#91200 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 5:04 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise visitorfromt... Dear Scott (Nina), - Besides Arahant's nobody's speech is perfect. So I hope you forgive me whenever my words annoy you. > >Tep: "...But how do you know that the knowledge that you have experienced is a Vipassana~nana, or is it just a vipassanukilesa (imperfection of insight)?" >Scott: This I think, is the down-side of giving personal experience, which I am loathe to do. You'd have to have had the experience to remove doubt as to whether it was kusala or akusala. I tell you where I'm coming from as a kindness to you and as an aid to our further discussions. T: I apologize if by asking/suggesting like that has caused you some grief. But the question must be asked by any meditator who is making a progress toward the path (and on the path). ......................... T: I mostly agree with the following remarks of yours. : >Scott: Akusala has characteristics which differ from a kusala moment and these can be known - but not by a person and not by 'thinking it through' as an intellectual exercise. Kusala can be condition for akusala. [Tep's comment: it is known by a 'person' while there still is attachment to me and mine. Personality is not perceived when attachment has been abandoned] >Scott: To me, thoughts of stepwise practise go hand in hand with thoughts of 'attainments', and with these go thoughts of someone who practises and someone who attains and, as far as I'm concerned, once these are being thought, it is akusala and all about self. Then there is only room for unwholesome desire ('I will attain'), which, when accompanied by thoughts of a person, lead to destructive envy ('I think he attained such and such. I want to attain it. I haven't attained anything. He didn't attain anything either. He is a conceited fool') which is only dosa. [Tep's comment: Anattaanupassana is for this very purpose : to dwell with mindful awareness of tanha and ditthi that may condition the self views due to failure of not letting go of 'me and mine'.] ........................... >Scott: I'm glad that the telling gave you a chance to further consider Dhamma. I'd rather continue to focus on the Dhamma of theory and general cases - a 'bland intellectual discussion' as you put it. T: I like this positive attitude, Scottie. But I'll like it more if it is more flexible to include "experience". ......................... > >Tep: "...to 'practice in accordance with the Dhamma' (the Buddha's own words in several suttas) means the diligent action with adverting, zeal, attention and effort (as defined by samma-vayamo in the suttas, e.g. DN 22) to cause the bodhipakkhiya dhammas (e.g. satipatthana, indriya, bala, magga, bojjhanga) to arise so that vijja and vimutti can be attained. The Teachings seen in the Suttas explain how these dhammas can be conditioned to arise and grow by means of 'path of practice' or patipada (see Sekha Patipada Sutta, for example) or bhavana of Satipatthana. The bodhipakkhiya dhammas do not just arise one day without bhavana and patipada of gradual practice." >Scott: We must continue to differ in our understanding of these terms. One's conscious decision to 'condition' dhammas to 'arise and grow' will not do it. Have you yet succeeded, for example, to cause to arise the experience of vipassanaa-~naa.na by willfully setting out to do so? T: I sympathetically understand that individual choice of words can lead to accepting /not accepting of another person's ideas. Will or Intent in the sense of Iddhipada [4 bases of power: desire, persistence, intent, or discrimination] is kusala, Scott. Iddhipada is a part of the bodhipakkhiya-dhammas. Yet, the path to nibbana is not to be clung to anyway ( see the Raft simile). "There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. "Whoever neglects these four bases of power neglects the noble path going to the right ending of stress. Whoever undertakes these four bases of power undertakes the noble path going to the right ending of stress. [SN 51.2] ............................... >Scott: You speak of 'samma-vaayaama', for example. This is viriya cetasika. Of this, Dhammasa"nganii (p. 13) explains it to be: "The mental inception of energy which there is on that occasion, the striving and the onward effort, the exertion and endeavour, the zeal and ardour, the vigour and fortitude, the state of unaltering effort, the state of sustained desire, the state of unflinching endurance and solid grip of the burden, energy, energy as faculty and as power, right endeavour..." >Scott: Here I see that there is development but note that samma- vaayaama is naama - a 'mental inception' which is effective during the moment citta arises and in relation to the same object citta has at that moment. In Atthasaalinii (p. 159), regarding viriya: "Its characteristic is strengthening, and grasp or support...energy has exerting as its characteristic, strengthening the co-existent states as function, and opposition to giving way as manifestation. It has been said 'He being agitated, makes a rational effort', hence it has agitation or the basic condition of making energy as proximate cause. Right energy should be regarded as the root of all attainments." T: Right. There is a strong connection to 'will' power that I talked about earlier. The meaning of viriya(exertion, energy) is 'support' and 'strengthening' of kusala dhammas together with abandoning(pahana) of akusala dhammas. Please note the terms "generates desire", "arouses persistence", "upholds & exerts his intent". These also correspond to the four Iddhipada dhammas. "There is the case where a monk, a disciple of the noble ones, keeps his persistence aroused for abandoning unskillful mental qualities and taking on skillful mental qualities. He is steadfast, solid in his effort, not shirking his duties with regard to skillful mental qualities. He generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... [and] for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. This is called the faculty of persistence." [SN 48.10 :Indriya- vibhanga Sutta] .................... >Scott: I don't think of the sequence of mind-produced movements of a body or of speech in the literal and illusory fashion of a person exerting energy and 'practising'. I think of the effects of this particular cetasika on the other elements arising at a given moment of consciousness. What do you think? T: Both are correct, since body and mind are mutually dependent. Tep === #91201 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 5:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) truth_aerator >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex (and TG) - > ============================== > There is no need for waiting one mind moment (as if there WERE such >a thing as a mind moment), because whenever we are experiencing, that >IS the present. Hi Howard, you made a good point. I was thinking about the ontological and subjective perceptive present, where you have correctly pointed out that what is percieved now is now (regardless of the fact that it takes couple hundred of milliseconds of reaction time). Best wishes, #91202 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 2:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) TGrand458@... Hi Alex I completely agree and that was my intent. :-) TG In a message dated 10/9/2008 1:37:43 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: While it is true that we cannot experience the exact present moment due to reaction time, and the fact the observation of the present moment is at least one mind-moment away; In general, I think, that the present moment *can* be experienced as long as we have a bit more leniency regarding what we consider to be the present moment and what we consider to be the past. If we consider the present moment to be a single "citta", then it is impossible to experience citta without any sort of reflection of it. If we allow present moment to be couple seconds long, then we can experience it. Best wishes, #91203 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 2:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: No control (its a coping mechanism) TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/9/2008 6:03:09 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: There is no need for waiting one mind moment (as if there WERE such a thing as a mind moment), because whenever we are experiencing, that IS the present. At any time, whatever is the content of consciousness is what is present. What is true is that we cannot *hold onto* anything, for change is constant, and nothing stands still to be "captured" in some way. With metta, Howard ................................................. Hi Howard You may be right. But I think cognition and perception IS a matter of "capturing" experience. (Capturing in the sense of processing.) I feel relatively confident that there are processes and sequences of events that occur in order to feel a "present" experience...and that by the time we are aware of that experience, its pretty much gone. The actual awareness is probably always "reflective" to some degree. That's why I tend to agree with Alex in that its a matter of perhaps a second, plus or minus, in which the "present" is realized. So I'm giving some leeway to "present experience" as being slightly "fuzzy." Though for practical purposes... "present." Of course, this is a far cry from a view of being aware of "each citta" as it arises and passes away... A theoretical idea which seems mind bogglingly ridiculous to me. And Buddhistically based on what??? (rhetorical) TG #91204 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 6:40 pm Subject: Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? truth_aerator Hello all, A question: Was it inevitable from billions (and more) years ago that Alex would type this? Was it inevitable that Devadatta would do what he did or did he (the stream of cittas) have any possible choice and ability to abstain from doing heineous crimes? Thanks, Alex #91205 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 3:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/9/2008 7:40:49 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello all, A question: Was it inevitable from billions (and more) years ago that Alex would type this? Was it inevitable that Devadatta would do what he did or did he (the stream of cittas) have any possible choice and ability to abstain from doing heineous crimes? Thanks, Alex .............................................. Hi Alex It was inevitable that conditions would alter in accordance to conditional forces/momentums. "Alex" is just conditions doing what they've been doing throughout the history of our knowledge. "Alex" is a "putrid cesspool of conditions" contaminated with ignorance (self-view) and afflictions...almost as badly as "TG." You probably won't like this but I'd just "chuck" that line of thought about the pros or cons of predetermination. Its an empty street. Its very much on the order of wondering about the origins of the universe, etc. I think the inquiry is "self view" motivated. TG #91206 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 7:36 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise scottduncan2 Dear Tep, T: "...the question must be asked by any meditator who is making a progress toward the path (and on the path)." Scott: Not of other 'meditators' though, Tep. How would it go over, do you think, were I to press the jhaana enthusiasts to tell me exactly how it is they know that they have attained the level of the first jhaana? Do you think they'd appreciate being asked exactly what 'vitakka' feels like experientially? Or 'vicaara'? Or what the experience is of moving from the first to the second jhaana? I've actually nearly done as much here once, only to learn that none of the jhaana enthusiasts who are so volubly in favour of jhaana have actually experienced jhaana. This request for experienctial evidence didn't go over too well. I think it best to let the individual monitor his or her own 'development' and stick to discussing 'theory'. I think that anyone willing to openly discuss his or her own so-called 'meditative experiences' is suspect, at least to me. I've met some in my day... [Tep's comment: it is known by a 'person' while there still is attachment to me and mine. Personality is not perceived when attachment has been abandoned] Scott: Here is where I totally disagree. There is nothing I've read in the suttas to support this idea. Since a 'person' is entirely conceptual, it has no capacity to 'know' anything. Surely you must know at least of the theoretical difference between naama, ruupa, and pa~n~natti. Sati is aware and pa~n~naa knows at all levels of development from low to high. A person can never be aware of or know anything. T: "I like this positive attitude, Scottie. But I'll like it more if it is more flexible to include 'experience'." Scott: Sorry, Tep, you'll have to take me as I am. I'll stick to discussing Dhamma here. I deal with 'experience' as it comes, when it comes, and keep it to myself. I've got to go for now, Tep, so, if you don't mind, I'll address the rest of the post at a later point. (I've got half a reply going to an earlier post of yours - all about how worldlings can't know anything ;-) - as well that I'll get off, likely tomorrow morning.) Sincerely, Scott. #91207 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 7:46 pm Subject: Vism.XVII,304 305 lbidd2 "The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga), Ch. XVII 304. 