293: whatever volition. But here it does not mention
which of the seven javanas are included. Perhaps more in general:
whatever volition.
Nina.



#89517	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 1:12 am 
Subject: Scott: behaviour. 	nilovg 
 		Dear Scott,

AN III,2, which BB entitles "The fool and the wise person.":

"His action marks the fool, his action marks the wise person, O
monks. Wisdom shines forth in behaviour..."

Scott: Can you help with the Paa.li? It is:

"Kammalakkha.no bhikkhave baalo, kammalakkha.no pa.n.dito,
apadaanasobhinii pa~n~naati..."

Scott: In particular, what is the compound 'kammalakkha.na'?
-----------
N: the character of (his) kamma is (of the) fool...
--------
S:  What is
the compound 'apadaanasobhinii'? Is it a negated 'padaana' or is it
'apadaana'? 'Pa~n~naati' is from 'pajaanaati', I think, which relates
to a function of pa~n~naa somehow.
-------
N: Pa~n~naati' is: Pa~n~naa + ti, ti indicating a quote.
apadaana: morals, instruction, legend, life stories, referring mostly
to arahats.
Behaviour is good here.
sobhinii: sobhaa: splendour. Suffix: -in: having splendour.
Literally: wisdom in his behaviour that has splendour.
-------
Nina.



#89518	From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" <bhikkhu0@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:32 am 
Subject: Intelligent + Energetic = Honourable! 	bhikkhu0 
 		Daily Words of the Buddha for 28 August 2008



The Blessed Buddha once said:
Uá¹¹?nako analaso,

Ä€padÄ?su na vedhati,

Acchinnavutti medhÄ?vÄ«,

TÄ?diso labhate yasaṃ.
DÄ«gha NikÄ?ya III 273


Worthy, wise and virtuous:
Who is energetic and not indolent,

In misfortune unshaken,

Flawless in manner and intelligent,

Such one will honour gain.



Have a nice day!


  Friendship is the Greatest *
  Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-)
  ....


#89519	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:48 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	nilovg 
 		Dear Han,
very happy to see you again on the list. This means that your health
is somewhat improving?
Op 28-aug-2008, om 1:03 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven:

> Therefore, if satipa.t.thaana arises when a yogi is practicing as
> described in paragraph 4 above, it means that pa~n~naa also arises
> when a yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 4. My
> understanding before I joined DSG was that pa~n~naa may or may not
> arise when a yogi is practicing as described in paragraph 4. But
> pa~n~naa definitely arises when a yogi is practicing as described
> in paragraph 5 above. That’s why Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi
> put the word INSIGHT in brackets above paragraph 5. I asked these
> questions with you to confirm or otherwise of my previous
> understanding.
-------
N: When the yogavaacara is mentioned in the satipatthaanasutta, yes,
the four Applications are objects of sati and pa~n~naa, not without
pa~n~naa, as you also thought before.
When reading about satipatthaana, as said before, this has three
meanings, depending on the context: the four Applications of
mindfulness, thus, all nama and rupa appearing through one of the six
doors; sati of satipatthaana, that is, sati sampaja~n~naa, or sati
with understanding; the way the Buddha and his great disciples went:
having equanimity, no matter the listeners approved or disapproved.
Usually when we speak about the arising of satipatthaana, or the
development of satipatthaana, we refer to the second meaning.
Wishing you well!
Nina.



#89520	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 2:55 am 
Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 1. 	nilovg 
 		Dear friends,

Chapter 8.

    “Is sati being conscious of all one’s actions, such as eating or
driving a car?” This was another question asked during the sessions.
When someone thinks of himself as eating or driving a car, it is not
sati but thinking of concepts. Eating is not a reality, driving a car
is not a reality. Sati is a wholesome cetasika and it arises with a
wholesome citta. Sati of satipatthana is mindful of realities, of
nåmas and rúpas. It is mindful of one reality at a time. Sati can be
mindful during activities such as eating or driving a car.
While one eats there are hardness, flavour or thinking. These are
realities and they can be known one at a time, as only different
elements, no “body”, no self in them. When mindfulness of realities
arises, right understanding of them can be developed. When there is
no mindfulness one is bound to cling to one’s body and one’s mind.
We read in the “Satipaììhåna Sutta” (Middle Length Sayings I, no. 10)
in the section on postures [1] :

“A disciple while walking, understands ‘I am walking’; while
standing, he understands ‘I am standing”; while sitting, he
understands ‘I am sitting’; while lying down, he understands ‘I am
lying down’. He understands every position his body assumes.
Thus he lives contemplating the body internally or externally or both
internally and externally.
He lives contemplating the arising nature of the body, or the
perishing nature of the body or both the arising and perishing nature
of the body....”

Should we be aware of walking? We should read the whole context of
the sutta in order to understand its meaning. We cling to the body as
a whole, but this is only a concept, not a reality. What we take for
the body are only different elements which arise and fall away.
Hardness, softness, heat, cold, motion or pressure, no matter whether
they are internal or external, should be known when they appear one
at a time. In this way one will know later on the arising and falling
away of these elements. Right understanding will eventually lead to
detachment. This sutta reminds us to be aware of any reality which
appears, when we are walking, standing, sitting or lying down.
Is it possible to give simple instructions for the development of
vipassanå? This was a question asked during the discussions.
It would be very easy if a teacher could tell us what to do first and
what next, and if by following these instructions we could be sure of
attaining enlightenment. However, the Buddha taught us not to follow
a teacher blindly, but to develop the Path ourselves. A good friend
in Dhamma can explain the right way of development. We should listen,
consider what we have heard, and then study with mindfulness any
reality which appears. We have to develop the Path ourselves, right
now; nobody else can do that for us.
--------
[1]: I am using the translation of the Venerable Nårada Thera.
*********
Nina.



#89521	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:20 am 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 		Dear Nina,

Nina: very happy to see you again on the list. This means that your health is
somewhat improving?

Han: Thank you very much for your kind concern. My health condition is the same:
not better or worse.

--------------------

Nina: When the yogavaacara is mentioned in the satipatthaanasutta, yes, the four
Applications are objects of sati and pa~n~naa, not without pa~n~naa, as you also
thought before.
When reading about satipatthaana, as said before, this has three meanings,
depending on the context: the four Applications of mindfulness, thus, all nama
and rupa appearing through one of the six doors; sati of satipatthaana, that is,
sati sampaja~n~naa, or sati with understanding; the way the Buddha and his great
disciples went: having equanimity, no matter the listeners approved or
disapproved.
Usually when we speak about the arising of satipatthaana, or the development of
satipatthaana, we refer to the second meaning.

Han: You said, “Usually when we speak about the arising of satipatthaana, or
the development of satipatthaana, we refer to the second meaning.� The problem
with me is the word “arising.� To me, the “arising� of satipa.t.thaana
and the “development� of satipa.t.thaana are not the same. I consider the
satipa.t.thaana as a ‘process’ and not the ‘product’ or ‘outcome’ of
the process. To me satipa.t.thaana means the establishment of sati on kaaya,
vedanaa, citta and dhamma, and the entire process of establishing sati on kaaya,
vedanaa, citta and dhamma, from the beginning to the end, is satipa.t.thaana.
What arises then is the ‘pa~n~naa’ at the appropriate stage. I do not claim
that what I believe must be correct. But at the same time, I find it difficult
to believe otherwise. Anyway, I thank you very much for your kind explanation.

--------------------

Nina: Wishing you well!

Han: Thank you very much.
I also wish you the best of health and happiness.

Respectfully,
Han


#89522	From: "connie" <nichicon@hotmail.com> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 5:55 am 
Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Twos (22-25) 	nichiconn 
 		Dear Friends,
continuing from: #89200 1.9(17-21) (cy: #89229, #89256, #89294)


CSCD
<<Satibala~nca samaadhibala~nca.

Walshe
DN 33.1.9(22) 'Powers of mindfulness and concentration. (Satibala~nca
samaadhibala~nca.)
Olds
[ 2.22 ]  The Power of Mind and the Power of Getting High[ 2.22 ]samaadhi
RDs
[ 2.22 ]The powers of mindfulness and concentration.


CSCD
<<Samatho ca vipassanaa ca.

Walshe
DN 33.1.9(23) 'Calm and insight.*1027 (Samatho ca vipassanaa ca.)
Olds
[ 2.23 ]  Calm (samatha) and Review (vipassana)
RDs
[ 2.23 ]Calm and insight.2.23



CSCD
<<Samathanimitta~nca paggahanimitta~nca.

Walshe
DN 33.1.9(24) 'The sign of calm and grasping the sign. (Samatha-nimitta~n ca
paggaha-nimitta~n ca.)
Olds
[ 2.24 ]  The Sign (nimitta) of Calm and The Sign of Exertion
RDs
[ 2.24 ]The causes [or signs]2.24 of calm and of mental grasp.2.24.1


CSCD
<<Paggaho ca avikkhepo ca.

Walshe
DN 33.1.9(25) 'Exertion and non-distraction. (Paggaho ca avikkhepo ca.)
Olds
[ 2.25 ]  Exertion and equanimity[ 2.25 ]
RDs
[ 2.25 ]Mental grasp and balance.


.. to be continued,
connie/Scott



#89523	From: Jean-François <jfdh@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:23 am 
Subject: Hi! 	jeanfrancoisdbe 
 		Hello!

I live in Belgium.

I followed the path, a few years ago. I left it and, after
having "travelled", I come back to Buddhism.

Best regards.

Jean-François


#89524	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:28 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 3a 	sarahprocter... 
 		Dear Friends,

Some more interesting topics this afternoon

1.  Han's further comments #89510, (incorporating Tep's comments) on paras 4 & 5
of the Satipatthana Sutta, (sections on anapanasati and then 'contemplating the
body as a body internally' etc under the heading of INSIGHT by the translators.
(Many thanks Han & Tep for your helpful feedback which led to further
interesting discussion.)

Why hadn't she given specific yes-no answers about whether the first section was
referring to satipatthana etc?
KS: He knows that already!
The purpose is to understand reality now. For example, citta or kaaya (rupa)
now. It's not necessary to divide it into sections. It's no use to think 'the
first 3 tetrads refer to samatha, or the last section refers to samatha and
satipatthana etc.' It all depends on the understanding when reading.[ In other
words, it comes back to the present moment again, the understanding of realities
now.]
Are there conditions understanding of reality now? If there is no understanding
of reality now, when will one know? No self! What is now? When one understands
this, one understands what breath is by way of samatha or satipatthana. If heat
or cold (appearing through the body-sense) are not known, there cannot be the
understanding of anatta.

The purpose of study or discussion is not just to classify or group. There are
conditions to become more detached. From the first moment of birth, all dhammas
are conditioned. What about what is said about breathing and positions when
there is no understanding of realities? [Nothing will be understood.]

KS went through Han's comments carefully. For example, he wrote: "...when a yogi
is practicing...." Who is a yogi and who is practicing? The meaning of yogi is
the one who has viriya, right effort. Not the one in the forest. 'Practicing' is
the moment when awareness arises. There is nothing extra do do. The difference
between when there is hearing as usual and when satipatthana arises must be
different. In the latter case, there is awareness of the characteristic of
hearing. Anytime when it arises.... 'INSIGHT'....whenever satipatthana
arises....

2. Sutta on jhana as quoted by Alex, #88270. Short words full of meaning. Who
can understand them? At moments of satipatthana, understanding of namas and
rupas. At moments of jhana, the object is a nimitta. Useless to try and
understand everything said in the sutta 3. Azita - just listening and
understanding present realities as most important. Always distracted and so much
ignorance!

4. Hiri and ottappa. At moments of kusala, they are there already. The
characteristic of hiri can only be known if there is awareness of it. It sees
the shame in akusala, but it can only be known by panna.

5. Self-examining as in the Perfections commentary given, #86810. KS: Don't
follow the words. Never mind how many times, bound to think of the past and
present and of kilesa, for example. Awareness anytime - closer than thinking
about this moment.

Just as in the Vitakka Sutta, whatever is reflected on, develop understanding.
We all have different accumulations.
Also from the above extract, it says "The commentary explains further that
energy does not let go of the desire-to-do, chanda....."
When we come to Bangkok to study dhamma, there is chanda (interest) and viriya.
What did we do this morning? Follow various pursuits with lobha. Chanda and
viriya must have been there. Whether kusala or akusala, chanda and viriya
leading us.

6. Patience with satipatthana
Patience with heat and cold, the example given of warm and cold baths in #84204.
It doesn't mean do or don't do anything such as having a warm, pleasant bath.
Even while doing so, while doing whatever one likes, it is conditioned, there
can be patience. It depends on right understanding. So do anything, but
gradually craving may be less. Patience can be of different levels, patience
with no understanding, patience to develop understanding, even akusala patience
with an idea of self.

7. Kamma as relatives, esp. kusala cittas, see #87322
Usually referring to past kusala. Do we have many relatives?

to be contd.


#89525	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:33 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 3b 	sarahprocter... 
 		contd.

8. Bhavanga cittas. Ven P suggested they were very hypothetical and he wasn't at
all sure they existed.
KS: Before seeing is there citta? That is bhavanga citta.
Ven P: I don't see a bhavanga.
KS: Even if we don't see it, we know it must be there. Before seeing, for
example, when we're fast asleep, the body is not a dead body. Different cittas
and rupas of the body are arising and falling away as a result of past kamma.
Before thinking, there must be the moment without thinking.

At moment of patisandhi, there are kammaja rupas, then countless bhavanga cittas
before the first mind-door process of thinking. We cannot say how long before
this first mind-door process or how long before the first moment of bodily
experience.

9. Visuddhi - Some scholarly monks Ven P had spoken to the night before said it
was nonsense to say that sila and citta visuddhi involve the understanding of
dhammas. Where was the reference?

Panna purifies. Jon showed him the reference to the visuddhis in CMA under
'insight'.
KS: What is the difference between sila and sila visuddhi?
Sila visuddhi is with panna. Sila without panna is not visuddhi. It must be sila
with samadhi and panna.
Just following precepts is not sila visuddhi. Only sila visuddhi leads to
enlightenment. 7 visuddhis, stage by stage. The 3rd visuddhi is the result of
the development of satipatthana.

10. Understanding of the 3 characteristics before understanding of a reality?
People think they can understand impermanence, for example, without
understanding realities such as seeing and visible object.
KS: There must be the understanding of a reality as it is and later there can be
the understanding of the 3 characteristics of each one, one at a time.

11. Metta & Abhidhamma. Ven P sceptical about whether there's any point in
studying the Abhidhamma. Why not just read the Metta sutta and follow what is
says, for example. It talks about monks going to the forest, meditation
experiences and instructions. He also referred to 2 bhikkhus he knows who
radiate metta all the time.
KS: Where would the monks go to, if not the forest? What about lay people?
Is metta permanent or not?
When metta doesn't arise yet, can anyone know its characteristic?
Metta has to arise, so it can be known in order to develop.
When metta arises, it's a reality. Can it stay?
Ven P: We can't know.
KS: Then it's just thinking about empty words.
Anyone who just recites metta without metta doesn't develop metta.

S: When we're disturbed (like the monks in the sutta), it indicates a lack of
metta. As we discussed the other day, dosa harms. But the sutta also reminds us
at the end about the understanding of namas and rupas. Metta is anatta too - it
doesn't beling to this or that bhikkhu..
KS: the most important thing is to develop understanding of dhammas as anatta.
When metta arises, is it a dhamma?
Ven P: Yes
KS: Is it Abhidhamma? Are they the 'absolute' details? For example, metta is a
reality.This is the beginning, then we can hear more details to understand it
really doesn't belong to anyone. No one can condition it to arise. The
Abhidhamma shows the anattaness of all realities.

12. Kamma and kammasakata-nana - understanding from the beginning of
satipatthana. At the moment of hearing, it has to develop. Hearing just hears
sound. When understanding nama or rupa, no thinking in words, a beginning of
understanding kammasakata-nana.

Metta,

Sarah
p.s I haven't listened to the recordings - again this are just my recollections
and summaries. One more session to come on Saturday.
===========


#89526	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:57 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi! 	nilovg 
 		Dear Jean-François,
welcome. You wrote a short interesting Email. Why did you leave the
Path and what moved you to return? Well, of course these are
conditioning factors that operate and we cannot always trace what is
the condition for what.This really demonstrates that there is no self
that controls the events of life. What interests you in Buddhism?
Nina.

Op 28-aug-2008, om 15:23 heeft Jean-François het volgende geschreven:

> I followed the path, a few years ago. I left it and, after
> having "travelled", I come back to Buddhism.



#89527	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:06 am 
Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 3b 	nilovg 
 		Dear Sarah,
thank you very much, I am so glad to hear what was discussed. You did
very well without listening to the recordings.
Nina.
Op 28-aug-2008, om 15:33 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven:

> I haven't listened to the recordings - again this are just my
> recollections and summaries.



#89528	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:06 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	purist_andrew 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
> >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "purist_andrew"
> ><purist_andrew@> wrote:
> > I find the scriptures of Mahayana interesting, complementing the
> > Theravada
> > scriptures, but for some reasons I will outline below I do not
> > believe them to be entirely authentic or pragmatic,
> > although, they seem backed by a lot of theory and similar laws of
> > cause and effect to Theravada.
>
> You are correct here. I'd like to add that there is plenty of proto
> Mahayana in later, Theravadin book found in KN.
>
> The thing is that "Bodhisatta to be" became a Buddhist only when he
met
> Buddha Kassapa.
>
> http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/081-ghatikara-e1.htm

Precisely.  He made his vow at the foot of a Buddha, who had the
ability to confirm to him that he would indeed fulfill that role
aeons in the future.

As far as I can tell, it is the view of Theravada tradition that this
is the *only* situation that can give one assurance (even ability) to
become a Buddha.  The point being, the Buddha of our dispensation has
passed, and we don't have the foot of a Buddha to make our vows at.

Therefore, if the Theravada position on the requirements for the
great aspiaration, and the conditions for its fulfillment are what I
understand them to be, it is required for a Buddha to be present at
your Bodhisattva vow for it to bear fruit into the future.

Of course, I like Mahayana, so prove me wrong.

The passages I've referenced are pasted again at the end of this
post.  Please address these and share your thoughts on these in the
next reply.

>
>
> Then we know that he was reborn in Tusita after which he was reborn
on
> Earth for his final time.
>
> Become an Ariya (no further than sotopanna) and you have a chance
of
> becoming a Buddha - although the chance is slim.  You'd have to be
most
> likely reborn as Sakadagamin (or a sotopanna on his 7th existence)
on
> Earth when there isn't Buddha's sassana and then when you will
*have
> to* become an Buddha (silent or teaching).

So you are saying that if one becomes a sotapanna outside of the
Buddha's dispensation, one will necessarily become a Buddha in his
seventh existence?  What of the perfections that have to be done over
tens of thousands of kalpas?  Seven lives seems not enough for that.

Even solitary Buddhas have to fulfill the perfections, not just
attain indivual liberation.  Am I wrong?

=============================================
Cited passages
=============================================
>>>>>>>
The condition of the paramis is firstly, the great aspiration. This
is the aspiration supported by the eight qualifications which occurs
thus: "Crossed I would cross, freed I would free, tamed I would
tame, calmed I would calm, comforted I would comfort, attained to
nibbana I would lead to nibbana, purified I would purify, enlightened
I would enlighten!" This is the condition for all the paramis without
exception.

The eight qualifications through which the aspiration succeeds are:
the human state, the male sex, the cause, the sight of the master,
the going forth, the acheivement of noble qualities, extreme
dedication, and strong desire.
>>>>>>>>>>>


4) The sight of the master: The personal presence of the master. The
aspiration only succeeds when made by one aspiring in the presence of
a living Buddha. When made after the Exalted One has passed into
parinibbana-- before a shrine, at the foot of a Bodhi-tree, in front
of an image, or in the presence of paccekabuddhas or the Buddha's
disciples-- the aspiration does not succeed. Why? Because the
recipient lacks the power (necessary to confirm the aspiration). The
aspiration only succeeds when made in the presence of the Buddhas,
for they alone possess spiritual power adequate to the loftiness of
the aspiration.<<<<<<<

Regards and progress in the Dhamma,
Andrew


#89529	From: "connie" <nichicon@hotmail.com> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:20 am 
Subject: Re: The importance of behaviour 	nichiconn 
 
 		dear scott,

back.   #3: << Bdhgh's definition of aayatana at DA i.124 as sa~njaati and as
kaara.na (origin & cause, i. e. mutually occasioning & conditioning relations or
adaptations). >>

<< Cpd. p. 183 says rightly: "aayatana cannot be rendered by a single English
word to cover both sense-organs (the mind being regarded as 6th sense) and sense
objects". -- These ayatanani (relations, functions, reciprocalities) are thus
divided into two groups, inner (ajjhattikani) and outer (bahirani) >>

more from dhamma entry (app's & def's B:) << Thus cakkhu "faculty of sight"
corresponds to rupa "relation of form" & mano "faculty of thought" (citta & ceto
its organ or instrument or localisation) corresponds to dhamma "mentalized"
object or "idea" (Mrs. Rh. D. "mental object in general," also "state of mind")
-- >>

well, whatever.

     yatana, endeavour

that's one good thing about DN33 - just a few words at a time.
very good nina is back!
no mo' of my rear-view(-reading)s
for now,
connie

who had been back-tracking the sisters from Ruppa.  << Th 2, 394 is not clear.
It refers to something which is not rupa, yet pretends to be rupa, i. e. a sham
performance or show. >>

ps.  ref's

Bk of Analysis (Vbh) 324. What states are neither-good-nor-bad? At the time when
having done, having accumulated bad action there arises resultant eye
consciousness accompanied by indifference, having visible object; <snip> the
arising of this whole mass of suffering.

BoA/Vbh 353. ..., having accumulated bad action there arises resultant
mind-consciousness-element accompanied by indifference, ...

DA i 124;   Nd1 505;  - say what??
snip, snip. chew, chew.

(on



#89530	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:26 am 
Subject: Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' .. One Typo 	dhammanusarin 
 
 		Dear Sukin and All, -

I apologize for a typo that I would like to correct now.


Error : "Intellectually understanding it" does not one free from
doubts.

Correction : "Intellectually understanding it" does not SET one free
from doubts.
................

Thanks.


Tep
===


#89531	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 8:44 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	dhammanusarin 
 
 		Dear Nina (Sukin), -


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom
<vangorko@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Tep and Sukin,
> I do appreciate your dialogue on ADL. Very good questions Tep, and
> very good answers, Sukin. I do not need to add anything and anyway,
I
> am just back and Connie is going to give me homework with the
> Sangiitisutta! So will Larry with the Visuddhimagga. Besides, I am
> reading from the web posts that were sent in my absence.
>
> Nina.
>

T: Although I had expected that Sukin was able to speak for you in
this case, it was reassuring to hear from you that he gave "very good
answers".  On the other hand, it was a relief for me to know that you
were not annoyed by my review questions of the ADL.

Thank you, Nina.


Tep
===


#89532	From: "nidive" <nidive@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:21 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	nidive 
 
 		Hi Andrew,

> So you are saying that if one becomes a sotapanna outside of the
> Buddha's dispensation, one will necessarily become a Buddha in his
> seventh existence?  What of the perfections that have to be done
> over tens of thousands of kalpas? Seven lives seems not enough for
> that.
> Even solitary Buddhas have to fulfill the perfections, not just
> attain indivual liberation.  Am I wrong?

What if you discovered that the Buddha Gotama actually never taught
the Perfections?

What if you discovered that the Buddha-to-be, Prince Siddhartha, was
actually a sotapanna or a sakadagami?

What if you discovered that all along, the Buddha Gotama only taught
one Path, the Noble Eightfold Path?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.004.than.html

Before my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened Bodhisatta, the
thought occurred to me as well: 'It's not easy to maintain seclusion,
not easy to enjoy being alone. The forests, as it were, plunder the
mind of a monk who has not attained concentration.'

...

I am one of those noble ones who are purified in their bodily
activities when they resort to isolated forest or wilderness
dwellings.

...

"...'When priests or contemplatives who have minds of ill will, with
destructive attitudes... I have a mind of good will...'...

"...'When priests or contemplatives who are overcome by sloth &
drowsiness... I am devoid of sloth & drowsiness...'...

"...'When priests or contemplatives who are restless & with an
unstill mind... I have a still mind...'...

"...'When priests or contemplatives who are uncertain & doubting... I
have gone beyond uncertainty...'...
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Did you see that? The Buddha-to-be, the bodhisatta, had already gone
beyond uncertainty & doubting. He called himself a "noble one",
meaning that he is an ariyan.

One can only be beyond uncertainty & doubting only if one is at the
very least a sotapanna.

And it is very evident from the descriptions here that the bodhisatta
had not yet gone beyond ill will, sloth and restlessness, which are
higher fetters than uncertainty & doubting.

Swee Boon


#89533	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 5:48 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Swee Boon (and Andrew) -

In a message dated 8/28/2008 12:22:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
nidive@... writes:

Hi  Andrew,

> So you are saying that if one becomes a sotapanna outside  of the
> Buddha's dispensation, one will necessarily become a Buddha in  his
> seventh existence?  What of the perfections that have to be  done
> over tens of thousands of kalpas? Seven lives seems not enough  for
> that.
> Even solitary Buddhas have to fulfill the  perfections, not just
> attain indivual liberation.  Am I  wrong?

What if you discovered that the Buddha Gotama actually never  taught
the Perfections?

What if you discovered that the  Buddha-to-be, Prince Siddhartha, was
actually a sotapanna or a  sakadagami?

What if you discovered that all along, the Buddha Gotama  only taught
one Path, the Noble Eightfold  Path?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.004.than.html

Before  my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened Bodhisatta, the
thought  occurred to me as well: 'It's not easy to maintain seclusion,
not easy to  enjoy being alone. The forests, as it were, plunder the
mind of a monk who  has not attained concentration.'

...

I am one of those noble  ones who are purified in their bodily
activities when they resort to  isolated forest or wilderness
dwellings.

...

"...'When  priests or contemplatives who have minds of ill will, with
destructive  attitudes... I have a mind of good will...'...

"...'When priests or  contemplatives who are overcome by sloth &
drowsiness... I am devoid  of sloth & drowsiness...'...

"...'When priests or contemplatives  who are restless & with an
unstill mind... I have a still  mind...'...

"...'When priests or contemplatives who are uncertain &  doubting... I
have gone beyond  uncertainty...'...
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Did  you see that? The Buddha-to-be, the bodhisatta, had already gone
beyond  uncertainty & doubting. He called himself a "noble one",
meaning that  he is an ariyan.

One can only be beyond uncertainty & doubting only  if one is at the
very least a sotapanna.

And it is very evident  from the descriptions here that the bodhisatta
had not yet gone beyond ill  will, sloth and restlessness, which are
higher fetters than uncertainty  & doubting.

Swee Boon
===============================
     Swee Boon, I'm so pleased that you posted from this  illuminating sutta.
For one thing, which I think was your main point, it shows  that the Buddha
was already an ariyan at the time described in this sutta, which  did not
foreclose his going on to become a Buddha. Another important part of  this
sutta, I
think, is the following:
     "Now, brahman, if the thought should occur to you,  'Perhaps Gotama the
contemplative is even today not free of passion, not free of  aversion, not
free of delusion, which is why he resorts to isolated forest &  wilderness
dwellings,' it should not be seen in that way. It's through seeing  two
compelling
reasons that I resort to isolated forest & wilderness  dwellings: seeing a
pleasant abiding for myself in the present, and feeling  sympathy for future
generations." This explicity answers the question as to why  the Buddha engaged
in
meditation, namely 1) to abide in (probably) nibbanic  awareness, the
distinctive dwelling place of arahants, and 2) to be of  service in some way
(unexplained) to others yet to come.

With metta,
Howard



#89534	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:38 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Andrew and all interested,

>---  "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> wrote:
> Precisely.  He made his vow at the foot of a Buddha, who had the
> ability to confirm to him that he would indeed fulfill that role
> aeons in the future.

At first he disliked the Buddha (he swore at him) and had to be
dragged by his lay anagami friend to see Buddha Kassapa. To me this
refutes any notion that future-Gotama was a "Buddhist" or working
on "paramis".   No Buddhist would swear at the Buddha and refuse to
see Him.



> As far as I can tell, it is the view of Theravada tradition that
>this is the *only* situation that can give one assurance (even
>ability) to  become a Buddha.

If by "Theravada" you mean Buddhaghosa's version - then it is as late
as Mahayana. In fact in pre-sectarian Buddhism there were NO notion
of Paramis, Vows, and such.


> So you are saying that if one becomes a sotapanna outside of the
> Buddha's dispensation, one will necessarily become a Buddha in his
> seventh existence?

If on your 7th existence you are male, in Human realm, and there is
no Buddha Sassana - then you will HAVE TO become a self awakened
Arahant.

Depending on your choice and ability to teach or not, you will be
either Private or Teaching Buddha.



> What of the perfections that have to be done over tens of thousands
>of kalpas?  Seven lives seems not enough for that.

Many people needed one life as a Buddhist to become Arhats. A Buddha
is an Arahat, although on a higher level, but still an Arhat.


The aeons of Parami building is NOT found in the core suttas. It
could have been later, proto-Mahayana development.




Best wishes,


Alex


#89535	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:39 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	purist_andrew 
 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" <nidive@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> > So you are saying that if one becomes a sotapanna outside of the
> > Buddha's dispensation, one will necessarily become a Buddha in
his
> > seventh existence?  What of the perfections that have to be done
> > over tens of thousands of kalpas? Seven lives seems not enough for
> > that.
> > Even solitary Buddhas have to fulfill the perfections, not just
> > attain indivual liberation.  Am I wrong?
>
> What if you discovered that the Buddha Gotama actually never taught
> the Perfections?
>
> What if you discovered that the Buddha-to-be, Prince Siddhartha,
was
> actually a sotapanna or a sakadagami?

I would judge the idea of it to be moderately to probably very
unlikely because it is said that individual attainments can only be
secured during the dispensation of a Buddha, and Prince Siddartha, as
a sotapanna, would have had to trained under a Buddha in a time
period starting no longer than seven lives ago, and as far as I have
(according to to the suttas) learned dispensations are far more
interspersed in time than a mere single digits number of lives, in
fact there are maybe a handful in an aeon.  So I find this unlikely

...

That is, unless you propose that a sotapanna can extend his time in
samsara beyond the seven life time period if he just desires it,
which would be another issue we could discuss.

As far as if the Buddha did not teach the pefections, I would say I'm
not well-informed on this issue because I don't know the source of
the idea (though I thought it was widely accepted) that the Buddha
was taught the perfections by Lord Dipankara (the Buddha he aspired
under) that he would have to fulfill over uncountable lives.  I think
it was in the Suttas, though.  Please inform if I am wrong.

> What if you discovered that all along, the Buddha Gotama only
taught
> one Path, the Noble Eightfold Path?

We know from the Suttas that the Buddha made his vow to Buddhahood at
the foot of another fully enlightened Buddha, who predicted that he
would succeed, and then took teachings from him on how to practice
the perfections for the vast amounts of time required to that end.
It may also very likely be that our historical Buddha never taught
the perfections or gave the instructions to Buddhahood to no one in
his own dispensation.  How then, should we believe that a disciple,
eg Shantideva, has the insight and understanding to teach the way
that he hasn't even traveled himself or even been taught?

>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.004.than.html
>
> Before my Awakening, when I was still an unawakened Bodhisatta, the
> thought occurred to me as well: 'It's not easy to maintain
seclusion,
> not easy to enjoy being alone. The forests, as it were, plunder the
> mind of a monk who has not attained concentration.'
>
> ...
>
> I am one of those noble ones who are purified in their bodily
> activities when they resort to isolated forest or wilderness
> dwellings.
>
> ...
>
> "...'When priests or contemplatives who have minds of ill will,
with
> destructive attitudes... I have a mind of good will...'...
>
> "...'When priests or contemplatives who are overcome by sloth &
> drowsiness... I am devoid of sloth & drowsiness...'...
>
> "...'When priests or contemplatives who are restless & with an
> unstill mind... I have a still mind...'...
>
> "...'When priests or contemplatives who are uncertain & doubting...
I
> have gone beyond uncertainty...'...
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Did you see that? The Buddha-to-be, the bodhisatta, had already
gone
> beyond uncertainty & doubting. He called himself a "noble one",
> meaning that he is an ariyan.

You may have something here, but I think that it may be the
misunderstanding of terms.  However, I don't have the knowledge of
the scriptures to refute it (I would invite others in the group to
give their opinions on this though).  And even if it were so, the
consequences of such an assertion have no bearing I can see on my
question, unless, again, you mean to assert that someone who becomes
sotapanna under this dispensation can prolong his stay in samsara to
many, even aeons of, future lives.  But even if that were so, would
he still not have to meet a living Buddha to get the assurance of
success, just as our historical Buddha did at the foot of Lord
Dipankara (or was it Kassapa?)?

If not, what do you think is required to assure that through tens of
thousands of aeons of samsara one is pursuing precisely the right
path to attain final enlightenment without straying?  Wouldn't it,
common sensically, require the blessing of someone who had already
done it, not merely the presence of a personal or spiritual teacher
for one's vows and following on the ways laid out by a disciple
hundreds of years after said Buddha's passing, of his own mind?

The only alternative I see to give assurance to that idea would be to
give credence to the Mahayana scriptures, thus to the idea that the
Buddha *did* teach the perfections, and that we can work with those?

If this is the case, please give me some background on the Mahayana
scriptures.. what are the requirements *they* lay down for assurance
of fulfillment of one's Bodhisattva vows?  I'd like to know..

>
> One can only be beyond uncertainty & doubting only if one is at the
> very least a sotapanna.
>
> And it is very evident from the descriptions here that the
bodhisatta
> had not yet gone beyond ill will, sloth and restlessness, which are
> higher fetters than uncertainty & doubting.
>
> Swee Boon
>

Regards,
Andrew L


#89536	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 10:43 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Hi Swee and all,

I agree with you. There are actually Theravadin Monks who say that
Buddha Gotama was a Sakadagamin. I've heard that there was a early
Buddhist school that held that Gotama was a Sakadagamin.


Best wishes,

Alex


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "nidive" <nidive@...> wrote:
> What if you discovered that the Buddha Gotama actually never taught
> the Perfections?
>
> What if you discovered that the Buddha-to-be, Prince Siddhartha,
was
> actually a sotapanna or a sakadagami?
>
> What if you discovered that all along, the Buddha Gotama only
taught
> one Path, the Noble Eightfold Path?
>


#89537	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:02 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Andrew and all,

Regarding Gotama.  He may have became a Sotopanna under Buddha
Kassapa. Considering that future Gotama became the Buddha Gotama on
the 3rd existence afterwards, doesn't refute him becoming S.


Regarding path to Buddhahood today:

If the cosmology with its timescales is correct, then if you are
reborn in Heaven and reborn for the last time in the Human realm -
then that time will be millions of years into the future. It probably
isn't impossible that current Buddha Sassana will *not* exist
millions of years in the future. So you have the chance. It is
actually questionable about how much true Buddhism exists NOW.

In Mahapajapati sutta the Buddha has said something about a strong
decline in his teachings after 500 years (or so).

"the good Teaching will last only five hundred years."
006. Gotamivaggo  Section on Gotami
http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-
Nikaya/Anguttara5/8-atthakanipata/006-gotamivaggo-e.html


While I disagree with the reason, the prediction is sad. Probably 99%
of what we call Buddhism, isn't really authentic Buddhism.

Buddha's teaching was being corrupted even when Buddha was alive, not
to mention later on when bad monks started to join in and add wrong
doctrines.


=====
The earliest phase of scriptures, recognized by nearly all scholars
(the main exception is Dr Gregory Schopen), is based on a comparison
of the Pali Canon with the Chinese Agamas and other surviving
portions of other early canons. Some scholars consider that this
rough common core of the scriptures of the different schools gives a
substantially correct picture of the original teachings of the
Buddha. This core is identified as the four main nikayas of the Sutta
Pitaka (the Digha Nikaya, Majjhima Nikaya, Samyutta Nikaya and
Anguttara Nikaya), together with the main body of monastic rules[17],
the Vinaya Pitaka. Scholars have also claimed that there is a core
within this core, referring to some poems and phrases which seem to
be the oldest parts of the Sutta Pitaka.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-sectarian_Buddhism
=====================================

Note: There is NO teaching about Paramis and Bodhisattva path in 4
Nikayas.


Best wishes,

Alex


#89538	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:24 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Response Part I 	nilovg 
 
 		Dear Tep,
Op 28-aug-2008, om 17:44 heeft Tep het volgende geschreven:

> On the other hand, it was a relief for me to know that you
> were not annoyed by my review questions of the ADL.
-------
N: Oh no, on the contrary, I appreciate your sincere interest.

Nina.



#89539	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:53 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	nilovg 
 
 		Dear Han,
thank you for your kind response. I enjoy Dhamma discussions with
you. You have stimulating remarks and questions.
Op 28-aug-2008, om 12:20 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven:

> You said, “Usually when we speak about the arising of
> satipatthaana, or the development of satipatthaana, we refer to the
> second meaning.” The problem with me is the word “arising.” To me,
> the “arising” of satipa.t.thaana and the “development” of
> satipa.t.thaana are not the same. I consider the satipa.t.thaana as
> a ‘process’ and not the ‘product’ or ‘outcome’ of the process.
-------
N: Arising and development, at first sight it may seem different, but
let us look more closely.
Citta with some degree of understanding arises and falls away, but
this little understanding is a condition for arising again, and then
again. Many, many moments of arising of understanding and in this way
understanding is accumulated, it grows and grows. When we consider
citta, not a whole situation, it becomes clearer that development of
understanding is in the very arising of it, even at this moment,
while considering and discussing Dhamma.
We can call this a lifelong process of many arisings, and who thinks
now of the outcome? THis depends on conditions, there have to be many
more lives of arisings of sati and pa~n~naa. May there be
opportunities in lives to come.
-------
> H: To me satipa.t.thaana means the establishment of sati on kaaya,
> vedanaa, citta and dhamma, and the entire process of establishing
> sati on kaaya, vedanaa, citta and dhamma, from the beginning to the
> end, is satipa.t.thaana.
-------
N: The Applications of mindfulness that are kaaya, vedanaa, citta and
dhamma include actually all nama and rupa appearing now. Kaaya: all
rupas, appearing time and again. Feeling too, it arises all the time.
Citta, yes, citta now that sees, reads, thinks. Dhammas: all are
dhammas but we do not see them yet as mere dhamma elements.
A moment of sati now and then but interspersed with many moments of
forgetfulness, that is how it goes. But it is accumulated little by
little. No regret.
----------
> H: What arises then is the ‘pa~n~naa’ at the appropriate stage. I
> do not claim that what I believe must be correct. But at the same
> time, I find it difficult to believe otherwise.
-------
N: Sati of a reality in satipatthana does not arise alone, there is
understanding as well, but it is still weak. But a beginning is
better than none at all. Thus, from the beginning sati and pa~n~naa
can arise together, even when still weak. That is why intellectual
understanding of what the development of satipatthana is should be
firm. Otherwise there is no basis.
-----
The word yogavacara or yogi was used. Here is a good passage from the
Co to the satipatthanasutta. He translates bhavanaa as meditation,
and in this case it is vipassana.
<By the instruction dealing with the overcoming of covetousness and
grief, yogic power and yogic skill are shown.