5. [Kinds of profundity:] Now the Blessed One's words, 'This dependent origination is profound, Aananda, and profound it appears' (D.ii,55), refer to profundity (a) of meaning, (b) of law, (c) of teaching, and (d) of penetration. So this Wheel of Becoming should be known 'as to the kinds of profundity' in whichever way is appropriate. 305. (a) Herein, the meaning of ageing-and-death produced and originated with birth as condition is profound owing to difficulty in understanding its origin with birth as condition thus: Neither does ageing-and-death not come about from birth, nor, failing birth, does it come about from something else; it arises [only] from birth with precisely that nature [of ageing-and-death]. And the meaning of birth with becoming as condition ... and the meaning of formations produced and originated with ignorance as condition are treatable in like manner. That is why this Wheel of Becoming is profound in meaning. For it is the fruit of a cause that is called 'meaning', according as it is said, 'Knowledge about the fruit of a cause is the discrimination of meaning' (Vbh.293). ************************* 304. yasmaa ca bhagavataa atthatopi dhammatopi desanatopi pa.tivedhatopi gambhiirabhaava.m sandhaaya ``gambhiiro caaya.m aananda pa.ticcasamuppaado gambhiiraavabhaaso caa''ti (dii0 ni0 2.95; sa.m0 ni0 1.2.60) vutta.m, tasmaa gambhiirabhedatopeta.m bhavacakka.m vi~n~naatabba.m yathaaraha.m. 305. tattha yasmaa na jaatito jaraamara.na.m na hoti, na ca jaati.m vinaa a~n~nato hoti, ittha~nca jaatito samudaagacchatiiti eva.m jaatipaccayasamudaagata.t.thassa duravabodhaniiyato jaraamara.nassa jaatipaccayasambhuutasamudaagata.t.tho gambhiiro. tathaa jaatiyaa bhavapaccaya...pe0... sa"nkhaaraana.m avijjaapaccayasambhuutasamudaagata.t.tho gambhiiro. tasmaa ida.m bhavacakka.m atthagambhiiranti aya.m taavettha atthagambhiirataa. hetuphala~nhi atthoti vuccati. yathaaha -- ``hetuphale ~naa.na.m atthapa.tisambhidaa''ti (vibha0 720). #91208 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 8:59 pm Subject: Dhamma Wiki Encyclopedia: http://www.dhammawiki.com bhikkhu0 Friends: An official Buddhist Encyclopedia have been initiated here: http://www.dhammawiki.com It is a Buddhist encyclopedia, which anyone can edit. All traditions are welcome, but this encyclopedia primarily focuses on the basic teachings of early Buddhism, i.e., Theravada. For Buddhist terms, Please use Pali. Help create this world's largest FREE Buddhist encyclopedia 321 articles written so far. Got a good idea for an entry? Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #91209 From: "colette" Date: Thu Oct 9, 2008 2:02 pm Subject: "Class Consciousness" by Marx ksheri3 Hi Group, Okay, I know it's political theory but basically this that we study here is also foundationalized upon political theory. Don't run with that please since I can easily see the fun I could and would have if somebody said that to me -- and we all know how playful I can get. I just came into contact with the formal definition of this aspect of reality and am struck with how well it transposes into what I experience lately in the normal day or my life -- which is completely abnormal or is that abbey normal, hmmm. Given: there are masses of people competing for a limited supply of goods that can sustain their lives. Given: IGNORANCE is one of the key causes for the negative emotional aspects of these competing masses being raised to the surface or raised to consciousness. NOW I CAN DEVIATE SINCE I'VE PLACED CONSCIOUSNESS INTO A CONTEXT. Lets look at the Buddhist principle of reality as Illusion or Illusionary. <...> Marx, in his observation(s), reduces the buddhist dogma of TAKING REFUGE, in taking refuge the aspirant can come into contact with the deeper and more specific realities found in the Abhidhamma, Sangha, and Dharma. Marx sidetracks the entire process of DISCOVERY of Buddhism and goes straight to the heart of the matter by suggesting that there is a lack of self-awareness within the masses of their position in the aggregate or whole. I found it in the Mid-80s, I think in Dion Fortune literature, that "god cannot be conscious that god is god, which is why we have such negative events and occurances in our lives", it's not a direct quote I'm quoting the concepts that I remembere here, I do that a lot, though. Technically, this supposed god does not have a consciousness of the social class that god exists in. There is no awareness within this creationist diety, it's almost like a "VEIL OF IGNORANCE". While this is a legal term it also happens to be part of a concept of viewing this creationist diety, which is where the Masons got their concept "In Him is all right side" meaning that they can only see one side of the dieties face -- dark side of the moon, possibly? <...> DON'T YOU SEE? this implies the CAUSE & EFFECT relationship, the host/parasite relationship, etc. I've been watching the entire financial meltdown around the world over the past week and I've watched it being manifested since 1982. Sure, Sarah, it has been tremendously stormy in Hong Kong lately but the initial shock has been achieved, IT'S ALL DOWN HILL FROM HERE. It's all bread and butter since we know what has happened it's perfectly clear IN AN ORDERED SOCIETY (a society that worships the status quo norm as being a robotic existance of "IF this THEN that", no emotions, no feeling, no life or death, simply robotics aka STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE). I've been thinking, since Sunday, that I'd like to use Supertramp's album CRISIS WHAT CRISIS since it shows a normal person just sitting amongst devastation as if nothing has happened, which is what I've been contemplating since last week when certain things were occuring that clearly fortold the upcoming events. At this time, the unbelievable amount of IGNORANCE within the people, is more than likely to send them into a hallucinatory panic which will initiate an entirely new set of parameters upon which reality is based. Maybe this is the wrong format to introduce these amazing aspects of reality I've just had the pleasure of experiencing but I still need to know the Buddhist view on these concepts since it's in a purification stage, a stage of refining. Once I refine this better I'll be able to establish the Bardo concepts applicable here. THANX toodles, colette #91210 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:40 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 3, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Do we truly see that clinging is harmful? I have read in the scriptures, for example in the “Parable of the Water-snake” (Middle Length Sayings I, no 22), that sense-pleasures are compared to “a skeleton... to a lump of meat... to a torch of dry grass... to a pit of glowing embers...” However, I have to admit that I do not really see the danger of clinging to such objects as a sunset or music. I do not harm others when I cling to such pleasant objects, and, moreover, I am not a monk but a layfollower. I cannot give up music, it is part of my daily life. It is difficult to see the danger of clinging, even though we know that it brings sorrow and disappointment when we do not have the pleasant objects anymore we have been clinging to. The Buddha did not forbid clinging, he urged people to prove the truth to themselves. I found that when there is a moment of sincere generosity, or of true consideration of someone else’s happiness, there is another kind of joy, different from the kind of pleasure that is connected with clinging. We can find out that there is selfishness with clinging. When we like a sunset or music, we actually cling to our own pleasant feeling, thus, we are attached to ourselves. We may not find clinging harmful, but when we compare it with a moment of kusala citta, we may begin to see the benefit of kusala and the disadvantage of akusala. If there can be mindfulness of the different cittas which appear we shall see this, not merely in a theoretical way, but through our own experience. We can find out that at the moment of kusala citta there is peace and at the moment of akusala citta there is restlessness. We may have read the Buddha’s advice to the Kålåmas (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, Ch VII, § 65, Those of Kesaputta): “... Be not misled by report or tradition or hearsay. Be not misled by proficiency in the collections, nor by mere logic or inference, nor after considering reasons, nor after reflection on and approval of some theory, nor because it fits becoming, nor out of respect for a recluse (who holds it). But, Kålamas, when you know for yourselves: These things are unprofitable, these things are blameworthy, these things are censured by the wise; these things when performed and undertaken, conduce to loss and sorrow-- then indeed do you reject them, Kålåmas....” Do we really understand this sutta? We read suttas but we do not apply them. During our discussions we discovered that we cling more often than we ever realized before. ****** Nina. #91211 From: "alberto.spera" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:31 am Subject: Hello alberto.spera Hi, I'm from Italy, I'm 50 and I've been interested in the Buddha's teaching for the past ten years. For the first 3/4 years I practiced formal meditation, including retreats, and I also tried to study dhamma on my own with BPS books (mainly Suttanta material), but without understanding much of what I read. A couple of years ago I decided to give Abhidhamma a try, downloading and printing the Abhidhammata sangaha by Narada, which helped a little. Eventually a found A. Sujin and her publications and tapes on dsg site, which was just what I was looking for, a clear exposition of dhammas done by someone who actually knows them as they are. After much miccha-magga at last I had the chance to accumulate a little samma-magga instead! Kind regards - Alberto #91212 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:44 am Subject: Quote Survey. nilovg Dear friends, Because of visible object which appears through the eyes it seems as if there are many people living together in this world, at a certain time and in a particular location. However, if there is clear comprehension of the characteristic of the element which experiences, the dhamma which arises and sees the object which appears at that moment, one will know that, while there is seeing just for a short moment, there is only the world of seeing. Then there are no people, other living beings or different things. At the moment of seeing there is not yet thinking about shape and form, there is not yet thinking of a story about what is seen. When we think that there is the world, beings, people or different things, we should know that this is only a moment of citta which thinks about what appears to seeing, about visible object. Seeing occurs at a moment different from thinking about what appears. For everyone there is citta which arises just for a moment and is then succeeded by the next one, and this happens continuously. Thus, it seems that there is the whole wide world with many different people and things, but we should have right understanding of what the world is. We should know that realities appear one at a time, and that they appear only for one moment of citta. Since cittas arise and fall away, succeeding one another very rapidly, it seems that there is the world which does not disintegrate, the world which lasts, with beings, people and many different things. In reality the world lasts just for one moment, namely, when citta arises and cognizes an object just for that moment; and then the world falls away together with the citta. -------- Nina. #91213 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello nilovg Dear Alberto, wellcome here. I am glad you appreciate A. Sujin. If you have any remarks about the materials or questions about it, do write them, it is to the benefit of us all. Looking forward to your remarks and contributions, Nina. Op 10-okt-2008, om 10:31 heeft alberto.spera het volgende geschreven: > Eventually a found A. Sujin and her > publications and tapes on dsg site, which was just what I was looking > for, a clear exposition of dhammas done by someone who actually knows > them as they are. #91214 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, Welcome to DSG! Thank you so much for your lovely introduction. Your response is just like the one I felt when I came across such materials. When I read a letter like this it makes all the effort by a team of friends worthwhile in meaking such materials available on-line. Have you had a chance to listen to the most recent set of uploaded recordings on www.dhammastudygroup.org? (At the top of the audio section). If so, do share anything from these or others that has particular significance for you. Perhaps you can also help us to help others see the value in them too:-). In appreciation, Metta, Sarah p.s Whereabouts in Italy do you live? As it happens, next July we are due to be Italy as my mother has decided she'd like to spend her 80th with all her family in a farmhouse in Tuscany. ........ --- On Fri, 10/10/08, alberto.spera wrote: >Hi, I'm from Italy, I'm 50 and I've been interested in the Buddha's teaching for the past ten years. For the first 3/4 years I practiced formal meditation, including retreats, and I also tried to study dhamma on my own with BPS books (mainly Suttanta material), but without understanding much of what I read. A couple of years ago I decided to give Abhidhamma a try, downloading and printing the Abhidhammata sangaha by Narada, which helped a little. Eventually a found A. Sujin and her publications and tapes on dsg site, which was just what I was looking for, a clear exposition of dhammas done by someone who actually knows them as they are. After much miccha-magga at last I had the chance to accumulate a little samma-magga instead! #91215 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Thu, 9/10/08, Alex wrote: >"this Doctrine and Discipline has a gradual training, a gradual performance, a gradual progression, with a penetration to gnosis only after a long stretch. " http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ kn/ud/ud. 5.05.than. html >All the gradual words there show that there are gradual steps. .... S: A gradual training, no steps to be followed by a self. .... >>S:it all comes down to understanding realities from beginning to >end. >So first of all, what are the realities now? Let's keep >discussing >this. A:> Can you please explain what you mean by "understanding realities"? Would something like this do? "all things that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction " [done during or after Jhana] http://www.budsas. org/ebud/ majjhima/ 064-maha- malunkhyaputta- e1.htm .... S: Understanding the khandhas, one reality at a time for what they are. Sorry, the translation above won't do and the understanding of realities can never occur *during* jhana. Also,once again, it's not a matter of *doing*, but of understanding and being aware of such realities when they are present, regardless (and detached) from what they are. As the Nanamoli/Bodhi note (and context of the passage in the sutta) makes clear, "This passage shows the development of insight (vipassanaa upon a basis of serenity (samatha), using the jhaana on which the practice of insight is based as the object of insight contemplation." Here is another translation for this passage (Nanamoli/Bodhi) for you to consider: "Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness [S: i.e 5 khandhas], he sees those states as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a tumour, as a barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, as void, as not self.....etc" .... S:>>Seeing appears, visible object appears, thinking appears. However, >nothing can be *done* to understand and be aware of them when they >appear except by really considering (as is being done here) what >they are and appreciating that desire for results, desire for >awareness, clinging to a self that can practice and so on are real >hindrances - but of course they too can be known when they arise. A:> Nothing can be done? Now that IS sad. What about looking on with sati and upekkha? Sampajnana and all such factors. What about developing the 7 factors of awakening and dropping 5 hindrances? This was talked about a lot in Buddha's teaching. ... S: Who does the *looking on*, the *developing* and *dropping*? There is developing of the path, but no developer, understanding, but no one who understands. Nothing that can be *done* by a self taking steps, going on retreats, doing anything. Metta, Sarah ====== #91216 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:35 am Subject: Re: Hello visitorfromt... Hello, Alberto - It is my pleasure to encounter a person with confidence like you. I wish I may learn something from you by asking a few questions. Hope you don't mind. ---"alberto.spera" wrote: > > Hi, I'm from Italy, I'm 50 and I've been interested in the Buddha's > teaching for the past ten years. For the first 3/4 years I practiced > formal meditation, including retreats, and I also tried to study > dhamma on my own with BPS books (mainly Suttanta material), but without understanding much of what I read.... Eventually a found A. Sujin and her publications and tapes on dsg site, which was just what I was looking for, a clear exposition of dhammas done by someone who actually knows them as they are. > After much miccha-magga at last I had the chance to accumulate a > little samma-magga instead! > > Kind regards - Alberto > My questions are : 1. What "formal meditation" did your learn during the first 3-4 years of study ? 2. Without understanding much of the Suttanta material, how do you know whether A. Sujin's teaching is in accordance with the Buddha's Dhamma or if it is something different? Exactly, please tell me how you know that she is "someone who actually knows them as they are" ? 3. Why are you so confident that you "had the chance to accumulate a little samma-magga" ? Best wishes, Tep === #91217 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bhikkhu Bodhi's inconsistency re origins of Abhidhamma sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Yes, there are bound to be doubts. With regard to the B.Bodhi passages you quoted (and I could give you other more extreme examples, such as the luminous one he asked me to pass onto DSG), what he writes of course reflects his understandings and ideas at the time. There have, of course, been many (inc. well-known) Theravada bhikkhus who have turned away (or partially turned away) from the Theravada teachings, due to doubts and uncertainties or changes of belief. In the end, as Scott always stresses, only the Dhamma is our Teacher. --- On Thu, 9/10/08, Phil wrote: >A question arises. Are Theravadin monks expected to uphold the Theravadin orthodoxy? ... S: Yes, along with the entire set of rules in the Patimokkha. The truth is, of course, that without insight attainments, there is bound to be doubt about the teachings, especially the Abhidhamma and ancient commentaries and also the value of the Patimokkha in its entirety. .... P:> I think I'm just frustrated because now I am irreversibly stuck with the idea that the Abhidhamma represents an evolution. Now, that might be the truth, so it is good to know, and even if it does represent an evolution Abhidhamma seems very valuable to me. >Sorry, I know this sort of thing has been discussed around the block again and again but I'm needing to work this out...thanks. .... S: As others have said, it comes down to the understanding of dhammas and Abhidhamma at this moment. This is the only way to clear-up some doubts, frustrations and wonderings about evolutions etc. ... Also I apologize if words of criticism of such a great monk cause .... P:> p.s Sarah and Tep, based on the above, if Sarah insists that all the derived rupa were taught by the Buddha, she is saying what is in line with Theravadin orthodoxy, so it should be respected. ... S: I think I was pointing to the reference to primary and derived rupas in the suttas elaborated on in the Abhidhamma. Of course not all the same details are given in the suttas and we have to read all over the place to count them up, whereas in the Abhidhamma (esp. in summaries such as the Ab.Sangaha), the work has been done for us. However, if you look in the suttas, I think you'll find they are all included or implied, even if in very conventional language. For example, 'the form of a woman', 'the form of a man', nutriment, life-force, space, gestures of meaning and so on. It all comes back to how we read the suttas: with an idea of atta or without. .... P:> Perhaps her unwillingness, if there is any, to admit when something isn't in the suttanta is because when that is established people use that point to dismiss Abhidhamma teachings, which, again, according to Theravadin orthodoxy as described above by Bhikkhu Bodhi, would be an unwise thing to do because it would be denying teachings that were "expounded by the Buddha during his lifetime." ... S: No, I have no difficulty admitting something isn't in the suttanta when that's the case. Like on conditions, far, far more detail is in the Abhidhamma. But even something like heart-base at the moment of patisandhi citta, I would hesitate before saying it's not referred to in the suttanta. Often what seems (to me) to be absent one day becomes more apparent another. Metta, Sarah ======= #91218 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:51 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Regarding: T: "...The un-instructed worldling only knows the a-dhamma (non-Dhamma). See MN 1 that I reviewed in Part III of "Error in the Vism". He does not comprehend the Dhamma. He does not have pa~n~na!" Scott: You are thinking of persons. How does 'wisdom' start, Tep? Surely not at the height of its strength. I'm sorry but you've not made your case. The whole premise is illogical. It T: "When I say pa~n~na I mean understanding (in the sense of knowing accurately) the Teaching of the four Ariya Saccas. Please note that pa~n~na in the arahants is a synonym for pari~n~na (comprehension, full understanding), see for example the Metta.net dictionary." Scott: I find two forms of the word (PTS PED). "Pari~n~naa...accurate or exact knowledge, comprehension, full understanding..." "Pari~n~na...knowing, recognising, understanding..." Scott: Do you have a source for the reference from the suttas so I can check the Paa.li? The latter form seems more general but I don't know the term... Yes, there is highly developed pa~n~naa. No problem here, Tep. I'm saying that there is no support for the view that pa~n~naa cannot arise initially and at 'lower developmental strength' for the worldling as well. Consider the Abhidhamma; Dhammasa"nga.ni (p.16) defines pa~n~naa as: "The insight which there is on that occasion is..." Scott: Now note, in the rest of the definition, how pa~n~naa is variously described: "...understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, discrimination, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide', intuition, intelligence, a 'goad'; wisdom as factulty, wisdom as power, wisdom as light, wisdom as glory, wisdom as splendour, wisdom as a precious stone; the absence of dullness, searching the Truth, right views - this is the wisdom that there then is." The commentary is even clearer, demonstrating that pa~n~naa has a broad range. The quote is a bit lengthy, so please bear with it. Atthasaalinii (pp. 195-197): "In the exposition of the 'faculty of understanding' understanding is so called in the sense of knowing plainly, i.e., making plain the meaning of various things. Or, understanding is that which knows states under various aspects as impermanent, etc. This is the primary word. The behaviour of mind in knowing widely is 'wisdom.' That which investigates impermanence, etc. is 'search' (vicaya). 'Research (pavicaya) shows increase by means of a preposition. 'Search of the doctrine' is that which investigates the doctrine of the Four Truths. Understanding is 'discernment' by virtue of discerning impermanence, etc. By means of the different prepositions understanding is called 'discrimination,' 'differentiation.' "The state of the learned man is 'erudition.' The state of an expert is 'proficiency.' The state of a subtle man is 'subtlety.' 'Criticism' [here] is critical knowledge respecting impermanence and kindred subjects. 'Reflection,' or, in whom it arises, it makes him think of impermanence - this is 'reflection.' 'It examines impermanence,' etc. - this is 'examination.' The next term, 'bhuurii' (breadth), is a name for the earth; understanding is like the earth in the sense of both subtelty and amplitude; hence breadth. And it has been said that the earth is broad, and that a man endowed with understanding, having richness and abundance like the earth, is of 'broad' understanding. Further bhuurii is a synonym for understanding, because this delights in the true [or revealed] meaning. "'It slays corruptions and destroys them as lightning destroys stone pillars' - this is 'sagacity'; or, it is 'sagacity' in the sense of quickly grasping and bearing the meaning. Next, 'in whom it arises it bends or inclines him to practise that which is his personal advantage,' or 'it inclinces associated states to to the penetration of the irreversible characteristic marks' - this is 'guide.' 'It discerns states under various aspects such as 'impermanence' etc. - this is 'insight.' 