Yogic power is the power of meditation. Yogic skill is dexterity in
yoking oneself in meditation.

Freedom from satisfaction and discontent in regard to bodily
happiness and misery, the forbearing from delighting in the body, the
bearing-up of non-delight in the course of body-contemplation, the
state of being not captivated by the unreal, and the state of not
running away from the real — these, when practiced produce yogic
power; and the ability to practice these is yogic skill.>

N: I like: not running away from the real. Not running away from nama
and rupa appearing right now. They are so real!
Nina.


#89540	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 4:56 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 		Dear Nina,

> Nina: thank you for your kind response. I enjoy Dhamma discussions with you.
You have stimulating remarks and questions.

Han: The feeling of enjoyment is mutual. I also enjoy discussing with you.

------------------------------

> > Han: You said, “Usually when we speak about the arising of satipatthaana,
or the development of satipatthaana, we refer to the second meaning.� The
problem with me is the word “arising.� To me, the “arising� of
satipa.t.thaana and the “development� of satipa.t.thaana are not the same. I
consider the satipa.t.thaana as a ‘process’ and not the ‘product’ or
‘outcome’ of the process.

> Nina: Arising and development, at first sight it may seem different, but let
us look more closely.
Citta with some degree of understanding arises and falls away, but this little
understanding is a condition for arising again, and then again. Many, many
moments of arising of understanding and in this way understanding is
accumulated, it grows and grows. When we consider citta, not a whole situation,
it becomes clearer that development of understanding is in the very arising of
it, even at this moment, while considering and discussing Dhamma. We can call
this a lifelong process of many arisings, and who thinks now of the outcome?
This depends on conditions, there have to be many more lives of arisings of sati
and pa~n~naa. May there be opportunities in lives to come.

Han; If you argue on that line, then everything will be “arising� because we
cannot get away from the arising and falling away of cittas at all times. In
that case, we won’t be needing any other expression. If you use the arising
and falling away of cittas as a criteria for equating “arising� and
“development�, then in Pali, uppajjati will become synonymous with
bhaavanaa, bhaaveti, bahuliikataa or bahuliikaroti, and so on. Well, you know
these things better than me. So I won’t press my point.

------------------------------

> > Han: To me satipa.t.thaana means the establishment of sati on kaaya,
vedanaa, citta and dhamma, and the entire process of establishing sati on kaaya,
vedanaa, citta and dhamma, from the beginning to the end, is satipa.t.thaana.

> Nina: The Applications of mindfulness that are kaaya, vedanaa, citta and
dhamma include actually all nama and rupa appearing now. Kaaya: all rupas,
appearing time and again. Feeling too, it arises all the time. Citta, yes, citta
now that sees, reads, thinks. Dhammas: all are dhammas but we do not see them
yet as mere dhamma elements. A moment of sati now and then but interspersed with
many moments of forgetfulness, that is how it goes. But it is accumulated little
by little. No regret.

Han; What you are describing is the “process� of application of mindfulness.
What I was saying was satipa.t.thaana is a “process� of establishment of
sati. So I do not see any disagreement.

------------------------------

> > Han: What arises then is the ‘pa~n~naa’ at the appropriate stage. I do
not claim that what I believe must be correct. But at the same time, I find it
difficult to believe otherwise.

> Nina: Sati of a reality in satipatthana does not arise alone, there is
understanding as well, but it is still weak. But a beginning is better than none
at all. Thus, from the beginning sati and pa~n~naa can arise together, even when
still weak. That is why intellectual understanding of what the development of
satipatthana is should be firm. Otherwise there is no basis.

Han: I said pa~n~naa will arise at the “appropriate� stage. I agree with you
that from the beginning sati and pa~n~naa can arise together. But it is also
possible that at the beginning sati may not be accompanied by pa~n~naa. You
said, “satipa.t.thaana does not arise alone.� Here is the disagreement
between you and me. I would say that “sati does not arise alone� because I
consider ‘satipa.t.thaana’ as a ‘process’ and not as a ‘product’ of
a process. Here again, I consider you are more learned than me. So I won’t
press my point.

-----------------------------

> Nina� The word yogavacara or yogi was used. Here is a good passage from the
Co to the satipatthanasutta. He translates bhavanaa as meditation, and in this
case it is vipassana.
<By the instruction dealing with the overcoming of covetousness and grief, yogic
power and yogic skill are shown.
Yogic power is the power of meditation. Yogic skill is dexterity in yoking
oneself in meditation.
Freedom from satisfaction and discontent in regard to bodily happiness and
misery, the forbearing from delighting in the body, the bearing-up of
non-delight in the course of body-contemplation, the state of being not
captivated by the unreal, and the state of not running away from the real —
these, when practiced produce yogic power; and the ability to practice these is
yogic skill.>
N: I like: not running away from the real. Not running away from nama and rupa
appearing right now. They are so real!
Nina.

Han: I used the word ‘yogi’ to designate a ‘meditator.’ I do not know
yogavacara or yogic power and yogic skill. Please consider my usage of the word
‘yogi’ as a poor choice of word.

Respectfully,
Han



#89541	From: Sukinder <sukinder@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 7:14 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Part II 	sukinderpal 
 		Dear Tep and Nina,

I answer the rest of your questions.

=============
  > 3. Nama and rupa "arise and fall away".
  > What does that mean?
  > "Nama and rupa are absolute realities, in Pali: paramattha dhammas."

T:
  > Is a mountain that is seen now, an absolute reality? Are things that
  > are not absolute realities, not real? Isn't it true that anything,
  > that is not an absolute reality, is also impermanent and not self?
  > Self is a concept. If it is not a rupa, then can citta experience
  > self?

S: All experiences, including consciousness and the accompanying mental
factors are momentary, and so too are the material realities such as
heat, sound, taste and so on. That something seems to last, this is due
to perversion of perception, in reality however nothing lasts longer
than 1 / ….…. (whatever figure you would agree with) of a second. ;-)

Only paramattha dhammas have the Tilakkhana. A mountain is not a
paramattha dhamma therefore it does not arise and fall away in the span
of 1/….. of a second as paramattha dhammas do. In the same way all other
conventional realities, being concepts are only a product of “thinking”.
Their so called ‘impermanence’ can therefore also only ever be ‘thought
about’, an inference and never experienced directly. So though it may be
alright to speak conventionally about mountains and so on as being
impermanent, the fact is that this “impermanence” can never be the
object of satipatthana / vipassana, but instead panna can arise to
insight any reality, for example visible object and this would be known
by “characteristic”.

‘Self’ is a product of thinking, hence concept. However we need to
factor the realities of tanha, mana and ditthi. These manifest
regardless of any recognizable thought about self and other. On the
other hand, thinking about people and things can be without tanha, mana
or ditthi, in fact they may be objects of kusala cittas such as metta,
karuna, mudita and so on.

=============
  > 4. "we do not learn that hearing, ear-sense and sound are realities
  > which are altogether different from each other, we will continue to
  > think that it is self which hears."

T:
  > Any newcomers when they hear a sound, think 'I hear the sound'. S/he
  > does not think it is a 'self which hears'.

S: As I said above, thinking about self and other can be purely
conventional. However, what Nina is pointing to is the fact of ditthi,
which I said, manifests regardless of the ‘concept’ thought about. In
this regard, the “I hear the sound” of the newcomer is exactly the “self
which hears” pointed out to by Nina, since it refers to ‘ditthi’ and not
the ‘thinking’.

============
T: Besides, they don't know
  > what's wrong about their hearing a sound; it is natural, and it is
  > real to them. "Hearing is hearing, and I hear sounds all the time. So
  > what!"

S: Hence the requirement that they are interested in the Truth. However
depending on their understanding or lack of, they will see the sense in
these words or not. And my point is that, if they do not see the Truth
when given such a description, then they likely won’t do so when
explained any other way, and this includes when reading about the same
things in the Suttas.

===========
T:
Then how can they be convinced that 'I hear' is a wrong vision that
leads to suffering?

S: Depending on the understanding again, but most probably they will
need to hear more to be able to see the deeper significance,
particularly the relationship between ‘ignorance’ and the ‘cause for
suffering’.

===========
  > 5. "The citta which sees has what is visible as its object. The citta
  > which hears (hearing-consciousness) has sound as its object."

T:
  > That sounds like an Axiom in Geometry to me. A newcomer is possibly
  > confused. How can the understanding that 'there is a citta which
  > hears' help someone get the right vision that abandons dukkha?

S: In short, because it is the Truth!
This truth on being understood better, starting with suttamaya panna and
then cintamaya panna and finally much Bhavanamaya panna, conditions
successively greater detachment. By lessening ignorance the cause for
Dukkha also decreases, until being finally eradicated at Arahat.

But I think Nina’s statement is very simple and direct. The newcomer,
who is not caught up in the habit of complicating things, can relate
this to his present moment experience and understand it at least
intellectually.

===========
T:
  > Why is there any advantage of knowing it is a 'citta which hears'
  > over that of 'I hear'.

S: It depends on right or wrong understanding. However, I see no reason
why someone with right understanding would object to such references as
'citta which hears'. What I see in fact is that those who know
themselves to have weak understanding, will never cease to appreciate
being reminded about the fact of “Citta” having characteristic and
performing functions as against the illusion that it is a ‘self’ which
sees, hears, thinks etc.

===========
T:
How do I know which citta is acting now?

S: With right pariyatti, one becomes less concerned about these things.
In thinking in terms of ‘developing understanding’ as against the need
to ‘catch the moment’ and in seeing that ‘understanding’ like all other
conditioned realities arises by conditions, the tendency to overreach
and have unrealistic expectations cease gradually.

==========
T:
  > Why do I need to know those cittas that arise and fall away all the
  > time, since I can never keep track of them anyway? So why bother?

S: No one keeps track and there is no need to. Pariyatti understanding
arises relatively rarely and this does not at any time condition such
thoughts as ‘needing to keep track of cittas’. Patipatti is a higher
level of understanding, and this will therefore be even rarer compared,
and when it does get well developed and hence possibly arise more often,
it wouldn’t be due to having memorized lists or wanting or not wanting
to keep track.
You ask, why bother? We study by conditions because of past interest.
However I think study of the Dhamma should be aimed at understanding the
present moment. With this we then read / listen each time not with the
aim of accumulating more concepts, but simply because we see the value
of developing understanding.

============
T:
  > 6. A newcomer may not understand why getting to know, with more and
  > more detail of the various kinds of 'citta', can "motivate
  > unwholesome or wholesome deeds" by him. Why is knowing drawbacks of
  > the various kinds of akusala dhammas NOT more effective in motivating
  > someone to stop unwholesomeness?

S: Being reminded about drawbacks is good, but without understanding
that dhammas arise and fall by conditions and are impermanent and
non-self, we likely go away trying to work things out with “self”. The
details about the various cittas, their characteristic, function and
cause, helps us not to go wrong in this regard. But as I said, we don’t
choose to hear, the interest is due to conditions from the past and
because they *are* about the Truth, it can only be helpful.

============
T:
  > Isn't it true that clear knowing
  > about the wonderful advantages of kusala dhammas is usually
  > sufficient to motivate someone to develop wholesomeness?

S: The ‘clear knowing’ won’t come about without the understanding of
dhammas as conditioned and anatta. The details help in this regard. And
the “motivation” here is not as in when people “do it”, but can manifest
simply, as a greater interest in developing more understanding about the
present moment with detachment.

===========
T:
  > Same questions as above (that a newcomer may ask) also apply to the
  > following cases :
  >
  > -- classifying citta by plane of consciousness (bhumi).
  > -- considering the different intensities of citta ..
  > -- classification of citta into a hundred and twenty-one types ..

S: Knowing that ours is kaamavacara bhumi helps to remind us of our
accumulated attachment to sense objects. It can also help to deter any
conceit that we have about “This” being all there is. Also wrong view
based on the kind perception can be noted. And for those who are
inclined to believe that they experienced Jhana, this may help them to
at least acknowledge that there is much difference between the two
planes and possibly allow them to question whether what they experience
during their sitting, are not in fact only kaamavacara cittas.

Considering intensities, we can learn not to overlook or underestimate
subtle manifestations of both kusala and akusala cittas. They also help
us to understand the difference in results for example, rebirth in
different planes and having different life spans and so on.

Being told that there are many types of cittas helps us to know and not
be confused when they arise in the course of our day. Like everything
else, it also allows us to appreciate anatta and be more sympathetic of
other people. With regard to ‘classification’ of citta into eighty nine
and a hundred and twenty-one types, I just accept it, having no reason
to question why it can’t be the way it is. I don’t however think that
the actual figure has any import on one’s ability to understand the
present moment, if this is what you are getting at.

============
T:
  > 7. I like the elaboration on 'cetasikas'; Nina did a good job here.
  > Questions that a newcomer may possibly ask are as follows.
  >
  > Are cetasikas not separate from cittas? What makes cittas and
  > cetasikas "arising together with the citta and falling away
  > together"?

S: I think it can be seen intellectually, that a citta can’t possibly be
without the help of other realities, namely cetasikas, to perform
different function with regard to the object of experience and also each
other. In learning for example, to distinguish kusala / akusala cittas
from vipakka cittas, we can understand that citta and accompanying
cetasikas which arise together in one kind, do so by conditions quite
distinct from those of the other kind. And since in either case the
citta wouldn’t function without help from the cetasikas and vice versa,
it goes without saying that these must arise and fall away together.

============
T:
  > Why are cittas and cetasikas that arise in one person
  > different from those of anybody else, and yet there is no ownership?

S: No two cittas are the same even with the same person. There are only
cittas and cetasikas arising and falling away by conditions and this is
exactly why there is no ownership. That which we identify as different
persons is because in each there is ever only one citta arising and
falling away at a time, however one conditions the next and passes on
all the existing information.

============
Nina:
  > "When we do not have a pleasant or an unpleasant feeling, there is
  > still feeling: at that moment the feeling is neutral or indifferent.
  > There is always feeling; there isn't any moment of citta without
  > feeling."

T:
  > That sounds like a hypothesis or a theory that should be readily
  > accepted without proof. A newcomer may ask: Did the Buddha sat that?

S: Or it can be understood to some extent, enough not to question it.
More listening and considering, particularly with regard to the function
and cause of ‘feeling’, can help then to add to the conviction that this
must be true.

=============
T:
  > 8. The rest of the chapter is about the same as before: i.e. there is
  > this; there is that; there are several kinds of this; there are
  > several kinds of that; these are paramattha dhammas; these are not
  > paramattha dhammas; this is how they arise or pass away.
  >
  > "All dhammas are anatta, not-self (in Pali: sabbe dhamma anatta).
  > Thus, the conditioned dhammas are impermanent and dukkha. But all
  > dhammas, that is, the four paramattha dhammas, nibbana included, have
  > the characteristic of anatta, not-self."
  >
  > In short, take her words for everything she said as truthful, because
  > that's the way they are and will ever be.

S: Or it can be that there is some degree of understanding. Perhaps on
reading the very first sentence, saddha has been seeded and as one
proceeds things become more and more clear and by the time one reaches
the end, saddha that wasn’t manifest before reading, now shows up quite
a bit. ;-)

But I can understand that if on the other hand, no understanding arose
at the outset, the chances are that there will be much resistance to the
kind of exposition.

<End of Part II>

Tep, I must sincerely express again my appreciation and admiration for
what you are doing. Very few, if any, would show a willingness to do
this kind of thing. And besides you are also giving me an opportunity to
sort my thoughts and test my own understanding, Thank you very much. :-)


Metta,

Sukin

Ps: I may have time later today, to respond to your other post. If not,
then it will have to be next week.


#89542	From: "kenhowardau" <kenhowardau@...> 
Date: Thu Aug 28, 2008 11:01 pm 
Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' 	kenhowardau 
 		Hi Tep,

I think we are making some headway.


--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri"
<indriyabala@...> wrote:
>
> Dear KenH ,
>
> We had been discussing and reconciling the different views on the
not-
> self strategy (good for you, believe me) and the lack of it (bad
for
> you, I say again). And I referred to the well-spoken Buddha's words:
>
> > "He defines the eye as impermanent, not as permanent;
> > he defines it as painful, not as pleasant;
> > he defines it as not self, not as self;
> > he becomes dispassionate, he does not delight;
> > he causes the fading of greed, he does not inflame it;
> > he causes cessation, he does not originate;
> > he relinquishes, he does not grasp.
> > .......................................
> >
> > What can be made clearer than the above Buddha's words?
> >
> -----------
>
> >KH: It is not the Buddha's words that need to be made clearer, it
is
> your (and Ven Thanissaro's) interpretations of them. What exactly
> the "not-self strategy?" I have tried many times to give my
> understanding of it, but you have always reacted angrily saying I
> was "slandering a venerable monk!".
>
> T: Indeed, what should be made clearer is the muddy mind state, not
> the well-spoken words of the Blessed One ! Indeed the subtle
message
> He was conveying to the lucky disciples is as follows :
>
> Whenever seeing  occurs, "the eye" (eye-consciousness) just sees
> while the mind is comprehending the three characteristics and
letting
> go of seeing (not grasping it with upadana). This mindful,
equanimous
> mind-state is free from 'dukkha samudaya' here and now.
>
> Ken, please try to see meanings of those words without first
becoming
> self defensive or offensive. Ajaan Thanissaro wisely calls the
> application of the above message in daily life as "Not-self
> Strategy". It is a strategy to win the Mara's battle.
>
>



KH: So, according to this theory, vipassana is simply a relaxed state
of mind: it is not a matter of seeing the world *as it truly is.* For
example, the circumstances you describe above never truly exist (in
absolute reality), do they? According to the Abhidhamma eye-
consciousness and comprehending-consciousness never occur together.
But I think you are saying that is not important; only a relaxed
state of mind is important.

That might explain an ATI article I read in which John Bullitt
described the Abhidhamma as 'interesting but not helpful.' :-)

--------------
KH: > > The two points you have made seem to be (1) there is a self,
but
(2) we should consider the self as 'not in the five khandhas.'

Is that right? If that is the correct summary of the not-self (as
distinct from no-self) teaching how is it so different from the
versions I have been giving?
> >

T: > That is partially right and muddy, Ken. I'll explain.
The two points I have made are:
(1) there is a self in the colloquial sense, but no reliable and
lasting self;
(2) whenever there is no grasping (upadana) in the khandhas, then the
khandhas are seen as 'not self' (anatta). The self is there whenever
there is upadana in the khandhas; that's why a self-view is a wrong
view.

As a consequence of not grasping and letting go of the khandhas,
there is no mud in the eye due to arisen right view.
-----------------

Please explain point 1. How is it different from the anatta
interpretation that I and other DSG members have putting to you all
these years, and that you have strongly rejected? We have been saying
that people, cars, mountains etc, were concepts (pannatti) and did
not exist in ultimate reality (paramattha dhammas). Is that the same
as point 1?