'Comprehension' is that which knows impermanence etc. in right ways. In order to put the wicked mind which has run off the track on to the right track, understanding urges it, just as a 'goad' urges horses of Sindh who are off track in order to put them on the right track. It is like a goad, and is called 'incitement.' As a controlling faculty understanding exercises government in the characteristic of 'seeing impermanence,' etc. It does not vacillate through ignorance - this is 'strength of understanding.' As a weapon, in the sense of cutting off the corruptions, understanding is the 'sword of understanding.' In the sense of rising high into the sky like a lofty building it is the 'height of understanding.' In the sense of illuminating it is the 'light of understanding.' In the sense of shedding lustre it is the 'lustre of understanding.' In the sense of being splendid it is the 'splendour of understanding.' For to the Wise Man, possessed of understanding and seated, at one sitting the ten thousand world elements become of one light, one lustre, one splendour. Hence it has been said that understanding is light, etc. I these three words, though the sense is accomplished by any one of them, the teaching is made to meet the inclinations of [various] persons - for instance, in such Suttas as 'Bhikkhus, there are four kinds of light; which are the four? - the light of the moon, of the sun, of fire, and of understanding. There are four kinds of light. Of these, the light of understanding is the best. Likewise, bhikkhus, the four kinds of lustre...of splendour.' [AN ii, 133; SN i 22,67.] For the meaning has been well analyzed in various ways, and others understand it in different ways. The 'treasure of understanding' is meant in the sense of causing, giving, and producing delight, of being worthy of respect (or being varied), of the difficulty of getting, or of manifesting it, of incomparableness, and of being the property of illustrious beings. Beings are not, on its account, deluded in the object, or, itself is not deluded in the object - this is 'non-delusion.' The expression 'search for the doctrine' has been already explained. Why is it repeated? - in order to show the antithesis between non-delusion and delusion. By that expression non-delusion shows it antithesis to delusion. And non-delusion is not a thing altogether different from delusion; but what is meant here is that the non-delusion known as 'search for the doctrine' is opposed to delusion. Finally, 'right views' are irreversible, emancipating, moral views." Scott: There is nothing here about 'only for Ariyans', Tep. This shows a range of 'application.' I'm not convinced by the view that pa~n~naa is only for the ariyan. You've not demonstrated how it gets to the point of being liberating pa~n~naa. If you look, you can see a 'definition' of 'practise' in the above. Sincerely, Scott. #91219 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:59 am Subject: Re: Hello scottduncan2 Dear Alberto (and Tep), Welcome to the forum. You may wish to take your time to acclimatize yourself to the place before plunging into the following: T: "My questions are : 1. What 'formal meditation' did your learn during the first 3-4 years of study ? 2. Without understanding much of the Suttanta material, how do you know whether A. Sujin's teaching is in accordance with the Buddha's Dhamma or if it is something different? Exactly, please tell me how you know that she is 'someone who actually knows them as they are' ? 3. Why are you so confident that you 'had the chance to accumulate a little samma-magga' ?" Scott: You'll see soon enough that there is quite the lively debate and Tep has furnished you, in the above, with some of the poles of this dialectic. Controversy swirls regarding 'formal meditation.' There are strong factions of 'Sutta only' opinions, and much said about the Commentarial position vis-a-vis the Suttas. There are many demands to 'prove' that which is impossible to prove - experience. Don't worry, you'll figure it out. I recall coming here awhile ago, having similar inclinations to the ones you state. After a jarring start, one can find ones way soon enough. No hurry. Sincerely, Scott. #91220 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Quote Survey. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/10/2008 4:44:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear friends, Because of visible object which appears through the eyes it seems as if there are many people living together in this world, at a certain time and in a particular location. However, if there is clear comprehension of the characteristic of the element which experiences, the dhamma which arises and sees the object which appears at that moment, one will know that, while there is seeing just for a short moment, there is only the world of seeing. Then there are no people, other living beings or different things. At the moment of seeing there is not yet thinking about shape and form, there is not yet thinking of a story about what is seen. When we think that there is the world, beings, people or different things, we should know that this is only a moment of citta which thinks about what appears to seeing, about visible object. Seeing occurs at a moment different from thinking about what appears. For everyone there is citta which arises just for a moment and is then succeeded by the next one, and this happens continuously. Thus, it seems that there is the whole wide world with many different people and things, but we should have right understanding of what the world is. We should know that realities appear one at a time, and that they appear only for one moment of citta. Since cittas arise and fall away, succeeding one another very rapidly, it seems that there is the world which does not disintegrate, the world which lasts, with beings, people and many different things. In reality the world lasts just for one moment, namely, when citta arises and cognizes an object just for that moment; and then the world falls away together with the citta. -------- Nina. ================================= So, Nina: When you & Lodewijk are standing side by side, and you are seeing, there is, at that very time no Lodewijk? I agree that there is no consciousness of him in your mind stream at that time. But are you saying that there is no Lodewijk then? What if Lodewijk is also hearing (or seeing or whatever) while you are seeing? Does that mean that there's no Nina then either? Hmm, then what happens to the seeing you are doing? All this talk of "you" and "him" is, of course, just a manner of speaking. But the mind stream called "Nina" and the mind stream called Lodewijk do both exist and, though interrelating, not identical. The fact that (either) one of these streams consists of mind states doesn't mean the other stream doesn't exist. It is irrelevant whether you and Lodewijk think of each other or not. There ARE the two of you! It seems to me, Nina, that all of a sudden you are taking an extreme subjectivist position, a solpisistic position to the effect that when we are not thinking about another mind steam, there is no other mind stream! This is odd, Nina, to say the least. With metta, Howard #91221 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] anupubbasikkhaa sarahprocter... Dear Han, Thank you for your input on this thread. I'm glad we've got your interest! --- On Thu, 9/10/08, han tun wrote: >I am interested in your discussions on a gradual training (anupubbasikkhaa) , because this gradual training is quite well-known in Burma. We call it Six Kathaas. (1) Daana kathaa, generosity (2) Siila kathaa, morality (3) Sagga kathaa, heaven or celestial states (4) Kaamagu.naa aadiinava kathaa, the drawbacks of sensual pleasures (5) Nekkhamma aanisansa kathaa, blessings of renunciation (6) Sacca kathaa, the Four Noble Truths. >A Burmese Sayadaw explained that if one follows the first three kathaas, he/she may obtain good results in this very life or rebirth in human and deva planes in the next existence. However, the pleasures achieved in this way are sensual pleasures which have drawbacks, and the Buddha teaches those drawbacks. To avoid those drawbacks, the Buddha next teaches the blessings of renunciation. By this time the mind becomes pliable and is ready to appreciate deeper teaching. Then the Buddha teaches him/her the Four Noble Truths. .... S: Perhaps the point is that the Buddha is showing that the kusala states taught by other teachers at the time, i.e. dana, sila and samatha leading to jhana, whilst good, do nothing to tear down the bricks of samsara. So then he goes on to teach about the 4NT. All conditioned dhammas, including dana, sila and samatha, are dukkha because of being anicca and beyond anyone's control. Only through the penetration of the 4NT is there a realisation of the unconditioned and an end to dukkha (eventually). ... >Sayadaw further explained that the Buddha uses this formula for the very first time when he teaches Yasa, a millionaire’s son of Benares soon after the Buddha has expounded Dhammacakkappavatta na sutta and Anattalakkhana sutta. Later on, the Buddha uses this formula as a routine for the beginners. ... S: As I recall, after the first 5 bhikkhus became arahats (Dhammacakkappavattana sutta), on the same day the Buddha realised Yasa was ripe for attainment of the Path. So by the end of the 'gradual talk' he was already a sotapanna and by the next day an arahat. All his companions also became arahats. So they may have been 'beginners', but they were certainly ripe for understanding the deep meaning from the beginning. Is this how you understand it? Btw, do you have a reference to this in a sutta? I only recall having read about Yasa briefly in the Dhp commentary. Metta, Sarah ======= #91222 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? visitorfromt... Hello Alex and TG, - Are you talking about conditional dhammas that originate and cease according to 24 paccayas? >Alex: > A question: Was it inevitable from billions (and more) years ago that Alex would type this? > > > TG: > You probably won't like this but I'd just "chuck" that line of thought about the pros or cons of predetermination. Its an empty street. T: You've got a great point. For those who believe in "predetermination" or determintic fate we must ask them as follows: How do you determine whether all events are 100% deterministic, i.e. if an event is not destined to happen, then it will never happen? If an event is destined to happen, then it will? That is the belief of the no-practice, do-nothing people. With that kind of belief there is no use to practice the Dhamma, because if you are going to become an arahant, then you WILL BE arahant even if you commit heinous crimes all the time. On the other hand, if it is already your fate to never penetrate the FNTs, then it is useless to practice siila-samadhi-pa~n~naa here and now. Either case you do nothing, and just live the stupid life. Tep === #91223 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Quote Survey. sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all (Tep, Alex, TG, Phil & all), --- On Fri, 10/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: >So, Nina: When you & Lodewijk are standing side by side, and you are seeing, there is, at that very time no Lodewijk? .... S: This reminds me (as I happened to listen to it today) that on the latest set of edited recordings, there's a very interesting part where Lodewijk himself raises in some detail the whole question (and his frustration at the time) at the idea of there being 'No Nina, no Lodewijk, no Buddha' and so on. I think the whole conversation is very useful and Lodewijk expresses many people's doubts and confusion on this matter beautifully and strongly. I'd love you to listen carefully and let us know at the end after having listened to KS's verbal comments (as opposed to just the quote Nina gave), whether they make sense to you. It's not long and easy listening. I'm sure you'll sympathise with all of Lodewijk's feelings in this regard. I hope that Tep, Alex, TG, Phil and others who are generally not inclined to listen might give it a try too. It can be found on www.dhammastudygroup.org. Go down to the audio section and it's in the first set: 2007-01-10A-b, starting at 13.30 mins into the track with the start of Lodewijk. Metta, Sarah ======== #91224 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mirages: was Concept Permanent and unconditioned? sarahprocter... Hi Howard & Ken H, --- On Thu, 9/10/08, kenhowardau wrote: H:>> The perspective that I sense on the part of some, though not all, of the admirers of Khun Sujin is that paramattha dhammas are entities: true, separable existents with essence that arise and are then annihilated. .... S: Zap!! .... K:> ...I am sure all of us understood conditioned dhammas in essentially the same way: real, possessing inherent characteristics (i.e. characteristics of their own), existent for one moment and then gone the next - never to return - . . and so on. .... S: Yes, nicely expressed, I'm in this club rather than the one above. If this is a description of the "admirers of Khun Sujin" with an extreme take on paramattha dhammas, I'm happy to be included. As you (Ken) once suggested, anatta can never be too extreme (or something along those lines). .... K:> If you know of some K Sujin students who see dhammas another way please name them, I am sure they won't mind. :-) ... S: Well you were obviously very sheltered in Bangkok, we'll have to shake it up next time! I assure you that there are admirers or students of KS who also go to meditation centres, prefer to discuss statues, also pray to the Buddha for happy rebirths for themselves or family members and so on.... We can't blame the teacher for the misunderstandings and wrong views of the admirers. We hear and understand what there are conditions and tendencies to hear at the time. Metta, Sarah ========= #91225 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise sarahprocter... Dear Scott & all, --- On Thu, 9/10/08, Scott wrote: >To me, thoughts of stepwise practise go hand in hand with thoughts of 'attainments' , and with these go thoughts of someone who practises and someone who attains and, as far as I'm concerned, once these are being thought, it is akusala and all about self. Then there is only room for unwholesome desire ('I will attain'), which, when accompanied by thoughts of a person, lead to destructive envy ('I think he attained such and such. I want to attain it. I haven't attained anything. He didn't attain anything either. He is a conceited fool') which is only dosa. .... Sarah: Very nicely expressed - my thoughts exactly. .... >Scott: I don't think of the sequence of mind-produced movements of a body or of speech in the literal and illusory fashion of a person exerting energy and 'practising' . I think of the effects of this particular cetasika on the other elements arising at a given moment of consciousness. What do you think? ... S: Again, I think we're very much on the same page. Metta, Sarah ========= #91226 From: "connie" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:05 am Subject: Re: Vism.XVII,304 305 nichiconn xvii 304. 