In point 2 you seem to be saying that non-grasping was the way
taught by the Buddha. (I have always believed the Buddha taught a way
of right understanding.) However, you avoid the question of ultimate
existence and non-existence. So let me ask you: is there, in ultimate
reality, a self or is there not?

I think Ven Thanissaro takes the view that, if there was no self,
there would be no kamma (no actions), and if there were no self to
receive the results of actions there would be no vipakka. I think he
also says if there were no self there would be enjoyment nibbana, so
there would be no reason to practise vipassana. Therefore, he claims,
the Buddha did not teach no-self, he simply taught a not-self
strategy. Is that the way you see it?

Ken H


#89543	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:42 am 
Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 2. 	nilovg 
 		Dear friends,

It is right understanding, not “self”, which will eventually see
things as they really are. We may wonder how wisdom can ever know
impermanence,  dukkha and anattå, and how it can realize nibbåna.
“Don’t underestimate the function of paññå”, Khun Sujin often said.
It is not self who will know realities, it is paññå. The present
moment is very precious. If there is the study of realities, paññå
can develop. Paññå will work its way.
If sati arises only when there are conditions for its arising, we
cannot do anything. Are we not bound to be lazy when we cannot do
anything?
Should we not make an effort to have sati? When we hear the word
effort we are so used to thinking of a self who exerts effort. Effort
is a cetasika, not self. Effort arises with all cittas except sixteen
out of eighteen ahetuka cittas, cittas which are not accompanied by
the the unwholesome roots, akusala hetus, of lobha, dosa and moha, or
by the sobhana (beautiful) hetus of alobha, adosa and amoha. Effort
arises not only with kusala citta, but also with akusala citta.
When there is mindfulness of any reality which appears now there is
right effort already; we do not have to think of effort. When we
think of effort there is bound to be akusala citta with desire.
Akusala citta is accompanied by wrong effort.
We read in the “Analysis of the Truths” (Saccavibhangasutta, Middle
Length Sayings III, no 141) about four right efforts:

“And what, your reverences, is right endeavour? As to this, your
reverences, a monk generates desire, endeavours, stirs up energy,
exerts his mind and strives for the non-arising of evil unskilled
states that have not arisen... for the getting rid of evil unskilled
states that have arisen...for the arising of skilled states that have
not arisen... for the maintenance, preservation, increase, maturity,
development and completion of skilled states that have arisen. This,
your reverences, is called right endeavour....”

When do these four right efforts arise? We read in the Gradual
Sayings (Book of the Ones, Ch VI):

“Monks, I know not of any other single thing of such power to cause
the arising of good states, if not yet arisen, or to cause the waning
of evil states, if already arisen, as earnestness. In him who is
earnest, good states, if not yet arisen, do arise, and evil states,
if arisen, do wane.”

Earnestness, mindfulness of nåma and rúpa, conditions the development
of wholesomeness and it leads to the elimination of unwholesomeness.
Right understanding of the eightfold Path, which is developed in
being mindful of nåma and rúpa, conditions right effort of the
eightfold Path. If one still clings to an idea of self who makes an
effort, there is lobha, not right effort of the eightfold Path.

*******
Nina.



#89544	From: "rinzeee" <rinzeee@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:00 am 
Subject: Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream .. Feeling like a fool ... 	rinzeee 
 		--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Tep Sastri"
<indriyabala@...> wrote:

Dear Tep,
>
> Hi Rinze and Alex, -
>
> The anatta-dhamma is often misunderstood even by those who always
> claim that they understand it.
>
>
> > Tep:
> > > It refreshed me and relieved me from "accumulated
> > > frustrations" (akusala citta) after having heard so often that
> > > right understanding of 'anatta' means "no-one practices the
>  > > Dhamma".
> > Rinze:
> > But there actually is no one practicing the Dhamma!
> >
>
> Our friend Alex then posted this sutta quote:
>
> The Buddha: "And which is the burden? 'The five clinging-
> aggregates,' it should be said. ... And which is the carrier of
the
> burden? 'The person,' it should be  said. This venerable one with
> such a name, such a clan-name. This is  called the carrier of the
> burden. ..."
>
> Rinze:  "Having listened or discussed the Dhamma wisely, and
having
> confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha, (therefore Faith),
and
> observing the precepts (Sila), need we STILL consider a self, if
not
> how to cast off `the burden'?
>
> T: You said before: 'no one is actually practicing the Dhamma',
yet
> you also say you observe the precepts -- that is a Sila practice
by
> a "carrier of the burden".

"This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? <
edited> Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate
present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being
come from? Where is it bound?' Sabbasava Sutta MN 2

Given above is what Lord Buddha has to say on speculative views. If,
in the present, we were to attend, in a similar way like – "Am
I?", "Is there a person meditating?", "Who is this meditating"… and
so on, then aren't we with a wrong view! Like the foolish King, who
believes he is wearing an invisible but exquisite cloak, made by the
court jester, when actually he is going about naked! Therefore, what
ever the ruling he were to give, in that state, he wouldn't be taken
seriously, because his people already thinks he is mad!

Similarly is, the Putthujjana, who believes he is a self, a
somebody, who seeks happiness, not knowing the dependent nature of
his body and mind. Therefore, he grasps the Dhamma,
albeit `intellectually', from the wrong end, like the snake by the
tail. But it will do much harm, like Lord Buddha cautions us, in the
Alagaddupama Sutta in MN 22.

Imagine, this 5 holding aggregates, to be the snake. If you hold
onto the view, that the 5 holding aggregates is a person, a self who
is meditating, then it is like holding the snake by the tail. It'll
bring you much harm! So, Lord Buddha advices us to "hold" this "5
holding aggregates" properly, use it like a raft, to get to the
further shore, that is Nibbana! We all are in this sea of Sansara,
rowing this 5 holding aggregates, aimlessly. All that Lord Buddha
teaches, is within this "5 holding aggregates" and that, is (The 4
Noble Truths) The Dhamma.

Within this one fathom long body of ours, is found Suffering, the
Cause, the End and the Path to the end of Suffering. - Rohitassa
Sutta AN 4.45. So the question should be, not `WHO' is meditating,
but `WHAT' is meditating?

Further, in Alagaddupama Sutta Lord Buddha says "an uninstructed
worldling who has no regard for Noble Ones, who is ignorant of their
teaching …. he considers Matter thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this
is my self'; he considers feeling... perception... mental formations
thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is my self'; and what is seen,
heard, sensed, and thought; what is encountered, sought, pursued in
mind, this also he considers thus: 'This is mine, this I am, this is
my self';

"But, monks, there is here a well-instructed noble disciple who has
regard for Noble Ones, <edited>… he does not consider thus: 'This is
mine, this I am, this is my self.'

There is enough, and more places in the Sutta, where Lord Buddha
tells us not to consider the 5 holding aggregates as 'This is mine,
this I am, this is my self'.

>
> Do you have a clearly defined position? Are you arguing against
the
> Buddha's words above, while maintaining the no-person-practices-
the-
> Dhamma proposition at the same time?

Now, why would I argue against Lord Buddha, using His own
statements! Had you analyzed properly, you should have asked, "Why
is Lord Buddha referring to the 5 holding aggregates as "the
person", in this Sutta, when else where He says they are not to be
taken as mine, I am or myself. Therefore, is there two ways of
looking at this 5 (holding) aggregates?" (Because Lord Buddha
wouldn't contradict Himself!)

> No hurry. It takes time and a lot of contemplation before the
anatta
> meaning in the Buddha's words above becomes clear.

Yes, training the mind does take time. Progress is gradual, step-by-
step, not in leaps and bounds!
>
> Metta,
>
> Tep
> ===
May all beings be Happy
Rinze


#89545	From: "rinzeee" <rinzeee@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:54 am 
Subject: Re: Self Defence and precepts 	rinzeee 
 		Dear Alex,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
>
> Here is a question:
>
>
> Lets say someone a person loves is brutally attacked. What should
that
> person do?
>
> If a person is attacked, what should he do?
>
>
> You may say about precept "not to harm/kill", but by doing
nothing,
> what in effect a person may be doing is allowing harm being done
to the
> victim! So the one who abstains is the one allowing
harming/killing to
> happen.
>
>
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
> Alex
>
Thought I'll post this Sutta that is directly related!

Samyutta Nikaya XXXV.88
Punna Sutta
To Punna

"Well then, Punna. Now that I have instructed you with a brief
instruction, in which country are you going to live?"
"Lord, there is a country called Sunaparanta. I am going to live
there."
"Punna, the Sunaparanta people are fierce. They are rough. If they
insult and ridicule you, what will you think?"
"If they insult and ridicule me, I will think, 'These Sunaparanta
people are civilized, very civilized, in that they don't hit me with
their hands.' That is what I will think, O Blessed One. That is what
I will think, O One Well-gone."
"But if they hit you with their hands, what will you think?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't hit me with a clod'...."
"But if they hit you with a clod...?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't hit me with a stick'...."
"But if they hit you with a stick...?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't hit me with a knife'...."
"But if they hit you with a knife...?"
"...I will think, 'These Sunaparanta people are civilized, very
civilized, in that they don't take my life with a sharp knife'...."
"But if they take your life with a sharp knife...?"
"If they take my life with a sharp knife, I will think, 'There are
disciples of the Blessed One who--horrified, humiliated, and
disgusted by the body and by life--have sought for an assassin, but
here I have met my assassin without searching for him.' That is what
I will think, O Blessed One. That is what I will think, O One Well-
gone."
"Good, Punna, very good. Possessing such calm and self-control you
are fit to dwell among the Sunaparantans. Now it is time to do as
you see fit."

Metta
Rinze


#89546	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:31 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	sarahprocter... 
 		Dear Alex,

--- On Tue, 26/8/08, Alex <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
>>S1: Speaking conventionally, no one has ever denied there are trees
>etc. We don't need a Buddha's wisdom to teach us about them.

>>S2: There is only ever cittas, cetasikas and rupas. At the moment of
>thinking about 'the Buddha', about 'caves', what is real? Is it
>citta, cetasika or rupa?

>>A: Conventionally these people and things DO exist. Otherwise who is
>reading and writing these?

>>S3: Yes, conventionally. No one has denied this.

>>S4: This is why there are conventional truths and ultimate truths.
?>S5: Conventional refers to that which is used to communicate and for
>common understanding.
?>S6: Ultimate refers to what actually exists now.
>=========== ========= ========= ========= ========= ========= ==

A:> In S1 you have said: "nobody ever denied there are trees, etc "
>In S2 you are subtly refuting the existence of "'the Buddha' & 'caves'
>In S3 you are back at S1 (contrary to S2)
....
S: Not contrary to S2
....
In S4 you say that there are 2 'truths'
In S5 you are saying that CT is for communication & common
understanding

In S6 by saying that Ultimate refers to what actually exists now, you
like in S2 are refuting what in S1 & S3 you've said.
....
S: Not refuting what is said in S1 & S3.

Yes, we can all refer to trees and mountains and we know just what we mean.
However, the Buddha didn't spend 40 years teaching us about trees and mountains.
He taught us that what is seen are only visible objects, what is heard are only
sounds. When we think about trees and mountains, there is thinking about
particular ideas, based on what sanna has marked over and over again. For
example, what is seen now? If you say 'comnputer', isn't this just an idea based
on what has been seen, heard and thought about over and over again?

Metta,

Sarah
=======


???

Best wishes,

Alex


#89547	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:41 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is Frustration Avoidable in Dhamma Discussion? 	sarahprocter... 
 		Dear Tep,

--- On Tue, 26/8/08, Tep Sastri <indriyabala@...> wrote:
>T: You're right. Just be mindful enough to know when a certain kilesa
(say, a sa.myojana) is in the mind then let it go (easier said than
done, though).
...
S: This is because of clinging and other defilements of course that just can't
let go. Anyway, I think it's a matter of understanding rather than trying to
'let go'.
....
>S: These discussions always have fruitful outcomes, I believe as
they are very relevant to dhammas in daily life. Thank you for your
sincere sharing which helps us all to reflect further.

>T: Yes, a dhamma discussion like this is fruitful. Simply because it
doesn't involve with the human elements, me and mine.
....
S: Good comment - that's why I think the best discussions are always those about
dhammas.
....
>T: I thank you too Sarah, very much, for showing "metta and
understanding" .
....
S: Likewise, Tep. We're all bound to have disagreements and frustrations with
each other from time to time, but usually the good friendship shows through.

I like your thorough review and discussion with Sukin on ADL. I hope you'll both
continue it.

Metta,

Sarah
p.s Btw, Nina also wrote 'Buddhism in Daily Life' around the same time -
originally in two smaller books which were later combined. (I remember Jon
working hard on the editing and proof-reading/printing of this too later.) I
mention this because you wondered why she only wrote about 'Abhidhamma' in daily
life, why not a more 'general' introductory book.
========


#89548	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:47 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	sarahprocter... 
 		Hi Howard (& Alex),

--- On Tue, 26/8/08, upasaka@... <upasaka@...> wrote:
A:>In S1 you have said: "nobody ever denied there are trees, etc "
In S2 you are subtly refuting the existence of "'the Buddha' & 'caves'
In S3 you are back at S1 (contrary to S2)
In S4 you say that there are 2 'truths'
In S5 you are saying that CT is for communication & common
understanding

In S6 by saying that Ultimate refers to what actually exists now, you
like in S2 are refuting what in S1 & S3 you've said.

???

============ ========= =========
H:> It seems to me that what is missing in all this conversation is the
matter of patterned aggregates of interrelated namas and rupas that act in
concert - what I call "aggregations" . It is a convention to speak of these
aggregates as individuals, but in reality they are only collections.
....
S: I'd call these patterned 'aggregations' or collections CTs as well.
...
H:> As I see it, it is by means of this understanding that one can bridge the
divide between sammuti vaca and paramattha vaca.
...
S: I think that we can only 'bridge the divide' by understanding paramattha vaca
or ultimate realities.
...
H:> And whatever the sort of speech one is using, everything that is
referenced, if it exists in any way at all, is empty of self.
....
S: Yes, 'if it exists in any way at all', it 'is empty of self'. I don't see the
bridge of 'patterned aggregations' as 'existing in any way at all', except as a
concept.

Metta,

Sarah
=========


#89549	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 12:48 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	upasaka_howard 
 		Hi, Sarah -

In a message dated 8/29/2008 7:32:07 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
sarahprocterabbott@... writes:

Yes, we  can all refer to trees and mountains and we know just what we mean.
However,  the Buddha didn't spend 40 years teaching us about trees and
mountains. He  taught us that what is seen are only visible objects, what is
heard
are only  sounds. When we think about trees and mountains, there is thinking
about  particular ideas, based on what sanna has marked over and over again. For
example, what is seen now? If you say 'comnputer', isn't this just an idea
based on what has been seen, heard and thought about over and over  again?
===============================
     He did teach what you say, Sarah. But FAR more so  he taught the
tilakkhana, paticcasamupada, the four noble  truths, cultivation of sila and
samadhi
(right effort, right  mindfulness, and right focus) leading to pa~n~na, and,
most of all,  relinquishment.

With metta,
Howard

P. S. Wasn't it 45 years?


#89550	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:52 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Samadhi & Insight 	sarahprocter... 
 		Dear Scott (& Alex),

--- On Mon, 25/8/08, Scott <scduncan@...> wrote:
>Scott: Not wishing to plunge once again into the jhaana debate, I
would ask whether you consider the jhaana factors to be part of the
'things comprised by the five aggregates'? If so, these will still
need to become the object of adhipa~n~naadhammav ipassanaa in order for
pa~n~naa to develop enough such that the Path might arise would they
not? This would indeed be the development of pa~n~naa should such a
thing occur.

And from this point of view, these jhaana factors are no less or no
more worthy objects of pa~n~naa than any other dhamma, as I see it.
....
Sarah: Nicely put. As you say, 'no less or no more worthy objects of pa~n~naa
than any other dhamma'. We see what is meant by the development of detachment
and panna becoming a bala (power) that understands whatever appears without any
selection at all.

All inherently unsatisfactory, impermanent dhammas, not in anyone's control at
all.

Metta,

Sarah
======


#89551	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:00 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Fwd: Sudden Insight In My Dream 	sarahprocter... 
 		Dear Rinze,

I'm appreciating all your discussions too.

--- On Mon, 25/8/08, rinzeee <rinzeee@...> wrote:

R: >Ven. Sariputta, under the guidance of Lord Buddha, also meditated.
To him, there is no one who is meditating. It's simply a physical &
mental process. The conditions for the 5 holding aggregates were
progressively eradicated, never to rise again. Ven. Sariputta was
satisfied of Lord Buddha's guidance, saw the `proof of the pudding',
attained Arahantship.

Therefore, should we meditate like Alara Kalama or Ven. Sariputta?
One was ignorant of a `self', the other was wise. Having listened or
discussed the Dhamma wisely, and having confidence in the Buddha,
Dhamma and Sangha, (therefore Faith), and observing the precepts
(Sila), need we STILL consider a self, if not how to cast off `the
burden'?
...
S: Nicely put. I enjoyed the whole post.

Metta,

Sarah
p.s Pls consider putting a pic in the photo album along with any other new
members. I wonder if you lived before in England or the States? Your lovely
style of writing leads me to ask. Just curiosity, no need to answer.
================


#89552	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:12 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	sarahprocter... 
 		Hi Andrew L & all,

Good to see you back in your stride here. I thought you and Alex would get on
well:-).

--- On Thu, 28/8/08, purist_andrew <purist_andrew@...> wrote:
>Precisely. He made his vow at the foot of a Buddha, who had the
ability to confirm to him that he would indeed fulfill that role
aeons in the future.

As far as I can tell, it is the view of Theravada tradition that this
is the *only* situation that can give one assurance (even ability) to
become a Buddha. The point being, the Buddha of our dispensation has
passed, and we don't have the foot of a Buddha to make our vows at.

Therefore, if the Theravada position on the requirements for the
great aspiaration, and the conditions for its fulfillment are what I
understand them to be, it is required for a Buddha to be present at
your Bodhisattva vow for it to bear fruit into the future.
....
S: Yes.
...
============ ========= ========= ========= ======
Cited passages
============ ========= ========= ========= ======
>>>>>>>
The condition of the paramis is firstly, the great aspiration. This
is the aspiration supported by the eight qualifications which occurs
thus: "Crossed I would cross, freed I would free, tamed I would
tame, calmed I would calm, comforted I would comfort, attained to
nibbana I would lead to nibbana, purified I would purify, enlightened
I would enlighten!" This is the condition for all the paramis without
exception.

The eight qualifications through which the aspiration succeeds are:
the human state, the male sex, the cause, the sight of the master,
the going forth, the acheivement of noble qualities, extreme
dedication, and strong desire.
>>>>>>>>>>>

4) The sight of the master: The personal presence of the master. The
aspiration only succeeds when made by one aspiring in the presence of
a living Buddha. When made after the Exalted One has passed into
parinibbana- - before a shrine, at the foot of a Bodhi-tree, in front
of an image, or in the presence of paccekabuddhas or the Buddha's
disciples-- the aspiration does not succeed. Why? Because the
recipient lacks the power (necessary to confirm the aspiration). The
aspiration only succeeds when made in the presence of the Buddhas,
for they alone possess spiritual power adequate to the loftiness of
the aspiration.< <<<<<<
....
S: Yes, again. (See more under 'Aspiration' and 'Bodhisatta' in U.P.)

Metta,

Sarah
p.s Please would you kindly make it clear who you are addressing at the outset,
even if it's 'all' or 'anyone'.
=============


#89553	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:17 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Hi! 	sarahprocter... 
 		Dear Jean-Francois,

It's very nice to see you back after a long time-gap. I just traced back your
earlier intro here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/14324

You'll see there are many new 'faces', but also many old ones too. Please join
in any of the discussions and ask any questions or give any of your ideas. Look
forward to chatting later.


Metta,

Sarah


--- On Thu, 28/8/08, Jean-François <jfdh@...> wrote:

>I live in Belgium.

>I followed the path, a few years ago. I left it and, after
having "travelled", I come back to Buddhism.


#89554	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:37 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] MN74, views. Rejection of views. 	sarahprocter... 
 		Hi Alex,

--- On Wed, 27/8/08, Alex <truth_aerator@...> wrote:

>Summary of Dighanakha sutta MN74:

>DN holds a view "All is not pleasing to me" .
....
S: No time to give detailed comments now (about to sign off until we're back in
Hong Kong, probably, in a couple of days or so.)

Meanwhile, please take a look at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/36964

Maybe also, Dighanakha Sutta, MN74
#37400, 68449

How about inserting any of my comments from the first post amongst yours and
saving me the trouble:-).

In brief, we're talking about 'wrong' views about atta to be eradicated.

Metta,

Sarah
p.s as for Ashin Janakabhivamsa's ADL (on-line), why not post short extracts, a
para or two at a time for discussion?
=======


#89555	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 5:40 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	scottduncan2 
 		Dear Howard (and Sarah),

H: "...But FAR more so he taught the tilakkhana, paticcasamupada, the
four noble  truths, cultivation of sila and samadhi (right effort,
right  mindfulness, and right focus) leading to pa~n~na, and,
most of all, relinquishment..."

Scott: Well, no.  Sammaa-di.t.thi (pa~n~naa) is the first, not the
last.  Sammaa-vaayaama, sammaa-sati, and sammaa-samaadhi cannot be
'right' without sammaa-di.t.thi.  I think it is inaccurate to suggest
that one cultivates siila and samaadhi which then 'leads to' pa~n~naa
- but this has been discussed long after the proverbial cows have
already come home.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89556	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:19 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Sarah,


> Sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Dear Alex,
>
> Yes, we can all refer to trees and mountains and we know just what
>we mean. However, the Buddha didn't spend 40 years teaching us about
>trees and mountains. He taught us that what is seen are only visible
>objects, what is heard are only sounds.

Do you have sutta quotes regarding that?

Specifically regarding not seeing trees, caves and so on, but
focusing on seeing "paramattha dhammas."



Best wishes,

Alex



#89557	From: sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:49 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	sarahprocter... 
 
 		Hi Alex,

--- On Fri, 29/8/08, Alex <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
>>S: Yes, we can all refer to trees and mountains and we know just what
>we mean. However, the Buddha didn't spend 40 years teaching us about
>trees and mountains. He taught us that what is seen are only visible
>objects, what is heard are only sounds.

A:> Do you have sutta quotes regarding that?
...
S: (the Udana, Enlightenment Ch, 10 with Bahiya, Masefield trans):

The Buddha addressed Bahiya: "Therefore, Bahiya, you should train yourself
that with respect to the seen there will be merely the seen, that with
respect to the heard...."

The commentary adds: With respect to the seen there will be merely the
seen(di.t.the di.t.thamatta.m;with respect to a sight-base (ruupaayatane)
(there will be) merely that seen by means of eye-consciousness."

I like this Abhidhamma quote I've given before:

Dispeller, 1755 about improper visitors in the eye-door process:

"But when a visible datum comes into focus in the eye door, impulsion
arises at the end when, following the disturbance in the life continuum,
adverting, etc have arisen and ceased with the accomplishment of their
respective functions. That [impulsion] is like a visitor in the eye door
which is the home of the previously arisen adverting and so on. And as it
is improper for a visitor who has entered another�s house to ask for
something, to give orders, when the owners of the home sit in silence, so
lusting or hating or becoming deluded in the eye door which is the home of
adverting, etc. is improper when adverting, etc. do not lust or hate or
become deluded. Thus should �clear understanding through non-delusion� be
understood by way of �visiting."

You could also try looking through your 4 Nikays, starting with SN, Salyatana
Samyutta for lots more.
...

A:>Specifically regarding not seeing trees, caves and so on, but
focusing on seeing "paramattha dhammas."
....
S: I wrote a series of posts recently on why the Buddha didn't teach
'focusing':-)

Metta,

Sarah
=========


#89558	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:26 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	nilovg 
 
 		Dear Han,
Op 29-aug-2008, om 1:56 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven:

> Han: If you argue on that line, then everything will be “arising”
> because we cannot get away from the arising and falling away of
> cittas at all times. In that case, we won’t be needing any other
> expression. If you use the arising and falling away of cittas as a
> criteria for equating “arising” and “development”, then in Pali,
> uppajjati will become synonymous with bhaavanaa, bhaaveti,
> bahuliikataa or bahuliikaroti, and so on.
>
> ------------------------------
> N: Different aspects such as you mention, bhaaveti, bahuliikaroti,
> are very useful. This reminds me of what I translated from the Co.
> to the Sangiitisutta:
< As to the power of mental development, bhaavanaabala, the Co states
that it is the seven factors of enlightenment (sambojjha"nga), with
the factor of energy at the head. The Co. refers to dha.sa. 1354. We
read (transl U Kyaw Khine, 1360): <What, in this connection, is the
power of mental cultivation?
There are: practice of meritorious dhammaa, mental cultivation, and
practising (them) repeatedly. >
   The Co speaks about making much of them (bahuliikamma.m). >
-------
N: These different aspects can remind us not to be indolent. Many
arisings of sati sampaja~n~na are needed so as to be bahuliikamma.m,
making much of it. The arising I emphasize helps me to understand
that the citta arising with sati sampaja~n~na comes to understand the
present moment. The present moment is different all the time (then
hardness, then feeling, then aversion, etc.), and only one citta at a
time can experience it with sati and pa~n~naa.
----------

> > > Han: To me satipa.t.thaana means the establishment of sati on
> kaaya, vedanaa, citta and dhamma, and the entire process of
> establishing sati on kaaya, vedanaa, citta and dhamma, from the
> beginning to the end, is satipa.t.thaana.
>
> > Nina: The Applications of mindfulness that are kaaya, vedanaa,
> citta and dhamma include actually all nama and rupa appearing now.
> Kaaya: all rupas, appearing time and again. Feeling too, it arises
> all the time. Citta, yes, citta now that sees, reads, thinks.
> Dhammas: all are dhammas but we do not see them yet as mere dhamma
> elements. A moment of sati now and then but interspersed with many
> moments of forgetfulness, that is how it goes. But it is
> accumulated little by little. No regret.
>
> Han; What you are describing is the “process” of application of
> mindfulness. What I was saying was satipa.t.thaana is a “process”
> of establishment of sati. So I do not see any disagreement.
>
> ------------------------------
> N: No disagreement, I am just thinking aloud to remind myself.
---------
>
> Han: I said pa~n~naa will arise at the “appropriate” stage. I agree
> with you that from the beginning sati and pa~n~naa can arise
> together. But it is also possible that at the beginning sati may
> not be accompanied by pa~n~naa. You said, “satipa.t.thaana does not
> arise alone.”
>
> -----------------------------
> N: Yes, as you say, it is possible that sati arises without
> pa~n~naa. But when we speak about satipatthaana, which is mental
> development, bhaavanaa, then pa~n~naa, even weak pa~n~naa must
> accompany the kusala citta. Suppose there is just sati, but then
> the question is: awareness of what?
-------
> H: Here is the disagreement between you and me. I would say that
> “sati does not arise alone” because I consider ‘satipa.t.thaana’ as
> a ‘process’ and not as a ‘product’ of a process. Here again, I
> consider you are more learned than me. So I won’t press my point.
--------
N: A process: not bad, it is a development, takes a long. long time.
Product of a process, this expression may not be so clear, seems like
an end result. But that is far away. Perhaps you mean something else,
but it seems a question of chosing the best words to clarify
something, which is not an easy task.
-------
> Han: I used the word ‘yogi’ to designate a ‘meditator.’ I do not
> know yogavacara or yogic power and yogic skill. Please consider my
> usage of the word ‘yogi’ as a poor choice of word.
-------
N: It is all right to use the word yogi, so long as we understand
what is meant. I took yogavacara and yogic skill from the Commentary.
Meditator: the person who applies himself to bhaavanaa. It can be
now, while we are busy.

Nina.



#89559	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:50 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] A Reviewer's Comments : 'The Four Paramattha Dhammas' Part II 	nilovg 
 
 		Dear Sukin and Tep (and Han),
Op 29-aug-2008, om 4:14 heeft Sukinder het volgende geschreven:

> Tep, I must sincerely express again my appreciation and admiration for
> what you are doing. Very few, if any, would show a willingness to do
> this kind of thing. And besides you are also giving me an
> opportunity to
> sort my thoughts and test my own understanding, Thank you very
> much. :-)
--------
N: I join Sukin in his appreciation. I also see it this way: giving
an opportunity to
> sort out my thoughts and test my own understanding.
I find this with several of the posts, also from others, like Han.
Nina.



#89560	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:07 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Sarah and all interested,

>--- sarah abbott <sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> --- On Fri, 29/8/08, Alex <truth_aerator@...> wrote:
> >>S: Yes, we can all refer to trees and mountains and we know just
>what we mean. However, the Buddha didn't spend 40 years teaching us
>about trees and mountains. He taught us that what is seen are only
>visible objects, what is heard are only sounds.
>
> A:> Do you have sutta quotes regarding that?
> ...
> S: (the Udana, Enlightenment Ch, 10 with Bahiya, Masefield trans):
>
> The Buddha addressed Bahiya: "Therefore, Bahiya, you should train
>yourself that with respect to the seen there will be merely the
>seen, that with respect to the heard...."
>

I knew that B., sutta would go there. Here is Buddha's words that
explain in more detail that instruction:


Here, Hemaka,with regard to things that are dear — seen, heard,
sensed, & cognized — there is: the dispelling of passion & desire,
the undying state of Unbinding. Those knowing this, mindful,
fully unbound in the here & now, are forever calmed, have crossed
over beyond entanglement in the world.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.08.than.html
=============

Notice the *dispelling of passion & desire*, not seeing "the
ontological Truth, the Whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth".


> You could also try looking through your 4 Nikays, starting with SN,
>Salyatana Samyutta for lots more.
> ...

If you have a specific sutta, please say it. While there are often
passages of 6 sense spheres & their objects, 5 aggregates, I don't
remember any passage which says "trees" do not really exist or that
one shouldn't see trees.

In fact I do remember the cosmologist sutta (SN 12.48) Where Buddha
has talked that "all exists" is one extreme "all doesn't exist" is
another. This is why he refused to say "self doesn't exist" because
he would be contradicting himself and his teaching of dependent
origination.

Neither "the Self" nor the "Self doesn't exist" is given in
experience. However impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and not worthy
to be called Self, is given in experience.


I believe that the Earliest, and most original Buddha's teaching was
about letting go off clinging for everything, including the
passionate screams of "S/self doesn't exist".

"One who has reached the end has no criterion by which anyone would
say that — for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena (dhamma) are
done away with, all means of speaking are done away with as well."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.06.than.html

Notice the transcending of ALL dhammas. Including the "atta/anatta"
dhamma.

Nibbana can't be a dhamma because ALL dhammas are transcended, but
Nibbana can't be transcended. Nibbana isn't atta/anatta because it isn
t a Dhamma.


Best wishes,

Alex


#89561	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:32 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Scott -

In a message dated 8/29/2008 8:41:13 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
scduncan@... writes:

Dear  Howard (and Sarah),

H: "...But FAR more so he taught the tilakkhana,  paticcasamupada, the
four noble  truths, cultivation of sila and  samadhi (right effort,
right  mindfulness, and right focus) leading to  pa~n~na, and,
most of all, relinquishment..."

Scott: Well,  no.  Sammaa-di.t.thi (pa~n~naa) is the first, not  the
last.
----------------------------------------------
Howard:
     The list is not necessarily in order of  acquisition. As for liberating
wisdom, it is indeed the very last to be  acquired. And, also, do you not
consider the three characteristics, dependent  origination, and the four noble
truths to fall under right view? (BTW, I listed  these first, because of their
extreme importance.)
---------------------------------------------

Sammaa-vaayaama, sammaa-sati, and sammaa-samaadhi cannot be
'right'  without sammaa-di.t.thi.  I think it is inaccurate to suggest
that one  cultivates siila and samaadhi which then 'leads to' pa~n~naa
- but this has  been discussed long after the proverbial cows have
already come  home.
-----------------------------------------------
Howard:
     There needs to be a bare modicum of "wisdom",  namely knowing that things
are not as they should be, to get started. If there  is that much, one is
fortunate. One more thing - information and wisdom are not  the same.
----------------------------------------------



Sincerely,

Scott.
========================
With metta,
Howard


#89562	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:23 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	purist_andrew 
 
 		Hi, Sarah:

It seems from the below that we agree that taking Bodhisattva vows at
this point in time, by no way can lead us to attain the desired goal
(Buddahood).
Your agreement and references to previous posts (UP list) affirm to
me what I thought to be the case. I am pleased.

However, I have come into this bit on an article Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote
about taking refuge in the Triple Gem.  In the relevant section, he
is comparing the future results of two people, one who practices
meditation and morality in this life, and one who with a mind of
faith takes refuge in the triple gem but because of adverse
circumstances cannot hold the precepts strictly nor practice
meditation.

He says that the first person will have more peace in this life and
may secure a more fortunate rebirth in the next life, but the one who
takes refuge may receive more good fortune on a long-term basis.

The cite is below.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/wheel282.html#ref1

==================== B.B.
On the other hand the person who has sincerely gone for refuge to the
Triple Gem, without being capable of higher practices, still lays the
foundation for spiritual progress in future lives merely by his
heartfelt act of seeking refuge. Of course he has to reap the results
of his kamma and cannot escape them by taking refuge, but all the
same the mental act of going for refuge, if it is truly the focus of
his inner life, becomes a powerful positive kamma in itself. It will
function as a link tending to bring him into connection with the
Buddha's dispensation in future lives, thereby aiding his chances for
further progress. And if he fails to reach deliverance within the
dispensation of the present Buddha it will very likely lead him to
the dispensations of future Buddhas, until he eventually reaches the
goal. Since this all comes about through the germination of that
mental act of going for refuge, we can understand that the taking of
refuge is very essential.
====================

The important passage in the above is:

=====================B.B.
And if he fails to reach deliverance within the dispensation of the
present Buddha it will very likely lead him to the dispensations of
future Buddhas, until he eventually reaches the goal.
=====================

This being the case, can we not generate a mind of faith and desire,
take the refuges, and begin developing or continue to develop, the
paramis with hope that we may be able to make our aspiration at the
foot of a future Buddha?  Even if the perfections aren't exactly what
the Buddha taught, they'll still serve as a foundation of spiritual
development and there's got to be some overlap.  We know the Buddha
was moral and generous, and a renunciate and so forth.

Maybe the Maha-Bodhisattva spirit isn't dead after all?


Thoughts please.

Regards,

A.L.

P.S.:  Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we
find the spiritual path and not get lost?  Perhaps a mind of faith is
one condition, or, as I've heard, a lot of reflection on the
qualities of the Buddha?  Or should we not assume anything about
future lives and strive extra hard because we only have a
comparatively high measure of certainty of what we can do in this
life, on this world.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott
<sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:
>  4) The sight of the master: The personal presence of the master.
The
> aspiration only succeeds when made by one aspiring in the presence
of
> a living Buddha. When made after the Exalted One has passed into
> parinibbana- - before a shrine, at the foot of a Bodhi-tree, in
front
> of an image, or in the presence of paccekabuddhas or the Buddha's
> disciples-- the aspiration does not succeed. Why? Because the
> recipient lacks the power (necessary to confirm the aspiration). The
> aspiration only succeeds when made in the presence of the Buddhas,
> for they alone possess spiritual power adequate to the loftiness of
> the aspiration.< <<<<<<
> ....
> S: Yes, again. (See more under 'Aspiration' and 'Bodhisatta' in
U.P.)



#89563	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:24 am 
Subject: 'Ultimate Truth' vs 'Conventional Truth'. Is it even Buddhist teaching? 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Hello all,

-
For one dispassionate toward perception there are no ties;
for one released by discernment, no delusions. Those who grasp at
perceptions & views go about butting their heads in the world.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.09.than.html

"Monk, whatever one stays obsessed with, that's what one is measured
by. Whatever one is measured by, that's how one is classified.
Whatever one doesn't stay obsessed with, that's not what one is
measured by. Whatever one isn't measured by, that's not how one is
classified."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.036.than.html


Part the Buddhist training should be to let go of all obsession with
perceptions & views.


---
One who has reached the end has no criterion by which anyone would
say that — for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena are done away
with, all means of speaking are done away with as well.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.06.than.html


Note, the above passage refutes the idea that parinibbana is
a "dhamma" and it also refutes the idea that Nibbana is not self
(although please don't reinterpret this at implying that Nibbana is
atta).



The highest emancipation of awareness is base of nothingness

"relying on nothingness, letting go of all else, released in the
highest emancipation of perception:He stays there unaffected."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.06.than.html

as AN 9.36 also tells, the dimension of nothingness is the highest
perception-attainment.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html#t-1


Not "ultimate truth in the highest sense", which would be a direct
contradiction to Snp4.9, 5.6, SN22.36 and many more.



Best wishes,


Alex



#89564	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:32 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Andrew and all,

> "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> wrote:
> P.S.:  Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we
> find the spiritual path and not get lost?  Perhaps a mind of faith
>is  one condition, or, as I've heard, a lot of reflection on the
> qualities of the Buddha?  Or should we not assume anything about
> future lives and strive extra hard because we only have a
> comparatively high measure of certainty of what we can do in this
> life, on this world.


If you reach Jhana and don't do anything bad afterwards, you'll be
reborn in Rupa Loka and will live long enough to see the next Buddha
(or become  ariya->Arahant there).


If you don't reach Jhana and don't become an ariya, then there is a
risk of being reborn in woeful planes where there is no possibility
of awakening. Even if you do a lot of merit now and get reborn as a
deva in Kama-Loka, or human again, you can still accidentally slip up
in the next existence and be reborn where you'll have no opportunity
to see or practice Buddha-Dhamma.

By developing Jhana and being reborn in very long lasting heavenly
existences, you are securing a possibility of seeing the next Buddha
due in this Aeon.


Best wishes,


Alex


#89565	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:50 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	purist_andrew 
 
 		To Rob and anyone else interested:

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Andrew and all,
>
> > "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@> wrote:
> > P.S.:  Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we
> > find the spiritual path and not get lost?  Perhaps a mind of
faith
> >is  one condition, or, as I've heard, a lot of reflection on the
> > qualities of the Buddha?  Or should we not assume anything about
> > future lives and strive extra hard because we only have a
> > comparatively high measure of certainty of what we can do in this
> > life, on this world.
>
>
> If you reach Jhana and don't do anything bad afterwards, you'll be
> reborn in Rupa Loka and will live long enough to see the next
Buddha
> (or become  ariya->Arahant there).