5. [Kinds of profundity:] now the Blessed One's word, 'This dependent origination is profound, Ananda, and profound it appears' (D.ii,55) refers to profundity (a) of meaning, (b) of law, (c) of teaching, and (d) of penetration. So this Wheel of Becoming should be known 'as to the kinds of profundity' in whichever way is appropriate. {PoP p.703} (And by different kinds of deep methods: -) And because the Blessed has said this: "Deep, Aananda, is this causal law, and it looks deep too" {Diigha ii, 55} concerning the profundity in meaning, in doctrine, in teaching, and in penetration, therefore is this wheel of becoming fittingly to be understood under different aspects of profundity. vxii 305. (a) Herein, the meaning of ageing-and-death produced and originated wth birth as condition is profound owing to difficulty in understanding its origin with birth as condition thus: Neither does ageing-and-death not come about from birth, nor, failing birth, does it come about from something else; it arises [only] from birth with precisely that nature [of ageing-and-death]. And the meaning of formations produced and originated with ignorance as condition are treatable in like manner. That is why this Wheel of Becoming is profound in meaning. This firstly is the profundity of meaning here. [584] For it is the fruit of a cause that is called 'meaning' according as it is said 'Knowledge about the fruit of a cause is the discrimination of meaning' (Vbh.293). {PoP p.703} Herein, whereas it is difficult to understand the arising of old-age-and-death from birth, it is not that old-age-and-death is not due to birth, that it is due to nothing other than birth, that is, so arises from birth: - such arising constitutes its profundity. And the same with the activities, the arising of which is conditioned by ignorance: - therefore is the wheel of becoming profound in meaning. This so far is [584] the profundity in meaning. For the result of a cause is said to be the meaning, as it is said: "Knowledge in respect of the result of a cause is the analysis of meaning." {Vibha"nga, p.239.} #91227 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Alex), --- On Thu, 9/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: Seeing appears, visible object appears, thinking appears. However, nothing can be *done* to understand and be aware of them when they appear except by really considering (as is being done here) what they are and appreciating that desire for results, desire for awareness, clinging to a self that can practice and so on are real hindrances - but of course they too can be known when they arise. ============ ========= ========= ==== H:> Sarah, you say that what needs to occur is to understand the dhammas that arise. What seems unclear is what you mean by that exactly and how that understanding is to come about, especially inasmuch as you say that we are unaware of dhammas. I wish you could clarify your take on that. .... S: Like now, there is seeing, there is thinking and so on. Considering and appreciating that at this moment, there are just these fleeting dhammas arising and falling away, no person in them at all, can be a condition for awareness even now as we speak of a reality, a dhamma which appears. Just the world of seeing, of hearing, of thinking - nothing else at all. At the moment of touching, just hardness appears, then immediately thinking about the story. Considering more and more about the realities which make up our life now is the condition for direct awareness and understanding to develop, but not by trying to do anything. As soon as there's the idea of 'trying to do', self is brought back into the equation and we go off-track again. ... H:> Relatedly, given your position that "there is nothing to be done," I wish you could explain what you see as different between a Buddhist and a non-Buddhist, especially as regards coming to understand dhammas. Your position on all this might well be correct and quite terrific, but it is unfathomable to me and some others here. I think it might be really helpful if you could clarify it for us. ... S: [Very good questions btw, thank you]. Yes the difference is in the understanding. For a non-Buddhist, hardness is not understood as a reality, an element. It is taken for 'something' or 'someone', for a computer or a body-part, for example. As we read in the Mulapariyaya Sutta, the ignorant worldling conceptualises and proliferates with attachment and wrong view about what is experienced, not understanding it's just hardness. For the Buddhist (of course, referring to the one with developed wisdom of the path here), the outer appearances of life go on the same. They still type on a computer and wash the body. The difference is that there is no idea of the realities or elements as being computers or body-parts in actuality. Like when you always quote from the Bahiya udana, the seen is understood in the seen. No confusing of the seen for the trees. .... H:> Now, that might well require your first clarifying it further for yourself. But that would be fine, would it not? (I found during my pre-retirement years that preparing for my teaching of topics helped me understand those topics even better.) ... S: Yes, of course it's always helpful to clarify for oneself. I appreciate your kind questions in this regard. I don't suppose I've clarified anything, but yes, I learn from it! Metta, Sarah ===== #91228 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Quote Survey. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and all) - In a message dated 10/10/2008 8:39:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard & all (Tep, Alex, TG, Phil & all), --- On Fri, 10/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: >So, Nina: When you & Lodewijk are standing side by side, and you are seeing, there is, at that very time no Lodewijk? .... S: This reminds me (as I happened to listen to it today) that on the latest set of edited recordings, there's a very interesting part where Lodewijk himself raises in some detail the whole question (and his frustration at the time) at the idea of there being 'No Nina, no Lodewijk, no Buddha' and so on. I think the whole conversation is very useful and Lodewijk expresses many people's doubts and confusion on this matter beautifully and strongly. I'd love you to listen carefully and let us know at the end after having listened to KS's verbal comments (as opposed to just the quote Nina gave), whether they make sense to you. It's not long and easy listening. I'm sure you'll sympathise with all of Lodewijk's feelings in this regard. I hope that Tep, Alex, TG, Phil and others who are generally not inclined to listen might give it a try too. It can be found on www.dhammastudygroup.org. Go down to the audio section and it's in the first set: 2007-01-10A-b, starting at 13.30 mins into the track with the start of Lodewijk. ------------------------------------------------ Howard: Of course I will listen to it, Sarah. Thanks. :-) ------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ============================= With metta, Howard #91229 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa -- Its Meanings in the Suttas vs the Abhidhamma. sarahprocter... Dear Tep, --- On Wed, 8/10/08, visitorfromtexas wrote: S:>> It's like when we give the example of understanding 'hardness'. Clearly, other tangible objects can be understood too. .... >T: A five-year-old girl understand hardness too. Can we assume she understands the paramattha dhammas of rupas? .... S: Yes, everyone knows that when hitting one's head against the door, it's hard. No, this isn't the understanding of hardness that we needed a Buddha to explain to us. When he taught about understanding pathavi dhatu (earth element) as just pathavi dhatu at the beginning of the Mulapariyaya, he wasn't passing on the five-year-old's knowledge. Just like we read in the Satipatthana sutta about the jackal. The jackal knows about moving and hardness too, but the kind of knowledge it has does nothing to dispel an idea of a person or a dog or to develop any awareness. There's no panna involved, even if there is some worldly wisdom involved in avoiding trees and doors! ............ ......... ... >T: The five-year-old girl understands hardness in 'head hairs' too, touching them with her finger. It is not difficult for her to know that it is the same hardness she can experience in the earth outside. ... S: Actually these are good and important comments to discuss, thank you. When she touches the softness of the hair, there's still the idea of 'hair' and 'finger' as existing, along with the earth outside. She doesn't know that at that moment there is just the world of softness, no person, no hair, no finger at all. Why? Because awareness and understanding haven't been developed. ... T:> Thank you very much Sarah for your viewpoint. ... S: Thank you for yours as well. I also appreciated a kind response you sent to another message of mine about something I'd written having made sense (for a change!!). Please don't mind at all if our communications become difficult at times....everything gets sorted out in the end, just like with family members:-). Metta, Sarah ========= #91230 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:39 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Sheaves of Reeds ... More Muddled .. sarahprocter... Hi Howard, In D.O. - --- On Wed, 8/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: S: >>Vinnana refers to the vipaka cittas, patisandhi (birth consciousness) and subsequent vipaka cittas such as seeing and hearing. Nama-rupa refers not to the 'objects' of these cittas, but to the accompanying mental factors and rupas (of the body) conditioned by past kamma. >>So, for example, hearing consciousness (vinnana) arises with 7 mental factors (nama in D.O.) and supported by ear-sense. The object, sound, is not conditioned by past kamma if it's outside the body - for example, the sound of the tree outside your window. ============ ========= ========= H:> Yours is an interesting take, Sarah! ... S: Except that I don't consider it as 'my take' at all....just what I read and learn about from the teachings... ... H:> I don't think it is a correct take, as I think it has little place in the D. O. that pertains to the arising and the cessation of dukkha that is what the 12-link scheme is about, but it IS an interesting perspective. ... S: I don't understand the problem with 'the take' - you'd have to elaborate. Metta, Sarah ========= #91231 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 10/10/2008 9:10:42 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (& Alex), --- On Thu, 9/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: Seeing appears, visible object appears, thinking appears. However, nothing can be *done* to understand and be aware of them when they appear except by really considering (as is being done here) what they are and appreciating that desire for results, desire for awareness, clinging to a self that can practice and so on are real hindrances - but of course they too can be known when they arise. ============ ========= ========= ==== H:> Sarah, you say that what needs to occur is to understand the dhammas that arise. What seems unclear is what you mean by that exactly and how that understanding is to come about, especially inasmuch as you say that we are unaware of dhammas. I wish you could clarify your take on that. .... S: Like now, there is seeing, there is thinking and so on. --------------------------------------------- Howard: Yes, certainly so - for all beings. --------------------------------------------- Considering and appreciating that at this moment, there are just these fleeting dhammas arising and falling away, no person in them at all, can be a condition for awareness even now as we speak of a reality, a dhamma which appears. ----------------------------------------------- Howard: So, now you're talking about thinking and theorizing. I would far sooner put that aside and "look"! ------------------------------------------------ Just the world of seeing, of hearing, of thinking - nothing else at all. -------------------------------------------------- Howard: But you are sticking with the thinking, it seems to me, Sarah. ---------------------------------------------- At the moment of touching, just hardness appears, then immediately thinking about the story. -------------------------------------------- Howard: And you are here just telling yourself a story about touching and hardness, it seems to me. As soon as that happens, you have left the reality of hardness and awareness of hardness. ---------------------------------------------- Considering more and more about the realities which make up our life now is the condition for direct awareness and understanding to develop, but not by trying to do anything. --------------------------------------------- Howard: What is all this "considering," Sarah. That's another word for story-making. Like the Tao, the "realities" you *think* about are not the real realities. ------------------------------------------------ As soon as there's the idea of 'trying to do', self is brought back into the equation and we go off-track again. ------------------------------------------------- Howard: And all this thinking IS a "trying to do." --------------------------------------------------- ... H:> Relatedly, given your position that "there is nothing to be done," I wish you could explain what you see as different between a Buddhist and a non-Buddhist, especially as regards coming to understand dhammas. Your position on all this might well be correct and quite terrific, but it is unfathomable to me and some others here. I think it might be really helpful if you could clarify it for us. ... S: [Very good questions btw, thank you]. Yes the difference is in the understanding. For a non-Buddhist, hardness is not understood as a reality, an element. It is taken for 'something' or 'someone', for a computer or a body-part, for example. As we read in the Mulapariyaya Sutta, the ignorant worldling conceptualises and proliferates with attachment and wrong view about what is experienced, not understanding it's just hardness. For the Buddhist (of course, referring to the one with developed wisdom of the path here), the outer appearances of life go on the same. They still type on a computer and wash the body. The difference is that there is no idea of the realities or elements as being computers or body-parts in actuality. Like when you always quote from the Bahiya udana, the seen is understood in the seen. No confusing of the seen for the trees. --------------------------------------------------- Howard: So, you are saying that the difference is a matter of belief. IMO, that's not good enough, and I do not recall having reading the Buddha as indicating that it was. Moslems have beliefs, Jews do, Hindus also, and Christians as well. But the Buddha taught "ehipassiko." To come and see goes far beyond "considering." -------------------------------------------------- .... H:> Now, that might well require your first clarifying it further for yourself. But that would be fine, would it not? (I found during my pre-retirement years that preparing for my teaching of topics helped me understand those topics even better.) ... S: Yes, of course it's always helpful to clarify for oneself. I appreciate your kind questions in this regard. I don't suppose I've clarified anything, but yes, I learn from it! ------------------------------------------------- Howard: :-) -------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah ============================ Thanks for your kind reply, Sarah. :-) With metta, Howard /Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. There is no place without the Presence/ (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) #91232 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:46 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Sheaves of Reeds ... More Muddled .. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 10/10/2008 9:40:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, In D.O. - --- On Wed, 8/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: S: >>Vinnana refers to the vipaka cittas, patisandhi (birth consciousness) and subsequent vipaka cittas such as seeing and hearing. Nama-rupa refers not to the 'objects' of these cittas, but to the accompanying mental factors and rupas (of the body) conditioned by past kamma. >>So, for example, hearing consciousness (vinnana) arises with 7 mental factors (nama in D.O.) and supported by ear-sense. The object, sound, is not conditioned by past kamma if it's outside the body - for example, the sound of the tree outside your window. ============ ========= ========= H:> Yours is an interesting take, Sarah! ... S: Except that I don't consider it as 'my take' at all....just what I read and learn about from the teachings... ------------------------------------------------ Howard: People rarely consider their understanding to be "their take". We rarely realize that what we think we know, we in fact only THINK we know. Frankly, it seems to me that the beginning of wisdom is a realization that we do NOT know. ------------------------------------------------ ... H:> I don't think it is a correct take, as I think it has little place in the D. O. that pertains to the arising and the cessation of dukkha that is what the 12-link scheme is about, but it IS an interesting perspective. ... S: I don't understand the problem with 'the take' - you'd have to elaborate. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard: It's not all that important, Sarah. I'm just going to let this thread drop. :-) ---------------------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah =============================== With metta, Howard #91233 From: han tun Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:15 am Subject: Re: anupubbasikkhaa hantun1 Dear Sarah, > > Han: A Burmese Sayadaw explained that if one follows the first three kathaas, he/she may obtain good results in this very life or rebirth in human and deva planes in the next existence. However, the pleasures achieved in this way are sensual pleasures which have drawbacks, and the Buddha teaches those drawbacks. To avoid those drawbacks, the Buddha next teaches the blessings of renunciation. By this time the mind becomes pliable and is ready to appreciate deeper teaching. Then the Buddha teaches him/her the Four Noble Truths. > Sarah: Perhaps the point is that the Buddha is showing that the kusala states taught by other teachers at the time, i.e. dana, sila and samatha leading to jhana, whilst good, do nothing to tear down the bricks of samsara. So then he goes on to teach about the 4NT. All conditioned dhammas, including dana, sila and samatha, are dukkha because of being anicca and beyond anyone's control. Only through the penetration of the 4NT is there a realisation of the unconditioned and an end to dukkha (eventually). Han: What you said is also plausible. But I find the Introductory Note by Thanissaro Bhikkhu in his article on Refuge: An Introduction to the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha, which is exactly in line with the explanation given by the Burmese Sayadaw. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/refuge.html Quote from the Refuge: [The readings on Dhamma form the core of the book, organized in a pattern — called a graduated discourse (anupubbi-katha) — that the Buddha himself often used when introducing his teachings to new listeners. After beginning with the joys of generosity, he would describe the joys of a virtuous life, followed by the rewards of generosity and virtue to be experienced here and, after death, in heaven; the drawbacks of sensual pleasures, even heavenly ones; and the rewards of renunciation. Then, when he sensed that his listeners were inclined to look favorably on renunciation as a way to true happiness, he would discuss the central message of his teaching: the four noble truths.] End Quote. ------------------------------ > > Han: Sayadaw further explained that the Buddha uses this formula for the very first time when he teaches Yasa, a millionaire’s son of Benares soon after the Buddha has expounded Dhammacakkappavatta na sutta and Anattalakkhana sutta. Later on, the Buddha uses this formula as a routine for the beginners. > Sarah: As I recall, after the first 5 bhikkhus became arahats (Dhammacakkappavatt ana sutta), on the same day the Buddha realised Yasa was ripe for attainment of the Path. So by the end of the 'gradual talk' he was already a sotapanna and by the next day an arahat. All his companions also became arahats. So they may have been 'beginners', but they were certainly ripe for understanding the deep meaning from the beginning. Is this how you understand it? Han: Not on the same day. Perhaps, it was a few days after the Buddha had expounded the Anattalakkhana Sutta and all the five bhikkhus had already become Arahants. I print below an extract from The Buddha and His Teachings, by Ven Narada, Chapter 7: The Teaching of the Dhamma. http://www.budsas.org/ebud/budtch/budteach07.htm Quote from the book: [The Conversion of Yasa and His Friends. In Benares there was a millionaire's son, named Yasa, who led a luxurious life. One morning he rose early and, to his utter disgust, saw his female attendants and musicians asleep in repulsive attitudes. The whole spectacle was so disgusting that the palace presented the gloomy appearance of a charnel house. Realizing the vanities of worldly life, he stole away from home, saying "Distressed am I, oppressed am I," and went in the direction of Isipatana where the Buddha was temporarily residing after having made the five Bhikkhus attain Arahantship. At that particular time the Buddha, as usual, was pacing up and down in an open space. Seeing him coming from afar, the Buddha came out of His ambulatory and sat on a prepared seat. Not far from Him stood Yasa, crying -- "O distressed am I! Oppressed am I!" Thereupon the Buddha said, "Here there is no distress, O Yasa! Here there is no oppression, O Yasa! Come hither, Yasa! Take a seat. I shall expound the Dhamma to you." The distressed Yasa was pleased to hear the encouraging words of the Buddha. Removing his golden sandals, he approached the Buddha, respectfully saluted Him and sat on one side. The Buddha expounded the doctrine to him, and he attained the first stage of Sainthood (Sotapatti). At first the Buddha spoke to him on generosity (dana), morality (sila), celestial states (sagga), the evils of sensual pleasures (kamadinava), the blessings of renunciation (nekkhammanisamsa). When He found that his mind was pliable and was ready to appreciate the deeper teaching He taught the Four Noble Truths.] End Quote. Han: Yasa became Sotaapanna after the discourse, and became an Arahant after hearing the same discourse repeated to his father the next day. His friends became Arahants at a later date. Quote from the same book: [Venerable Yasa had four distinguished friends named Vimala, Subahu, Punnaji and Gavampati. When they heard that their noble friend shaved his hair and beard, and, donning the yellow robe, entered the homeless life, they approached Venerable Yasa and expressed their desire to follow his example. Venerable Yasa introduced them to the Buddha, and, on hearing the Dhamma, they also attained Arahantship. Fifty more worthy friends of Venerable Yasa, who belonged to leading families of various districts, also receiving instructions from the Buddha, attained Arahantship and entered the Holy Order. Hardly two months had elapsed since His Enlightenment when the number of Arahants gradually rose to sixty. All of them came from distinguished families and were worthy sons of worthy fathers.] End Quote. Han: My understanding is that Yasa, although a beginner, must have enough accumulation of parami to be able to become Sotaapanna after hearing the discourse for the first time. Besides, we must not forget that the Teacher at that time was the Buddha himself. ------------------------------ > Sarah: Btw, do you have a reference to this in a sutta? I only recall having read about Yasa briefly in the Dhp commentary. Han: I have not yet read about Yasa in a sutta. But you can find this story in any book on the Life of Buddha. Yours truly, Han #91234 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Quote Survey. upasaka_howard Hi again, Sarah - In a message dated 10/10/2008 8:39:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: It can be found on www.dhammastudygroup.org. Go down to the audio section and it's in the first set: 2007-01-10A-b, starting at 13.30 mins into the track with the start of Lodewijk. ============================= I've listened to the audio, Sarah. Here are my comments: Khun Sujin's question as to whether there would be a Lodewijk if there were no cittas, cetasikas, and rupas was a good one. It makes the correct point that a person is nothing more than a stream of (closely interrelated) mental and physical conditions, and that without these component conditions, there is no person. Lodewijk seemed to express the idea that there is something more to the person than this and that there would be a person even without these conditions, and in that I believe he is in error. But Khun Sujin is also in error, I believe, when she then goes on to say not only that there is no person apart from the dhammas, but that there is no person at all. That ignores interrelatedness. It is analysis-bound and synthesis-avoiding. It is one-sided and tends towards nihilistic wrong view, as I see it. With metta, Howard #91235 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:26 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood visitorfromt... Dear Scott, - You have a lot of energy to argue and repeat the same one-tracked, programmed belief again and again, untiringly. >Scott: I'm not convinced by the view that pa~n~naa is only for the ariyan. You've not demonstrated how it gets to the point of being liberating pa~n~naa. T: I actually "demonstrated" to Jon several months ago and repeated that message again recently. Check it out, if you really want to know what was said twice. So far we have had at least 60 dialogs concerning pa~n~naa during the past 24 months alone. You should review the following two posts in which I answered your question about right view, pa~n~naa cetasika and pa~n~nindriya. So you cannot say I have not explained. ............................ (I) #83903 3/9/2008 Dear Scott (and to all who don't mind a long-but-good post), - This is my long reply to your short question about the first of the three supports why pa~n~naa or pa~n~nindriya cannot be found in non- ariyans. I don't want to write a thesis, though. >T: "There are three simple supports to that truth : 'pa~n~naa does not arise in those moments of consciousness which occur prior to the arising of the Path and Fruit'. 1. Becuase pa~n~naa, according to Dhammasangani and the Patismbhidamagga, includes right view in the domain of the ariya puggalas..." Scott: 'Includes' but can you show 'not limited to'? ...................... T: It is easy to ask, not easy to show and convince. But I'll try, nevertheless. The following is my reasoning that right view (sammaditthi) and other qualities relating to 'pa~n~naa' of the ariya puggalas are path qualities; hence they are above the worldings. Although this sassana of the Gotama Buddha is not limited to ariyans, these path qualities that pertain to the ones who truly see and know the truths through penetration, are. Unfortunately, the English word wisdom or understanding is not powerful enough to describe ~nanaa of the ariya puggala. First of all, let's take a second look at Dhammasangani's definition for pa~n~naa that you posted earlier: "What on that occasion is the faculty of insight (pa~n~nindriya.m)? The insight which there is on that occasion is understanding, search, research, searching the Doctrine, discernment, discrimination, differentiation, erudition, proficiency, subtlety, criticism, reflection, analysis, breadth, sagacity, a 'guide', intuition, a 'goad', wisdom as faculty, wisdom as power, wisdom as a sword, wisdom as a height, wisdom as light, wisdom as glory, wisdom as splendour, wisdom as a precious stone; the absence of dullness, searching the Truth, right views - this is the wisdom that there then is." T: Notice that 'wisdom as faculty' is 'pa~n~nindriya', 'wisdom as power' is 'pa~n~naa bala', and right view is 'sammaditthi', which you know, is a magga factor. It is so obvious that pa~n~naa bala and sammaditthi are the Path qualities that you don't see in puthujjana. For example, pa~n~naa bala is defined in Patism XIX, 7 : What is the understanding power? It is not shaken by ignorance, thus it is the understanding power. .. It is the understanding power in the sense of terminating defilements ... It is the understanding power in the sense of establishing in cessation.". [ Can a worldling have the pa~n~naa bala that terminate defilements, Scott?] T: Also in Patism, 'pa~n~naa' is one of the aspects that define Knowledge of Suffering(dukkha~naana). In the paragraph below please notice that pa~n~naa is rendered as "understanding" by Ven. ~Nanamoli Bhikkhu (who was the translator of Patism). "Herein, what is knowledge of suffering? [Tattha katamam dukkhe ~naanam?] "Any understanding [that arises contingent upon suffering] (dukkham aarabbha yaa uppajjati): act-of-understanding (pa~n~naa pajaananaa), investigation (vicayo), reinvestigation (pavicayo), investigation-of-ideas (dhammavicayo), noting (sallakkhanaa), noticing (upalakkhanaa), taking notice(paccupalakkhanaa), learning (panticcam), skill (kosallam), cleverness (nepu~n~nam), estimation(vebhavyaa), ratiocination (cintaa), scrutiny (upaparikkhaa), over-all-ness (----- ), good-sense(bhuurimedhaa), piloting (parinaayikaa), insight (vipassanaa), full-awareness (sampaja~n~nam), spur(patodo), understanding (pa~n~naa), understanding as faculty (pa~n~nindriyam), understanding as power(pa~n~naa balam), understanding as weapon (pa~n~naa sattham), understanding as stronghold (pa~n~naa paasaado), understanding as light (pa~n~naa aaloko), understanding as illumination (pa~n~naa obhaaso), understanding as lighting up (pa~n~naa pajjoto), understanding as treasure (pa~n~naa ratanam), non- delusion (amoho), investigation of ideas (dhammavicayo), right view (sammaaditthi),: this is called knowledge of suffering (Idam vuccati dukkhe ~naanam.) [Patisambhidamagga, Treatise I (on Knowledge), 568 (page 121 of the hard-bound edition) The above Pali inserts were given by Han Tun.] [Is dukkha~naana not limited to worldlings, Scott?] T: So, it is obvious, very obvious, that those many terms that describe dukkha~naana appear in the definition of pa~n~naa in Dhammasangani too. What do you think that tells you, Scott? Sincerely, Tep -------------------- (II) [I did not record this message's number, sorry. But I am sure it was after #83903.] Dear Scott (Alex, Han, Nina, Sarah), - > >T: Pa~n~naa cetasika includes right view and the faculty of discernment, according to Dhammasangani. >Scott: Would you say that 1) Right View arises as a function of pa~n~naa cetasika, that is, by the penetration of dhammas by pa~n~naa which reveals anatta, anicca or dukkha? Or 2) are Right View and pa~n~naa cetasika inseparable, perhaps synonymous? T: I haven't seen your evaluation of the previous answer yet! Okay. I only quess an answer for the first question and give you what I have seen in the Dhammasangani for the second one. 1) Yes. Panna cetasika accompanies yoniso-manasikara, and it evolves from a mundane right view to the Arahant's supramundane right view (as explained in MN 117, for example). 2) In the Dhammasangani samma-ditthi is listed with several other "things" such as pa~n~nindriya (faculty of discernment in the five Indriyas), dhamma-vicara (a factor of the bojjhanga), vipassana, pa~n~nabala, amoha. The same formula is also seen in the Patisambhidamagga where Pa~n~na also subsumes the four knowledges of the FNT. This shows consistency between Patism and the Abhidhamma. 568. Knowledge in one who possesses the path is knowledge of suffering and it is knowledge of the origin of suffering and it is knowledge of the cessation of suffering and it is knowledge of the way leading to the cessation of sufferring. Herein, what is knowledge of suffering? Any understanding, act-of-understanding, investigation, reinvestigation, investigation-of-ideas, noting, noticing, taking notice, learning, skill, cleverness, estimation, ratiocination, scrutiny, over-all-ness, good-sense, piloting, insight, full- awareness, spur, understanding, understanding as faculty, understanding as power, understanding as weapon, understanding as stronghold, understanding as light, understanding as illumination, understanding as lighting up, understanding as treasure, non-delusion, investigation of ideas, right view, that arises contingent upon suffering : this is called knowledge of suffering (cf. Dhs 16). Any understanding, ... right view, that arises contingent upon the origin of suffering: ... Any understanding, ... right view, that arises contingent upon cessation of suffering: ... Any understanding, ... right view, that arises contingent upon the way leading to the cessation of sufferring: this is called knowledge of the way leading to the cessation of sufferring. [end quote] * Now that I have answered your questions, it is time you give me your answers. ;-)) Yours truly, Tep === ........................... T: My answer to your question 2) in (II) above is 'yes, and more'. This answer shows clearly that pa~n~naa and pa~n~nindriya are ariya's understanding (on the path, not prior to). You did not understand the explanation I made or did not want to understand it then. So are you sure you want to repeat the same track of discussion disappointment again? Tep === #91236 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:29 am Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. nilovg Hi Howard, I understand your qualms. Kh. Sujin also said that it is natural that we think of persons. The reality is then thinking. We can think with metta and karuna, and even more so, when there is less the idea of my metta, my compassion. The Survey quote only tells us: at that short moment of seeing the world is visible object. There is no room for other objects such as concept of a person. Each citta experiences only one object at a time. In the beginning I also found this point difficult, but now it is better, although I still cling to the idea of person. Kh Sujin also said: it is very difficult to get rid of the idea of person or self. So we cannot expect this to happen soon. I notice this Q. comes back time and again, and this shows how difficult it must be to accept the truth: there are only dhammas arising because of their own conditions. Nina. Op 10-okt-2008, om 16:19 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > But Khun Sujin is also in > error, I believe, when she then goes on to say not only that there > is no > person apart from the dhammas, but that there is no person at all. > That ignores > interrelatedness. It is analysis-bound and synthesis-avoiding. It is > one-sided and tends towards nihilistic wrong view, as I see it. #91237 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:59 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise. visitorfromt... Dear Scott, - Some of your challenging questions are answered, being conditioned by what I know both in principle and in experience. >T: "...the question must be asked by any meditator who is making a progress toward the path (and on the path)." Scott: Not of other 'meditators' though, Tep. How would it go over, do you think, were I to press the jhaana enthusiasts to tell me exactly how it is they know that they have attained the level of the first jhaana? Do you think they'd appreciate being asked exactly what 'vitakka' feels like experientially? Or 'vicaara'? Or what the experience is of moving from the first to the second jhaana? I've actually nearly done as much here once, only to learn that none of the jhaana enthusiasts who are so volubly in favour of jhaana have actually experienced jhaana. This request for experienctial evidence didn't go over too well. T: Why not? They should be glad to respond if they can tell that you sincerely want to learn and ask them with respect. It all depends on how you ask, rather than what you ask. But who are you to judge them with the preprogrammed attitude that they know nothing? You can tell if they know jhaana only when you yourself know jhaana. ...................... Scott: I think it best to let the individual monitor his or her own 'development' and stick to discussing 'theory'. I think that anyone willing to openly discuss his or her own so-called 'meditative experiences' is suspect, at least to me. I've met some in my day... T: Since you want it that way, so let it be so. ....................... [Tep's comment: it is known by a 'person' while there still is attachment to me and mine. Personality is not perceived when attachment has been abandoned] Scott: Here is where I totally disagree. There is nothing I've read in the suttas to support this idea. Since a 'person' is entirely conceptual, it has no capacity to 'know' anything. Surely you must know at least of the theoretical difference between naama, ruupa, and pa~n~natti. Sati is aware and pa~n~naa knows at all levels of development from low to high. A person can never be aware of or know anything. T: So it seems that you have missed a lot in your sutta study. ................. >T: "I like this positive attitude, Scottie. But I'll like it more if it is more flexible to include 'experience'." Scott: Sorry, Tep, you'll have to take me as I am. I'll stick to discussing Dhamma here. I deal with 'experience' as it comes, when it comes, and keep it to myself. I've got to go for now, Tep, so, if you don't mind, I'll address the rest of the post at a later point. (I've got half a reply going to an earlier post of yours - all about how worldlings can't know anything ;-) - as well