A.L.: I have to agree this is possible, but it doesn't seem to fit
the situation.  One has to be a human to take the Bodhisattva vows.
That is, not interested in diciple enlightenment of a future Buddha,
but of meeting a future Buddha to allow me to take Bodhisattva with
the intention of myself becoming a Buddha to help others to
liberation.

> If you don't reach Jhana and don't become an ariya, then there is a
> risk of being reborn in woeful planes where there is no possibility
> of awakening. Even if you do a lot of merit now and get reborn as a
> deva in Kama-Loka, or human again, you can still accidentally slip
up
> in the next existence and be reborn where you'll have no
opportunity
> to see or practice Buddha-Dhamma.

A.L.: The article presented it just right.  One may suffer trillions
of times (or more) in hell before one gets the human rebirth again,
to say nothing of the time interval in which it becomes possible to
meet a teaching Buddha, but nonetheless, one will still be drawn to
future Buddha dispensations, if the Bhikkhu Bodhi's take is correct.
The laws of mathematics are such that if even an extremely small
chance of something happening exists, as time passes, it becomes
almost a certainty that it will indeed happen.  So it is exceedingly
likely that one who undertakes this would meet Buddhas in future
dispensations.  Great disciples have met numerous Buddhas in the past
before attaining liberation in this dispensation in just such a way,
haven't they?

So, the question seems to be, by taking refuge faithfully can we be
drawn to future dispensations, to meet future Buddha(s) and take
Bodhisattva vows at their feet?  And if so, it would seem wise to
make a strong desire for that and/or begin practising virtue and
other parami to take a head start, would it not?  And would making a
strong desire or resolution to practice and eventually acheive
Bodhisattva help it come to pass, just in the same way Bodhisatta
Gotama determined to become fully Enlightened at Lord Dipankara's
feet, or the way that the Buddha taught lay disciples could lead them
to an immediate fortunate rebirth?  If not, it seems less likely that
we would fulfill that desire, but it would certainly not rule it out.

Do you disagree?


Regards and progress in the Dhamma,

Andrew L.


#89567	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:45 am 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Andrew,

>--"purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> wrote:
>
> Do you disagree?
>
>
> Regards and progress in the Dhamma,
>
> Andrew L.

Due to absence of Bodhisatta path, vows,  and 10 Parami teaching in
the earlier Suttas - I do not have reason to believe that it is the
teaching of Historical Buddha Gotama. I am willing to consider the
evidence to the contrary, but please no appeal to later traditions
like (theravada or mahayana).

Furthermore in the DN14 (Mahaapadana sutta) where the Buddha has
mentioned previous Buddhas, none of them had to take any vows or
fulfill Paramitas as was popularized later on.

The whole fact that (Gotama in previous lives) was a worldling who
disliked Buddha (Kassapa) until he has met him and was converted,
tells me wide & clear when Gotama started the Buddhist path.



Best wishes,


Alex


#89568	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:47 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... 	dhammanusarin 
 
 		Dear Alex (Sarah, Han), -

Can you explain what "transcending all dhammas" in your message below
is supposed to mean?
Why is Unbinding (Nibbana) not a dhamma?
Isn't Nibbana known as asankhata-dhamma ?

Please also read the passage from MN 1 (below your message) about the
letting go of Unbinding by an Arahant, and answer my last question
which follows that passage, if you want to.

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Sarah and all interested,
>
... .... ...
>
> I believe that the Earliest, and most original Buddha's teaching
was about letting go off clinging for everything, including the
> passionate screams of "S/self doesn't exist".
>
> "One who has reached the end has no criterion by which anyone would
> say that — for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena (dhamma)
are done away with, all means of speaking are done away with as well."
> http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.06.than.html
>
> Notice the transcending of ALL dhammas. Including the "atta/anatta"
> dhamma.
>
> Nibbana can't be a dhamma because ALL dhammas are transcended, but
> Nibbana can't be transcended. Nibbana isn't atta/anatta because it
isn't a Dhamma.
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Alex
>
=============================


MN 1 :

"A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of mental fermentations...
directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he
does not conceive things about earth, does not conceive things in
earth, does not conceive things coming out of earth, does not
conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in earth.

Why is that? Because, with the ending of passion, he is devoid of
passion, I tell you.

He directly knows water as water... the All as the All...

He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding
as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not
conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of
Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in
Unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of passion, he is
devoid of passion, I tell you."
-----------------------------

T: In your opinion, doesn't the following description (of what
arahants don't conceive or delight in) indicate trancending of
Nibbana?

".. he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive
things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of
Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight in
Unbinding"


Thanking you in advance,


Tep
===


#89569	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 11:40 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Tep and all,

you found very interesting questions. Thank you for reminding me
about MN1.


>--- "Tep" <indriyabala@...> wrote:
> Why is Unbinding (Nibbana) not a dhamma?

Because nibbana isn't a "some thing"  like any of the 5 aggregates
that eternally exists. That is heresy of eternalism.


> Isn't Nibbana known as asankhata-dhamma ?

Is there a direct quote by the Buddha about Nibbana being asankhata-
*dhamma* ?

While the Nibbana in Udana sutta is described as asankhata

"Atthi bhikkhave ajatam abhutam akatam asankhatam"   - UD 80
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.8.03.than.html

It isn't said to be asankhata-*dhamma* .

Any reference to "thingness" of Nibbana has to be metaphoric at best.


In AN10.58 the Buddha said that all dhammas end in Nibbana
and that all dhammas are rooted in desire (something that Nibbana
can't be).
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an10/an10.058.than.html


> MN 1 :
>
> "
>
> He directly knows Unbinding as Unbinding. Directly knowing Unbinding
> as Unbinding, he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not
> conceive things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of
> Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight
>in
> Unbinding. Why is that? Because, with the ending of passion, he is
> devoid of passion, I tell you."
> -----------------------------
>
> T: In your opinion, doesn't the following description (of what
> arahants don't conceive or delight in) indicate trancending of
> Nibbana?

Nibbana is not a "thing" that can be transcended.

> ".. he does not conceive things about Unbinding, does not conceive
> things in Unbinding, does not conceive things coming out of
> Unbinding, does not conceive Unbinding as 'mine,' does not delight
>in Unbinding"

Nibbana has no criterion (dhamma would be one criterio).


"...an end that cannot be classified."
" One who has reached the end has no criterion by which anyone would
say that — for him it doesn't exist. When all phenomena are done away
with, all means of speaking are done away with as well."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.06.than.html


Best wishes,


Alex


#89570	From: "purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:22 pm 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	purist_andrew 
 
 		Alex,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Andrew,
>
> >--"purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@> wrote:
> >
> > Do you disagree?
> >
> >
> > Regards and progress in the Dhamma,
> >
> > Andrew L.
>
> Due to absence of Bodhisatta path, vows,  and 10 Parami teaching
in
> the earlier Suttas - I do not have reason to believe that it is
the
> teaching of Historical Buddha Gotama. I am willing to consider the
> evidence to the contrary, but please no appeal to later traditions
> like (theravada or mahayana).

So we are largely in agreement that the Bodhisattva path of Mahayana
is not a teaching of our Buddha, and that even Theravada does not
give us an opportunity to seek that path either.

This kind of sucks, because it's desirable to free many beings and
attain an even higher level of realization than arhats, namely full
Buddhahood and omniscience.

It suggests that the Noble 8fold is the true path that we have.

>
> Furthermore in the DN14 (Mahaapadana sutta) where the Buddha has
> mentioned previous Buddhas, none of them had to take any vows or
> fulfill Paramitas as was popularized later on.
>
> The whole fact that (Gotama in previous lives) was a worldling who
> disliked Buddha (Kassapa) until he has met him and was converted,
> tells me wide & clear when Gotama started the Buddhist path.

That might suggest that he did make a vow, namely when he met Buddha
Dipankara.  Maybe he was impressed by his presence, as the five
ascetics Buddha Gotama trained with were when he approached them
after his enlightenment.

What do the scriptures say about the Buddha's meeting with
Dipankara?  Do they say he made an aspiration in his presence and
that the former Buddha predicted it would succeed?  If so, would you
consider that to be essentially the same as making a vow at the foot
of another Buddha?

I still hold out my hope expressed in post #89562 that we can meet
Buddhas in the future and thereby be enabled to follow the
Bodhisatta path to full Buddahood.  We read that Sariputta and
others had met previous Buddhas and made the wish to become a future
Buddha's chief disciple.

If you don't believe Buddha Gotama made a vow at the foot of a
Buddha, who predicted it would succeed, how do you think Buddha
Gotama, or anyone else, would be able to begin the endeavor to
Buddhahood with a reasonable degree of certainty of success?


> Best wishes,
>
>
> Alex
>

Good discussing Dhamma with you.

Regards,
Andrew L.


#89571	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:40 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Andrew (and Alex) -

In a message dated 8/29/2008 4:23:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
purist_andrew@... writes:

Alex,

--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex"  <truth_aerator@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear Andrew,
>
> >--"purist_andrew" <purist_andrew@> wrote:
> >
> > Do you disagree?
> >
> >
> >  Regards and progress in the Dhamma,
> >
> > Andrew  L.
>
> Due to absence of Bodhisatta path, vows,  and 10  Parami teaching
in
> the earlier Suttas - I do not have reason to  believe that it is
the
> teaching of Historical Buddha Gotama. I am  willing to consider the
> evidence to the contrary, but please no  appeal to later traditions
> like (theravada or mahayana).

So we  are largely in agreement that the Bodhisattva path of Mahayana
is not a  teaching of our Buddha, and that even Theravada does not
give us an  opportunity to seek that path either.

This kind of sucks,  because it's desirable to free many beings and
attain an even higher level  of realization than arhats, namely full
Buddhahood and  omniscience.
--------------------------------------------------------
Howard:
     A buddha is not a savior. He is one who  reintroduces the Dhamma in a
realm in which it is unknown. At this time, the  Dhamma IS known, and we should
do our best to maintain that for as long as  possible, continue with our own
practice, and be as much service to others  as we can. Ariyans and even Buddhist
worldlings who are knowledgeable  and have made good progress can share the
Dhamma with others.
---------------------------------------------------------



It suggests that the Noble 8fold is the true path that we  have.
----------------------------------------------------------
Howard:
     The Dhamma is our refuge.
-----------------------------------------------------------



>
> Furthermore in the DN14 (Mahaapadana sutta) where  the Buddha has
> mentioned previous Buddhas, none of them had to take  any vows or
> fulfill Paramitas as was popularized later on.
>
> The whole fact that (Gotama in previous lives) was a worldling who
> disliked Buddha (Kassapa) until he has met him and was converted,
> tells me wide & clear when Gotama started the Buddhist path.

That might suggest that he did make a vow, namely when he met Buddha
Dipankara.  Maybe he was impressed by his presence, as the five
ascetics Buddha Gotama trained with were when he approached them
after  his enlightenment.

What do the scriptures say about the Buddha's  meeting with
Dipankara?  Do they say he made an aspiration in his  presence and
that the former Buddha predicted it would succeed?  If  so, would you
consider that to be essentially the same as making a vow at  the foot
of another Buddha?

I still hold out my hope expressed in  post #89562 that we can meet
Buddhas in the future and thereby be enabled  to follow the
Bodhisatta path to full Buddahood.  We read that  Sariputta and
others had met previous Buddhas and made the wish to become  a future
Buddha's chief disciple.
----------------------------------------------
Howard:
     All that we can do is "do the right thing" and  then let conditions take
care of conditions. All the hoping in the world is  to no avail.
----------------------------------------------



If you don't believe Buddha Gotama made a vow at the foot of a
Buddha, who predicted it would succeed, how do you think Buddha
Gotama, or anyone else, would be able to begin the endeavor to
Buddhahood with a reasonable degree of certainty of  success?


> Best wishes,
>
>
>  Alex
>

Good discussing Dhamma with you.

Regards,
Andrew  L.

================================
With metta,
Howard



#89572	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:39 pm 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Dear Andrew,

>--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "purist_andrew"
><purist_andrew@...> wrote:
>
> Alex,

> So we are largely in agreement that the Bodhisattva path of
>Mahayana is not a teaching of our Buddha, and that even Theravada
>does not  give us an opportunity to seek that path either.
>
> This kind of sucks, because it's desirable to free many beings and
> attain an even higher level of realization than arhats, namely full
> Buddhahood and omniscience.

Even the Buddha couldn't save all, so please keep that in mind.


> It suggests that the Noble 8fold is the true path that we have.
Yes.


> >
> > Furthermore in the DN14 (Mahaapadana sutta) where the Buddha has
> > mentioned previous Buddhas, none of them had to take any vows or
> > fulfill Paramitas as was popularized later on.
> >
> > The whole fact that (Gotama in previous lives) was a worldling
>who
> > disliked Buddha (Kassapa) until he has met him and was converted,
> > tells me wide & clear when Gotama started the Buddhist path.
>
> That might suggest that he did make a vow, namely when he met
>Buddha  Dipankara.

Is Buddha Dipankara found in the 4 main Nikayas? No.
Same with vows.


It is my belief that a Buddhist would *NOT* insult a living Buddha
three times in a row. It is my belief that a Buddhist would *not* be
have to be forced to see a living Buddha. You can disagree of course,
but that is what I believe. So I doubt that the Gotama-Buddha to be,
was a Bodhisatta in a Mahayana (or later Theravada) way.


>
> What do the scriptures say about the Buddha's meeting with
> Dipankara?

Nothing!

The earliest Buddha is  Vipassi (DN14) if I remember correctly.


> I still hold out my hope expressed in post #89562 that we can meet
> Buddhas in the future and thereby be enabled to follow the
> Bodhisatta path to full Buddahood.  We read that Sariputta and
> others had met previous Buddhas and made the wish to become a
>future  Buddha's chief disciple.

Based on scriptures I do NOT believe that Ven., Sariputta &
MahaMoggallana  were Buddhists prior to meeting Ajita.

I cannot believe how could someone with all these paramitas get stuck
with Sanjaya Bellaputtha. After all, isn't a sign of an Buddhist
ariyan that s/he doesn't follow others teachings? Furthermore, why
didn't the Buddha try to teach Ven. Sariputta & MahaMoggallana first?



> If you don't believe Buddha Gotama made a vow at the foot of a
> Buddha, who predicted it would succeed, how do you think Buddha
> Gotama, or anyone else, would be able to begin the endeavor to
> Buddhahood with a reasonable degree of certainty of success?

N8P. Become a stream enterer whose last life is on Earth when there
isn't Buddha Sassana present.

Also develop Brahmaviharas (especially compassion part).


>
> Good discussing Dhamma with you.
>
> Regards,
> Andrew L.
>

You too.





  Best wishes,


  Alex


#89573	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:51 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 
 		Dear Nina,

Thank you very much for your further elaboration, which is very useful for me. I
will respond below only those points which need further clarification.

> > Han: I said pa~n~naa will arise at the “appropriate� stage. I agree with
you that from the beginning sati and pa~n~naa can arise together. But it is also
possible that at the beginning sati may not be accompanied by pa~n~naa. You
said, “satipa.t.thaana does not arise alone.�

> Nina: Yes, as you say, it is possible that sati arises without pa~n~naa. But
when we speak about satipatthaana, which is mental development, bhaavanaa, then
pa~n~naa, even weak pa~n~naa must accompany the kusala citta. Suppose there is
just sati, but then the question is: awareness of what?

Han: Awareness of what?
Please look at the following excerpt from Satipa.t.thaana sutta:
[Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing out
long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he
understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he understands:
“I breathe out short.’]

Now, one can be aware of the long breath and the short breath with pa~n~naa. Or
another person can be aware of the long breath and short breath without
pa~n~naa. The latter happens to me quite often. When my concentration is weak I
am just aware of the physical feeling of the breath brushing over the tip of the
nostril without knowing the characteristics of naama and ruupa – the
‘realities’ as you might say.
If you say this kind of awareness is not sati, then I have no other explanation.

------------------------------

> > H: Here is the disagreement between you and me. I would say that “sati
does not arise alone� because I consider ‘satipa.t.thaana’ as a
‘process’ and not as a ‘product’ of a process. Here again, I consider
you are more learned than me. So I won’t press my point.

> Nina: A process: not bad, it is a development, takes a long. long time.
Product of a process, this expression may not be so clear, seems like an end
result. But that is far away. Perhaps you mean something else, but it seems a
question of chosing the best words to clarify something, which is not an easy
task.

Han: When I say ‘product’ it can mean immediate, or intermediate or end
result. Not necessarily the end result all the time.
You often use the word “sati sampaja~n~na.� If during the ‘process’ of
satipa.t.thaana, sati and sampaja~n~na arise that is the result or the
‘product.’ That was what I meant. If you have better word to describe it
instead of ‘product’, I will be happy to accept it.

Respectfully,
Han


#89574	From: mlnease <mlnease@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:59 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	m_nease 
 
 		Hi Han (and Nina),

I'm glad to see you posting and hope you'll feel better soon.  Do you
mind if I interject a question?

han tun wrote:

> Han: Awareness of what?
> Please look at the following excerpt from Satipa.t.thaana sutta:
> [Breathing in long, he understands: ‘I breathe in long’; or breathing
> out long, he understands: ‘I breathe out long.’ Breathing in short, he
> understands: ‘I breathe in short’; or breathing out short, he
> understands: “I breathe out short.’]
>
> Now, one can be aware of the long breath and the short breath with
> pa~n~naa. Or another person can be aware of the long breath and short
> breath without pa~n~naa. The latter happens to me quite often. When my
> concentration is weak I am just aware of the physical feeling of the
> breath brushing over the tip of the nostril without knowing the
> characteristics of naama and ruupa – the ‘realities’ as you might say.
> If you say this kind of awareness is not sati, then I have no other
> explanation.

Do you see 'the long breath' and/or 'the short breath' as dhamma or as
pa.n.natti?

Thanks for your patience and please just ignore the question if it's too
much trouble.

mike


#89575	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:09 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Hello Howard, Andrew and all,


> Hi, Andrew (and Alex) -
> --------------------------------------------------------
> Howard:
>A buddha is not a savior. He is one who  reintroduces the Dhamma in
>a realm in which it is unknown. At this time, the  Dhamma IS known,
>and we should do our best to maintain that for as long as  possible,
>continue with our own practice, and be as much service to others  as
>we can. Ariyans and even Buddhist worldlings who are knowledgeable
>and have made good progress can share the
> Dhamma with others.
> ---------------------------------------------------------


Very well said Howard!



Best wishes,

Alex


#89576	From: "Alex" <truth_aerator@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:19 pm 
Subject: Addition, my view on Final Nibbana 	truth_aerator 
 
 		Final Nibbana is cessation of 5 Aggregates.

Thus it is not some "thing" that can be "described".

Any imagination, criterion, is based on 5 khandas. Any speculation
regarding what Nibbana *is*  is wrong - work of sa~n~na and such.
Speculation is the work dependent on 5 Khandas.

The closest (but imperfect) parallel is Nirodha-Samapatti (cessation of
perception & feelings), except that the rupa is present and the
attainment is temporary.  After all, it is no surprise that Arhatship
may follow after one emerges from this attainment and examines (in
retrospect) with wisdom (mn111, mn25 and many other suttas).
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.034.than.html


Any allusion to Nibbana being a 'dhamma', 'dhatu' and so on, has to be
metaphoric at best.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.174.than.html


Best wishes,


Alex


#89577	From: Jean-François <jfdh@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:43 pm 
Subject: Re: Hi! 	jeanfrancoisdbe 
 
 		Sarah wrote :

> Dear Jean-Francois,
>
>It's very nice to see you back after a long time-gap. I just traced back
your earlier intro here:
>(…)



Great, Sarah!



I didn’t remember it was such a long time ago…



#89578	From: Jean-Fran�ois <jfdh@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:48 pm 
Subject: Re: Self Defence and precepts 	jeanfrancoisdbe 
 
 		>Here is a question:
>
>Lets say someone a person loves is brutally attacked. What should that
>person do?
>
>If a person is attacked, what should he do?
>
>You may say about precept "not to harm/kill", but by doing nothing,
>what in effect a person may be doing is allowing harm being done to the
>victim! So the one who abstains is the one allowing harming/killing to
>happen.
>
>Best wishes,
>
>Alex
>===================================
>My opinion:
>Try to do what will serve to protect the innocent one, and no more than
>that, but DO act if possible. One's action, as I see it, should optimally
be
>motivated by love, not anger, and one's intent should be to save the
innocent
>victim with as little harm to the aggressor as possible. But there is no
>virtue, as I see it, in capitulating to evil and sacrificing a victim on
the
>altar of rigid, pacifist "morality". Ajahn Chah was once asked what he
would do
>if physically attacked, and he replied, pointing at his umbrella, that he
>would lovingly hit his attacker with it! ;-) The Buddha once encountered an

>angry elephant on the road heading right towards him. Being a buddha, he
needed
>only to use his mental powers, causing the elephant to bow to him rather
than
>attack him, but act - the Buddha DID.
>
>With metta,
>Howard



Since we live in ar relative reality, I would answer something similar.


#89579	From: "S.Ganesh" <behappy.metta@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 9:59 am 
Subject: Dedication Of Merits To Our Departed Next - of - Kin 	behappy.metta 
 
 		Dedication of Merits to our Departed Next-of-Kin
Exemlified by the Tirokudda Sutta, Khuddaka Nikaya



                                                                        by


                                                     Ven Dr. Indaratana
Thera




INTRODUCTION

Petas are beings from one of the three Woeful States the other two being
Niraya (Hell) and Tiracchanayoni ( Realm of Animals 1 ). The Petayoni is
less woeful than the Niraya but more woeful than the Tiracchanayoni.

The word peta is not synonymous with hungry ghost . The word hungry
ghost lacks formal documentation, whereas the word peta was documented
by The Buddha as one type of beings from one the 31 planes of existence
in the universe.

Stories about petas were connected with real life situations during the
lifetime of The Buddha. On some occasions The Buddha directly explained
the cause for attaining the existence of a peta having encountered them
himself ; while the other occasions were reported to The Buddha by his
bhikkhus and people who had come across petas. Please refer to the
Petavatthu in order to see what evil actions that bring about birth as
petas.

A good portion of the stories of petas have been grouped into the fifth
Nikaya, the Khuddaka Nikaya, under Petavatthu, or the Stories of Petas.
For more details please refer to the Paramatthadipani nama
petavatthu-atthakatha, of the Pali Text Society, London.

Hungry Ghosts  ?

As told in the Petavatthu, some petas are incessantly hungry because
their mouths are as small as a needle point ; however, they do not die
of hunger as their unwholesome kamma ripens in a peculiar way to make
them suffer immensely from an insatiable hunger. This type of petas is
perhaps the go-kui referred to in Chinese beliefs. Not all petas suffer
in this manner. Some petas can be released from their suffering by
receiving the merits dedicated to them by the next-of-kin who are
living.

While some 'lucky' petas have next-of-kin (who believe in the Triple
Gem) to depend on for their end of their woe, the 'not-so-fortunate'
petas have to wait for an almost impossible chance for someone to help
them. [ A peta who gains rebirth in a happy realm, the human realm or a
celestial realm is only a temporary state of affairs just like any being
has to go through in Samsara.

Upon cessation of life in any realm, beings take rebirth in another
realm depending on their kamma.] As the Sangha with the Tathagata as its
head is the unsurpassable field of merit (in all the worlds), the
performance of alms-giving to The Buddha and the Ariya Sangha is the
most efficacious for the transference of such merits to the petas for
their release from suffering.

Nowadays, alms-giving to the Sangha represented by four Higher Ordained
Bhikkhus is the way to reap the merits to be passed to the departed
next-of-kin who have been reborn as petas. Petas who are 'desperate' for
merits will usually approach their next-of-kin who are still living in
the human realm (though the minority may approach strangers ; such
'strangers' now could have been their relatives in the incalculable
past) ; making eerie noises, appearing in their dreams during sleep and
even cause themselves to be visible to them.

Thus, these class of Departed Relative Petas (nati) ; and they can
recognize their living next-of-kin, their former abodes, and the past
deeds which caused them to be such. All petas know by what evil deed
they had carried out immediately before their current life that caused
their woe and they can even give a lesson or two to humans.

Take for example the story of a group of traders from Savatthi who had
done their business at Uttarapatha and were returning to their city ;
they camped a night at a place where a hideous peta was around. The peta
revealed himself to the traders. When asked who he was, the peta related
by what specific deeds he had done that made him thus.

The peta said that if the traders performed an alms-giving to the Buddha
and dedicated the merit to him, he would be released from the wretched
condition (else he would have to wait until the evil kamma wears off ).
The traders observed precepts and gave alms to The Buddha and the
Sangha. Later The Buddha taught Dhamma connected with the Law of Kamma.
The audience abandoned thoughts of evil and took delight in meritorious
deeds (Dhanapala Peta Story)

<....>


#89580	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:16 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 
 		Dear Mike (and Nina),

> Mike: I'm glad to see you posting and hope you'll feel better soon.
Do you mind if I interject a question?
Do you see 'the long breath' and/or 'the short breath' as dhamma or as
pa.n.natti?
Thanks for your patience and please just ignore the question if it's too much
trouble.
mike

--------------------

Han: Thank you very much for your kind concern.
My health situation is the same; not better, not worse.

Thank you also for your interjection.
The answer to your question is:
'the long breath' and 'the short breath' are pa~n~natti.
The paramattha would be vaayo dhaatu (of breath) and pathavii dhaatu (of
nostril) etc.

metta,
Han


#89581	From: mlnease <mlnease@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:23 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	m_nease 
 
 		Hi Han,

han tun wrote:

> Han: Thank you very much for your kind concern.
> My health situation is the same; not better, not worse.
>
> Thank you also for your interjection.
> The answer to your question is:
> 'the long breath' and 'the short breath' are pa~n~natti.
> The paramattha would be vaayo dhaatu (of breath) and pathavii dhaatu (of
> nostril) etc.

Thanks for this.  So, does this mean that mindfulness of the pa~n~naati
of breath will result in insight into the dhaatus of vaaya and pathavii?
   Again, please feel free to discontinue our discussion if it's too much
trouble.

mike


#89582	From: "kenhowardau" <kenhowardau@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:34 pm 
Subject: Re: Feasibility of Mahayana Bodhisattvaship (long) 	kenhowardau 
 
 		Hi Andrew L,

I think I have the answer to your question:

-------
AL: > Does anyone know how we can assure that in future lives we
> find the spiritual path and not get lost?
--------

What is needed is a moment of right understanding now. The right
understanding that there are only dhammas now - at this very moment -
will be a condition for the same, unique, liberating, right
understanding to arise again in future moments - in this lifetime and
in others.

Ken H


#89583	From: "Phil" <philco777@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:37 pm 
Subject: Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no 	philofillet 
 
 		Hi Scott and all

> Scott: Well, no.  Sammaa-di.t.thi (pa~n~naa) is the first, not the
> last.  Sammaa-vaayaama, sammaa-sati, and sammaa-samaadhi cannot be
> 'right' without sammaa-di.t.thi.

   Scott, you help me with Pali quite often. What is the pali term
for the "right view" that is knowing there is a result to deeds etc?
When I am away from Dhamma discussion surrounded by people that have
no interest in Dhamma I become aware of a kind of wrong view
cropping up in my mind that says "this Dhamma stuff is all a
crock...life is short, party on" sort of thing. For me, it is this
kind of wrong view that is most dangerous and the related kind of
right view that must come first. And when one looks up "wrong views"
in the index of a sutta anthology, it is this kind of wrong view
that is almost inevitably catalogued. (i.e the Buddha stressed it.)
So can't the samm-di.t.thi above be this basic kind of right view
rather than the penetrative getting-rid-of-sakkaya-ditthi right view
that is stressed in deeper teachings? I think the pali term
is "kammasomething" for this basic wrong view?

   Thanks.

   metta,

   phil


#89584	From: mlnease <mlnease@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 4:44 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no 	m_nease 
 
 		Hi Phil,

Phil wrote:

> Hi Scott and all
>
>>  Scott: Well, no. Sammaa-di.t.thi (pa~n~naa) is the first, not the
>>  last. Sammaa-vaayaama, sammaa-sati, and sammaa-samaadhi cannot be
>>  'right' without sammaa-di.t.thi.
>
> Scott, you help me with Pali quite often. What is the pali term
> for the "right view" that is knowing there is a result to deeds etc?
> When I am away from Dhamma discussion surrounded by people that have
> no interest in Dhamma I become aware of a kind of wrong view
> cropping up in my mind that says "this Dhamma stuff is all a
> crock...life is short, party on" sort of thing. For me, it is this
> kind of wrong view that is most dangerous and the related kind of
> right view that must come first. And when one looks up "wrong views"
> in the index of a sutta anthology, it is this kind of wrong view
> that is almost inevitably catalogued. (i.e the Buddha stressed it.)
> So can't the samm-di.t.thi above be this basic kind of right view
> rather than the penetrative getting-rid-of-sakkaya-ditthi right view
> that is stressed in deeper teachings? I think the pali term
> is "kammasomething" for this basic wrong view?

Since you included 'all' in your address:

5. “And what is wrong view? ‘There is nothing given, nothing offered,
nothing sacrificed; no fruit or result of good and bad actions; no this
world or other world; no mother or father; no beings who are reborn
spontaneously; no good and virtuous individuals in the world who have
realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world and
the other world.’ This is wrong view.

6. “And what is right view? Right view, I say, is twofold: there is
right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in
the acquisitions; and there is right view that is noble, taintless,
supramundane, a factor of the path.

7. “And what is right view that is affected by the taints, partaking of
merit, ripening in the acquisitions? ‘There is what is given and what is
offered and what is sacrificed; there is benefit and result of good and
bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is mother
and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there are in
the world good and virtuous individuals who have realised for themselves
by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.’ This is
right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the
acquisitions.

8. “And what is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a
factor of the path? The wisdom, the faculty of wisdom, the power of
wisdom, the investigation-of-states enlightenment factor, the path
factor of right view in one whose mind is noble, whose mind is
taintless, who possesses the noble path and is developing the noble
path: this is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a
factor of the path.

This is from the Great Forty (sorry I don't have the translator etc.
off-hand).  Does it answer your question?

mike


#89585	From: han tun <hantun1@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:14 pm 
Subject: Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	hantun1 
 
 		Dear Mike,

> Mike: Thanks for this. So, does this mean that mindfulness of the pa~n~naati
of breath will result in insight into the dhaatus of vaaya and pathavii? Again,
please feel free to discontinue our discussion if it's too much trouble.

Han: The mindfulness of pa~n~natti, be it in-out breaths or other objects, will
not lead to insight. Only the contemplation of paramattha, namely, naama and
ruupa, as they appear at the present moment, may lead to insight.

I know you know all these.
What I do not know is why you ask these questions.

metta,
Han


#89586	From: "Scott" <scduncan@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:17 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no Ken H ... 	scottduncan2 
 
 		Dear Howard,

I disagree, Howard, so please feel free to break-off the discussion at
any time.  Also, any of the 'orthodox' members of the list can feel
free to correct me here - a good learning opportunity:

Howard: "The list is not necessarily in order of  acquisition. As for
liberating wisdom, it is indeed the very last to be acquired. And,
also, do you not consider the three characteristics, dependent
origination, and the four noble truths to fall under right view? (BTW,
I listed  these first, because of their extreme importance.)"

Scott:  Its all important, really.  If, by 'liberating wisdom', you
refer to the arising of the Path for the arahat, then this would be
the very last.  The Path also arises at three other preliminary
levels.  This would suggest that the development of pa~n~naa is
incremental.  I think that the Path, when it arises, consists of all
eight of the path factors at once.

I consider 'right view' to be a function of pa~n~naa.  There is lokiya
and lokuttara pa~n~naa and, as far as I understand, mundane pa~n~naa
develops until it becomes capable of penetrating dhammas at 'path
strength'.  I think that mundane pa~n~naa knows the dhammas for their
own characteristics (sabhaava) and lokuttara pa~n~naa knows dhammas
for one of ti-lakkha.na.  I'd like to be corrected if this summary is
inaccurate.

Anicca, dukkha, and anatta are characteristics of all sa"nkhata
dhammas and I understand that it is one of these characteristics that
is penetrated by pa~n~naa at the arising of the Path.  Do these
characteristics 'fall under right view'?  Do they not become known by
pa~n~naa?  Wouldn't 'right view' be the knowing one or the other of
these characteristics?  Same with D.O. or 4NT.  These are known by
pa~n~naa.  Right view is pa~n~naa.

Howard: "There needs to be a bare modicum of 'wisdom', namely knowing
that things are not as they should be, to get started. If there is
that much, one is fortunate. One more thing - information and wisdom
are not the same."

Scott: I equate wisdom with pa~n~naa - an impermanent dhamma with
sabhaava.  Wisdom is not thinking either.  This way of referring to
'wisdom' is not pa~n~naa, as I understand it.  This is a conventional
notion about 'wisdom'.  'Wisdom' isn't something that persists, like
pa~n~natti, but arises and falls away.  Accumulation is not persistence.

To think, 'Things are not as they should be', is not pa~n~naa.  This
is a thought, a conceptual idea.  Pa~n~natti are door-freed, as I
understand, and not relevant.  Here the view seems to be labeling a
collection of unified thoughts ('Things are not as they should be') -
a concept - and suggesting that this is 'wisdom'.

This is where we always differ.  The 'wise man' is not a person who
thinks this and so, but it is pa~n~naa which knows.

Sincerely,

Scott.


#89587	From: mlnease <mlnease@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 6:46 pm 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 2 	m_nease 
 
 		Hi Han,

han tun wrote:

> Dear Mike,
>
>>  Mike: Thanks for this. So, does this mean that mindfulness of the
> pa~n~naati of breath will result in insight into the dhaatus of vaaya
> and pathavii? Again, please feel free to discontinue our discussion if
> it's too much trouble.
>
> Han: The mindfulness of pa~n~natti, be it in-out breaths or other
> objects, will not lead to insight. Only the contemplation of paramattha,
> namely, naama and ruupa, as they appear at the present moment, may lead
> to insight.
>
> I know you know all these.
> What I do not know is why you ask these questions.

Just trying to understand.  Never mind, sorry to have bothered you.

mike


#89588	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:39 pm 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... 	dhammanusarin 
 
 		Dear Alex, -

I have a feeling that discussion of Nibbana is more difficult than
anatta and any other Teachings. So if you are in no hurrry and see no
reason to wrap it up fast, perhaps we can discuss this difficult
topic a few more times. I am no expert, by the way.

Today let's define Nibbana using a few suttas that I can find for now.

One definition of Nibbana is "extinction". Yet, there are several
kinds of extinction. Extinction here and now; final extinction;
extinction by that factor; extinction in this very life.

See Anguttara Nikaya 005. Samannavaggo. The general section.

http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-
Nikaya/Anguttara6/09-navakanipata/005-samannavaggo-e.html

T: Nibbana is also referred to as a property(dhatu) and "dimension".

"There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor
fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor
dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of
nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception;
neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there,
I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither
passing away nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support
(mental object). This, just this, is the end of stress." [Ud 8.1]

"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all
fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of
craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." [AN 3.32]

=============================================

I think it is a good idea to go slowly,
when we do not see the way clearly.


Tep
===


#89589	From: LBIDD@... 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 8:56 pm 
Subject: Vism.XVII,296 297 	lbidd2 
 
 		"The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII

296. (c) 'There are five causes now as well' means craving, and so on.
Craving, clinging and becoming are given in the text. But when becoming
is included, the formations that precede it or that are associated with
it are included too. So they are five. Hence it is said: 'Here [in the
present becoming], with the maturing of the bases there is delusion,
which is ignorance; there is accumulation, which is 'formations'; there
is attachment, which is craving; there is embracing, which is
'clinging'; there is volition, which is 'becoming'; thus these five
things here in the [present] kamma-process becoming are conditions for
rebirth-linking in the future' (Ps.i,52).

Herein, the words 'Here [in the present becoming], with the maturing of
the bases' point out that delusion existing at the time of the
performance of the kamma in one whose bases have matured. The rest is
clear.

297. (d) 'And in the future fivefold fruit': the five beginning with
consciousness. These are expressed by the term 'birth'. But
'ageing-and-death' is the ageing and the death of these [five]
themselves. Hence it is said: 'In the future there is rebirth-linking,
which is 'consciousness'; there is descent [into the womb], which is
'mentality-materiality'; there is sensitivity, which is 'sense base';
there is what is touched, which is 'contact'; there is what is felt,
which is 'feeling'; thus these five things in the future rebirth-process
becoming have their condition in kamma done here [in the present
becoming]' (Ps.i,52].

So this [Wheel of Becoming] has twenty spokes with these qualities.
**********************
296. idaani hetavo pa~ncaati ta.nhaadayo paa.liya.m aagataa
ta.nhupaadaanabhavaa. bhave pana gahite tassa pubbabhaagaa
ta.msampayuttaa vaa sa"nkhaaraa gahitaava honti.
ta.nhupaadaanaggaha.nena ca ta.msampayuttaa, yaaya vaa muu.lho kamma.m
karoti, saa avijjaa gahitaava hotiiti. eva.m pa~nca. tenaaha ``idha
paripakkattaa aayatanaana.m moho avijjaa, aayuuhanaa sa"nkhaaraa,
nikanti
ta.nhaa, upagamana.m upaadaana.m, cetanaa bhavoti ime pa~nca dhammaa
idha kammabhavasmi.m aayati.m pa.tisandhiyaa paccayaa''ti (pa.ti0 ma0
1.47).

tattha idha paripakkattaa aayatanaananti paripakkaayatanassa
kammakara.nakaale sammoho dassito. sesa.m uttaanatthameva.
 
297. aayati.m phalapa~ncakanti vi~n~naa.naadiini pa~nca. taani
jaatiggaha.nena vuttaani. jaraamara.na.m pana tesa.myeva jaraamara.na.m.
tenaaha ``aayati.m pa.tisandhi vi~n~naa.na.m , okkanti naamaruupa.m,
pasaado aayatana.m, phu.t.tho phasso, vedayita.m vedanaa, ime pa~nca
dhammaa aayati.m upapattibhavasmi.m idha katassa kammassa paccayaa''ti
(pa.ti0 ma0 1.47).

evamida.m viisati aakaaraara.m hoti.


#89590	From: "Tep" <indriyabala@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 10:58 pm 
Subject: Re: The Big Difference between 'No Self' and 'No Individuals' 	dhammanusarin 
 
 		Dear KenH, -

Thank you for the willingness to listen a little more.

>KH: I think we are making some headway.
T: Yes, listening conditions a headway; listening is possible only
after a positive thinking. But please do not be too optimistic;
communication may fail again anytime.
...............................................
> > T:  Whenever seeing occurs, "the eye" (eye-consciousness) just
sees while the mind is comprehending the three characteristics and
letting go of seeing (not grasping it with upadana). This mindful,
equanimous mind-state is free from 'dukkha samudaya' here and now.

>KH: So, according to this theory, vipassana is simply a relaxed
state of mind: it is not a matter of seeing the world *as it truly
is.* For example, the circumstances you describe above never truly
exist (in absolute reality), do they? According to the Abhidhamma eye-
consciousness and comprehending-consciousness never occur together.
But I think you are saying that is not important; only a relaxed
state of mind is important.

T: Before the mind can "relax", first it has to be calm and non-
distracted (samadhi) by what is seen, i.e. concentrated mind.
That "seeing the world *as it truly is* " is conditioned by
concentration. [Upanisa Sutta]
That concentration is important. That insight knowledge is important.
Please be assured that there is no Tep's fabricated "theory"; it is
just his understanding of the quoted sutta. Maybe you can have a
little more positive thinking if you read the sutta yourself and then
please tell me what you understand, so that we can be on the same
footing.
.............................................
> > T:  The two points I have made are:
(1) there is a self in the colloquial sense, but no reliable-and-
lasting self;
(2) whenever there is no grasping (upadana) in the khandhas, then the
khandhas are seen as 'not self' (anatta). The self is there whenever
there is upadana in the khandhas; that's why a self-view is a wrong
view.

>KH:  Please explain point 1. How is it different from the anatta
interpretation that I and other DSG members have putting to you all
these years, and that you have strongly rejected? We have been saying
that people, cars, mountains etc, were concepts (pannatti) and did
not exist in ultimate reality (paramattha dhammas). Is that the same
as point 1?

In point 2 you seem to be saying that non-grasping was the way
taught by the Buddha. (I have always believed the Buddha taught a way
of right understanding.)

T: I appreciate the clarification. In Point 1 the big difference is
seen in the absence of emphasis on "ultimate realities"
and "concepts". In Point 2 I am saying that not-grasping of the
khandhas is the dhamma taught by the Buddha with the purpose of
letting go of self views and conceit. Now, about "right
understanding", which is one of the most-confusing terms used by DSG
Abhidhammikas, I believe the Buddha meant right knowledge
or "samma~na~naa" which is the 9th magga factor in the Arahant path
[See MN 117].

>KH: However, you avoid the question of ultimate existence and non-
existence. So let me ask you: is there, in ultimate reality, a self
or is there not?

T: Non-existence (Self does not exist) and Existence(Self exists) are
two extreme views that the Buddha taught his disciples to avoid [SN
44.10]. That's why I have "avoided" them. Your question on self
existence in ultimate realities, which is a bad question, shows your
confusion. Why do I think so? It is because ultimate reality is
defined by the four dhammas while self is the concept that "is there
whenever
there is upadana in the khandhas" -- i.e. self is sankhara that is
conditioned by upadana in the khandhas. Therefore, how can there be a
self "in ultimate reality"?
..................................

>KH: I think Ven Thanissaro takes the view that, if there was no
self, there would be no kamma (no actions), and if there were no self
to receive the results of actions there would be no vipakka.

T: I have explained before that Ajaan Thanissaro meant the self in
colloquial sense, not the permanent/lasting self that travels from
one life to another, accumulating kammas.

>KH: I think he also says if there were no self there would be
enjoyment nibbana, so there would be no reason to practise vipassana.
Therefore, he claims, the Buddha did not teach no-self, he simply
taught a not-self strategy. Is that the way you see it?

T: This concept of Nibbana is more difficult to understand, Ken. In
his Nibbana article he implies  that it is wrong to compare mind with
the fire that is gone when the flame dies down.

TB : "We all know what happens when a fire goes out. The flames die
down and the fire is gone for good. So when we first learn that the
name for the goal of Buddhist practice, nibbana (nirvana), literally
means the extinguishing of a fire, it's hard to imagine a deadlier
image for a spiritual goal: utter annihilation. ... ...So the next
time you watch a fire going out, see it not as a case of
annihilation, but as a lesson in how freedom is to be found in
letting go."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/nibbana.html

T: I agree with him that mind(consciousness) "extinguishes" at
nibbana so there will be no more birth. But I do not see anything
wrong with the final annihilation of nama and rupa at Nibbana. That
disagreement is perhaps my own ignorance.

Concerning your accusations that he says "there would be no reason to
practise vipassana" and that his "not-self strategy" is not in-line
with the Buddha's Teaching of anatta, I think you have gone too far.
Several Dhamma talks that he gave at Wat Metta were about vipassana
(read then at the ATI archive); vipassana on the anatta principle is
indeed what he calls a "strategy" for letting go of upadanakkhandha.
It is just a different wording, not a different idea from the
Buddha's.

Think more positively, please.

Tep
===


#89591	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:36 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hi! 	nilovg 
 
 		Dear Jean-François,

Op 29-aug-2008, om 22:43 heeft Jean-François het volgende geschreven:

> Sarah wrote :
>
> >It's very nice to see you back after a long time-gap. I just
> traced back
> your earlier intro here:
> >(…)
>
> Great, Sarah!
>
> I didn’t remember it was such a long time ago…
-------
N: I had to laugh, because now I remember. you said to me that maybe
we could meditate together, and I did not quite know what to answer.
You know, the word meditation is interpreted differently by different
people, and you were interested in Zazen.
I tell you what happened to me. More than fortytwo years ago (I am
now eighty, how time flies) I met Khun Sujin and I was interested in
meditation in daily life. I had a busy life, diplomatic service, lots
of parties. She then explained to me that vipassana can be developed
in daily life. She also encouraged me to read all suttas, and so I
begun to read the "Middle Length Sayings" and then the other Nikayas.
She also pointed out that it is important to read Commentaries and
subcommentaries. I still hear her saying this in my thoughts. Some
people have misunderstandings when they hear her say: you do not have
to think of such or such texts. No, this is a warning: do not get
stuck with texts only, the purpose of all these texts is
understanding the present moment. You indicated that you are
interested in the present moment.
We may become so engrossed in text study that we forget the real
purpose: understand the physical phenomenon or mental phenomenon that
presents itself now through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense or
mind. Texts are important, they are a foundation, and also they can
constantly remind us of our goal in life: developing more
understanding so that wrong view of self and eventually all
defilements can be eradicated. Just now we are clinging to "me, me, me."
By the way, if you are interested in my book Abhidhamma in Daily Life
in French, here is a link: <s.billard@...>. Sebastien Billard
started to translate and he has a website, but I did not hear from
him for a long time.

Nina.



#89592	From: "Phil" <philco777@...> 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 12:51 am 
Subject: [dsg] Pali term for wrong view about kamma etc? ( was Re: Warnings .... No Sarah, no 	philofillet 
 
 		Hi Mike

> Since you included 'all' in your address:
>
> 5. "And what is wrong view? `There is nothing given, nothing
offered,
> nothing sacrificed; no fruit or result of good and bad actions; no
this
> world or other world; no mother or father; no beings who are reborn
> spontaneously; no good and virtuous individuals in the world who
have
> realised for themselves by direct knowledge and declare this world
and
> the other world.?EThis is wrong view.
>
> 6. "And what is right view? Right view, I say, is twofold: there is
> right view that is affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening
in
> the acquisitions; and there is right view that is noble, taintless,
> supramundane, a factor of the path.
>
> 7. "And what is right view that is affected by the taints,
partaking of
> merit, ripening in the acquisitions? `There is what is given and
what is
> offered and what is sacrificed; there is benefit and result of good
and
> bad actions; there is this world and the other world; there is
mother
> and father; there are beings who are reborn spontaneously; there
are in
> the world good and virtuous individuals who have realised for
themselves
> by direct knowledge and declare this world and the other world.?E
This is
> right view affected by taints, partaking of merit, ripening in the
> acquisitions.
>
> 8. "And what is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane,
a
> factor of the path? The wisdom, the faculty of wisdom, the power of
> wisdom, the investigation-of-states enlightenment factor, the path
> factor of right view in one whose mind is noble, whose mind is
> taintless, who possesses the noble path and is developing the noble
> path: this is right view that is noble, taintless, supramundane, a
> factor of the path.
>
> This is from the Great Forty (sorry I don't have the translator
etc.
> off-hand).  Does it answer your question?


   Thanks. I'd also like the Pali for number 5 above for the sake of
making future discussions more to the point. I think it's
kammasomethingditthi maybe...

   Metta,

   Phil


#89593	From: Nina van Gorkom <vangorko@...> 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 2:37 am 
Subject: Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 3 	nilovg 
 
 		Dear friends,

At the sessions, people were still wondering what could be done in
order not to sit in idleness and wait for the arising of paññå.
There is no self who is “not doing anything”. Each citta which arises
performs a function. Even when one thinks that one is not doing
anything sati can arise and be mindful of thinking as not self. When
there is right understanding of the object of mindfulness, there
cannot be laziness. When there are conditions for sati, it arises
before there is any intention to be aware. If one has the intention
to be aware one is bound to have attachment.
We may find it very difficult to be mindful. What should we do during
all those moments when there is no mindfulness of nåma and rúpa? Is
there then not likely to be a great deal of akusala?
The Buddha taught us many different kinds of kusala. Sometimes we
have an opportunity for dåna, sometimes for síla, and sometimes for
calm, for example, when we think of the Buddha’s virtues or when we
develop mettå. Sometimes mindfulness of nåma and rúpa may arise. We
cannot “switch” the citta from this kind of kusala to that kind of
kusala. It depends on conditions which kind of kusala arises at a
particular moment. Knowing about the different ways of kusala and
seeing the value of them prevents us from laziness.
As we have seen, intellectual understanding can condition the arising
of sati. That is why we had discussions about realities such as
seeing, visible object, hearing or sound. We still have many
misunderstandings about nåma and rúpa. We talked about hearing and
paying attention to the meaning of words we hear. Paying attention to
the meaning of words is not hearing, it is thinking of concepts. We
remember concepts. Remembrance, saññå, is a mental factor which
arises with each citta. There is remembrance all the time of visible
object, sound and other realities, and also of concepts.
Khun Sujin used the name “Elisabeth” in order to show that many
different cittas are arising and falling away while one says
“Elisabeth”. Each sound of this word arises and falls away
completely: “E-l-i-s-a-b-e-th”. There are different sounds and in
between them many moments of citta arise and fall away. Ignorance may
arise in between, or there may be mindfulness. When we recognize
these different sounds, it is not hearing, but remembrance of
concepts. Memory conditions thinking of different stories of
Elisabeth. Each one of us thinks of the Elisabeth he or she knows. We
think of the appearance of the person we know by that name, her
voice, or the letters she wrote. Thinking conditions different
feelings: pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling or indifferent
feeling. In reality there is no Elisabeth, there is only the concept
of Elisabeth.
This example reminded me that there can be ignorance and wrong view
even in between the sounds of a word we speak. It reminded me that
realities arise and fall away within an extremely short period of
time and that realities have to be studied so that they will be known
as they are. Mindfulness can arise instead of ignorance, even in
between the recognition of different sounds.
*******
Nina.



#89594	From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" <bhikkhu0@...> 
Date: Fri Aug 29, 2008 7:32 pm 
Subject: What is Mental Purity? 	bhikkhu0 
 
 		Friends:

Good for All are The 3 Kinds of Right Mental Purity!

The Blessed Buddha once said:
How, Cunda <http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/c/cunda.htm> , is purity of
mental action threefold?

1: Herein, someone is without avarice, acquisitiveness, & greedy envy.
Whatever another person possesses of goods & property, he does
not long & yearn for it: Oh may I get what that other person has!

2: He is free from ill-will, he harbours no angry thoughts in his mind!
Rather he thinks: Oh, may these beings be free from hate & ill-will,
and may they lead a happy & easy life free from all trouble & harm!

3: He possesses right understanding and this unshakable right view:
Gifts, donations, and offerings are not worthless. There is a fruit
and kammic result of all advantageous & disadvantageous actions!
There is this world, and there is the next world. There are duties
towards father and mother. There are spontaneously reborn beings.
There are in this world recluses and monks of right & perfect living,
who have themselves understood and directly realized both this very
world and the next, and are able to explain them both....
This is the threefold mental purity, Cunda
<http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/c/cunda.htm> !

Source (edited extract):
Numerical Discourses of the Buddha. Anguttara Nikaya AN 10:176
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/Index.Numerical.htm

More on Right View (SammÄ? Ditthi):
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/What_is_Right_View.htm
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Straight_View.htm
and leaving Wrong View:
http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Leaving_Wrong_View.htm



Have a nice day!


  Friendship is the Greatest *
  Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-)
  ....


#89595	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:21 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Warnings .... Is Nibbana not a dhamma? ... 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Tep (and Alex) -

In a message dated 8/29/2008 10:39:36 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
indriyabala@... writes:

Dear  Alex, -

I have a feeling that discussion of Nibbana is more difficult  than
anatta and any other Teachings. So if you are in no hurrry and see no
reason to wrap it up fast, perhaps we can discuss this difficult
topic  a few more times. I am no expert, by the way.

Today let's define  Nibbana using a few suttas that I can find for now.

One definition of  Nibbana is "extinction". Yet, there are several
kinds of extinction.  Extinction here and now; final extinction;
extinction by that factor;  extinction in this very life.
---------------------------------------------
Howard:
     Nibbanic extinction is an event, an occurrence  - the obliteration of
something, namely the obliteration of  the three poisons. The realization of
nibbana, i.e., awakening (or  bodhi), certainly involves extinction, but I
cannot
construe nibbana  itself, whatever it's exact nature, to be an event in time.
-----------------------------------------------



See Anguttara Nikaya 005. Samannavaggo. The general  section.

http://www.metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-
Nikaya/Anguttara6/09-navakanipata/005-samannavaggo-e.html

T:  Nibbana is also referred to as a property(dhatu) and "dimension".

"There is that dimension where there is neither earth, nor water, nor
fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor
dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of
nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception;
neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there,
I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither
passing away nor arising: unestablished, unevolving, without support
(mental object). This, just this, is the end of stress." [Ud  8.1]
----------------------------------------------------

Howard:
     As regards the Udana quote, I conceive of nibbana  as the sole reality: a
seamless, luminous realm that is misperceived, due to  avijja, as our
samsaric world ("the appearance realm of separate things").
-------------------------------------------------------




"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all
fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of
craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana." [AN  3.32]

=============================================

I think it  is a good idea to go slowly,
when we do not see the way  clearly.
------------------------------------------------------
Howard:
     We will never see this matter clearly until  awakening.
-------------------------------------------------------




Tep
=====================================
With metta,
Howard



#89596	From: upasaka@... 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 1:44 am 
Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in Sri Lanka, Ch 8, no 3 	upasaka_howard 
 
 		Hi, Nina -

In a message dated 8/30/2008 5:38:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
vangorko@... writes:

Dear  friends,

At the sessions, people were still wondering what could be  done in
order not to sit in idleness and wait for the arising of  paññå.
There is no self who is “not doing anything�.
                                        <Snip>
================================
     Nina, why do you bring up the matter of "self"  every time someone speaks
of practice? You don't bring it up when writing of  study and contemplation
of Abhidhamma and "the ancient commentaries".  This  <no self who is 'not doing
anything"> is a red herring. It is beside the  point. Should people tell you
that there is no self who makes trips to the bodhi  tree or who writes books
on the Dhamma? The matter of "no self" is a crucial  one, but it is wrong to
use it a hammer to beat down intentional activities  urged by the Buddha.

With metta,
Howard



#89597	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 5:59 am 
Subject: Re: One-pointedness in Sattipatthana SN 47. 4 (4) at Sala 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

> > Yes, but the concentration spoken of here is the concentration
that
> > accompanies insight (when the object of consciousness is a
> > characteristic of a dhamma), not the concentration associated
with
> > samatha/jhana (when the object is a mental image, such as a
kasina).
>
> Don't you know by now that I don't preach "insightless" Samadhi?

Well I thought we were talking about a passage from a sutta (the At
Sala Sutta).  To my understanding, the reference to "concentrated,
with one-pointed mind" in the passage "dwell contemplating the body
in the body, ardent, clearly comprehending, unified, with limpid
mind, concentrated, with one-pointed mind, in order to know the body
as it really is ..." is a reference to the samadhi that accompanies
insight, not to the samadhi that accompanies samatha.

As I have said before, samadhi is not a synonym for samatha.  It will
depend on the context whether it is samatha or vipassana that is
being referred to.

> Regarding this "mental image" stuff. Where is it in the suttas? If
> these images are so bad, why did the Buddha so often talked about
> anapanasati and he did talk (very briefly) about Kasinas.

I'm not saying there's anything "bad" about samatha; on the contrary,
it's a very high level of kusala.  The question we're discussing,
however, is whether the teachings specify mundane samatha as a
prerequisite for the development of insight or the attainment of
enlightenment ("prerequisite" meaning something that is necessary in
each and every instance).

As regards the matter of mental image, I don't have any sutta quotes
handy at the moment.  But my understanding is that in samatha the
'kammatthana' (object) is contemplated until a mental image of it is
formed, and that this mental image then becomes the object of further
samatha.  How do you understand it?

> Remember that mindfulness has different degrees of power. Weak
> mindfulness may not be enough. But Jhana superpowered mindfulness
can
> do it

You seem to be saying that jhana can make weak mindfulness stronger.
I don't think so.  If mindfulness is relatively undeveloped, it'll be
weak in its arising until it has been further developed and becomes
stronger.  There is no short cut for this, no silver bullet.

Jon



#89598	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:06 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma in daily life 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

> Can you please provide an example of how a person applies this
direct
> experience? If it is not a secret, can you please tell me
> specifically how one uses Intellectual Understanding to get a
direct
> experience. Do you use mental noting "Nama, Nama."  or do you
> mentally go over the experience that has just happened as "This was
> just cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising and ceasing".

To my understanding, the arising of direct experience is not a matter
of a person *applying* anything, or *using intellectual
understanding* in any way, and in fact not a matter of anything that
might be thought of as a kind of "practice" as that term is generally
understood.

Direct experience occurs as a result of the increase in intellectual
understanding over time, when supported by the other factors that are
necessary for the growth of understanding.

Jon



#89599	From: "jonoabb" <jonabbott@...> 
Date: Sat Aug 30, 2008 6:07 am 
Subject: [dsg] Re: Just studying & Sariputta 	jonoabb 
 
 		Hi Alex

> > Do you have any sutta support for the proposition that insight
> > cannot be developed unless the 5 senses are not "operational"?
>
> First of all, for some induvidials it may have been possible to
have
> a limited meditational experience and become awakened.
>
> The commentaries say that today there are only Neyya & Padaparama
> induvidials who do need more work to do.

This is not to the point.  The question is whether the Buddha ever
said, expressly or by implication, that insight can only be developed
if the 5 senses are not "operational".  The answer to this has
nothing to do with whether or not today there are only Neyya &
Padaparama individuals (a point which I do not dispute).

> > You speak here as though the development of insight is about
> > understanding "the mind" to the exclusion of all else.
>
> In order to get to that stage one must have strong enough
> understanding of kaya/vedana anupassana. So one doesn't always
refute
> the other.

Are you saying that cittanupassana is a higher level of satipatthana
than kayanupassana?  I don't know of any textual basis for this idea.

Jon