that I'll get off, likely tomorrow morning.) T: No, I don't mind. Come back whenever it is convenient. Tep === #91238 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa -- Its Meanings in the Suttas vs the Abhidhamma. visitorfromt... Dear Sarah (Scott, Nina), - You are right when you observe that the following is a good example for the discussion of 'understanding realities now'. >T: The five-year-old girl understands hardness in 'head hairs' too, touching them with her finger. It is not difficult for her to know that it is the same hardness she can experience in the earth outside. ... S: Actually these are good and important comments to discuss, thank you. When she touches the softness of the hair, there's still the idea of 'hair' and 'finger' as existing, along with the earth outside. She doesn't know that at that moment there is just the world of softness, no person, no hair, no finger at all. T: You're welcome. Not just existence of hair, finger and the earth element outside, but also her personal identity. The same is true for a 50-year old who is uninstructed in the basic Teachings on elements(dhatus) and nama-rupa. >S: Why? Because awareness and understanding haven't been developed. T: How do they (the 5-year-old and the uninstructed 50-year-old) develop awareness and understanding? And how do you verify that such development leads to true (not imagined) understanding ? Nina answered satisfactorily on how to develop awareness & understanding but not about its verification, but Scott has failed in both imho. Tep === #91239 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:35 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/10/2008 10:29:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I understand your qualms. Kh. Sujin also said that it is natural that we think of persons. The reality is then thinking. We can think with metta and karuna, and even more so, when there is less the idea of my metta, my compassion. The Survey quote only tells us: at that short moment of seeing the world is visible object. There is no room for other objects such as concept of a person. Each citta experiences only one object at a time. In the beginning I also found this point difficult, but now it is better, although I still cling to the idea of person. Kh Sujin also said: it is very difficult to get rid of the idea of person or self. So we cannot expect this to happen soon. I notice this Q. comes back time and again, and this shows how difficult it must be to accept the truth: there are only dhammas arising because of their own conditions. Nina. =========================== No, Nina. I'm not talking about what is *known* at a given time, but what *exists* - namely a multiplicity of streams of dhammas in relation. At the very time that there is the experiencing in one mind stream of a single object, there is the experiencing of other objects in a multitude of other mind streams. You do know that, do you not? ================================ With metta, Howard Op 10-okt-2008, om 16:19 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > But Khun Sujin is also in > error, I believe, when she then goes on to say not only that there > is no > person apart from the dhammas, but that there is no person at all. > That ignores > interrelatedness. It is analysis-bound and synthesis-avoiding. It is > one-sided and tends towards nihilistic wrong view, as I see it. #91240 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:28 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise truth_aerator Hi Scott and all, >--- "Scott" wrote: >Scott: How would it go over, do you think, were I to press the >jhaana enthusiasts to tell me exactly how it is they know that they >have attained the level of the first jhaana? Unless you have attained it yourself, how would you recognize correct Jhana from incorrect? Please no arm-chair speculations here. I know how insight through meditation feel. I know how lights appearing (nimitta) feel. Do you? Would you recognize description of them? If you have achieved them, then you'll know. And I tell you, it is one thing to read about this or that insight and it is totally different to actually *experience* it rather than play make believe "I know it since I've read it" sort of thing. Best wishes, #91241 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Hi Sarah, > sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > .... > S: A gradual training, no steps to be followed by a self. > .... Sure, it is just nama reaching this and that step. However the "gradual" shows that arahatship isn't reached suddenly and without have to go through certain stages. > Sorry, the translation above won't do and the understanding of >realities can never occur *during* jhana. How deep in meditation did you get to? Any actual experiences to back that up? It is quite sad when arm-chair speculations hijack actual experience. For me, insights happened ONLY during meditation, not after. >"Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, >formations, and consciousness [S: i.e 5 khandhas], he sees those >states as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a tumour, as a >barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, >as void, as not self.....etc" Another proof of what I've said. In that sutta and MN111, the seeing of realities is in present tense AS THEY ARE OCCURING. The only level when one has to come out is the 8th one (neither perception nor non-perception) and Nirodha Samapatti. Best wishes, #91242 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? truth_aerator Dear Scott, Sarah, Jon and all DSG'ers I'd like you to answer what Tep has said: >---"visitorfromtexas" wrote: > T: For those who believe in "predetermination" or determintic fate >we must ask them as follows: > >How do you determine whether all events are 100% deterministic, i.e. > if an event is not destined to happen, then it will never happen? >If an event is destined to happen, then it will? > > That is the belief of the no-practice, do-nothing people. With that > kind of belief there is no use to practice the Dhamma, because if >you > are going to become an arahant, then you WILL BE arahant even if >you > commit heinous crimes all the time. On the other hand, if it is > already your fate to never penetrate the FNTs, then it is useless >to > practice siila-samadhi-pa~n~naa here and now. Either case you do > nothing, and just live the stupid life. > > Tep > === Best wishes, #91243 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:41 am Subject: Re: what is Considering truth_aerator Hello Sarah and all, > sarah abbott wrote: > S: Like now, there is seeing, there is thinking and so on. >Considering and appreciating that at this moment, there are just >these fleeting dhammas arising and falling away, no person in them >at >all, can be a condition for awareness even now as we speak of a >reality, a dhamma which appears. Is considering the same as thinking? Can you please explain what "considering" is and what it isn't? Isn't considering doing something, or is it doing nothing? Best wishes, #91244 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:55 am Subject: Re: dependent origination truth_aerator Hello Sarah, Howard and all, I do not have evidence to support that vinnana (3rd factor) in DO is patisandhi citta. Furthermore DO seems to be not the ontological model of "reality" but more of a psychological account of how suffering arises and ceases. It starts with ignorance and ends in "aging, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and of course dispair." The liberative dependent origination (upanisa sutta sn 12.23) starts with suffering and ends with knowledge of destruction of Cankers. Again, soteriological, rather than "ontological" diagram - just like what the Buddha has taught "I teach only suffering and its cessation." And this is what truly matters and what has a chance to stay in 21st century world. While we can argue and ignore space monsters swallowing moon, geo centricity and such - the liberative teaching still stands. Best wishes, #91245 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:32 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 10-okt-2008, om 17:35 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > At the > very time that there is the experiencing in one mind stream of a > single > object, there is the experiencing of other objects in a multitude > of other mind > streams. You do know that, do you not? ------- N: Other beings also experience different objects and react with attachment, aversion or wisdom, according to their accumulations. But what others experience cannot be as clearly known as what appears now to this being here now. It does not bring detachment to think and think all the time about other's mind-streams, they are fleeting anyway. Better attend to this citta here now, already difficult enough. Nina. #91246 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:52 am Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Survey quote nilovg Hi TG and Howard, your concerns were similar, so I better address both of you. Op 9-okt-2008, om 14:49 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Saying that a citta thinks about a story is simply replacing "a > person" > with "a citta". But that replacement is worse than the original, > for at least > a person is a conglomerate that includes thinking, whereas citta is > the > single activity of knowing. Cittas do not think, Nina. They are > knowing. They are > not thinking. And they are not entities that engage in actions, but > are > actions themselves, specifically acts of knowing . ------- N: Seeing sees, or citta sees, or there is just seeing. Never mind how we call it, we need not use the term citta or nama. The study of the Abhidhamma is directed towards the direct understanding of characteristics as they appear now, one at a time. Then names are not important. When there are conditions for mindfulnes, there isn't even time to think: citta sees or seeing sees, there is just attending to the characteristic of whatever appears. When we study the Abhidhamma and do not forget the goal: to be aware of whatever appears now, the study will be more fruitful and there will be less opportunity for the dangers you both are so concerned of: letting the self in at the backdoor, in the guise of citta, seen as an actor, a person, a self. Returning to citta as explained in the Abhidhamma, the exposition of the different functions of cittas as they arise in processes and of those that are process freed, this an eminent way of helping us to see that they are beyond control, and impermanent. It seems that there can be seeing and hearing at the same time, but in reality many processes have passed. As soon as we think of a specific citta it has passed away already. All that can be done is attending to different charactreistics that appear, quite naturally. Nothing to hold on to. The study is the condition for the right practice. But any fool can insert a self in the citta and take it for a person. It is possible to read the whole Tipitaka with the wrong view of self. Thinking of a self who exerts effort, who takes decisions, who wills this or that. Nina. #91247 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa -- Its Meanings in the Suttas vs the Abhidhamma. nilovg Dear Tep, Op 10-okt-2008, om 17:32 heeft visitorfromtexas het volgende geschreven: > How do they (the 5-year-old and the uninstructed 50-year-old) > develop awareness and understanding? And how do you verify that such > development leads to true (not imagined) understanding ? > > Nina answered satisfactorily on how to develop awareness & > understanding but not about its verification, but Scott has failed in > both imho. ------- N: This is a matter that is known each person individually for himself. When there is pa~n`naa there is no doubt, but we cannot know about this in another person, as Scott also indicated. Nina. #91248 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mirages: was Concept Permanent and unconditioned? kenhowardau Hi Sarah and Howard, ------------- <. . .> S: > As you (Ken) once suggested, anatta can never be too extreme (or something along those lines). ------------- Thanks for remembering my moment in the sun, Sarah. :-) To be a little more precise, I think I said it could never be taken "too far." We perceive problems with anatta only when we don't take it far enough. To put it another way: there are only dhammas - and 'only' means only! :-) ------------------------ KH (to Howard): > > If you know of some K Sujin students who see dhammas another way please name them, I am sure they won't mind. :-) ... S: > Well you were obviously very sheltered in Bangkok, we'll have to shake it up next time! I assure you that there are admirers or students of KS who also go to meditation centres, prefer to discuss statues, also pray to the Buddha for happy rebirths for themselves or family members and so on.... We can't blame the teacher for the misunderstandings and wrong views of the admirers. We hear and understand what there are conditions and tendencies to hear at the time. ----------------------- Yes, I conveniently forgot that. I remembered seconds after posting and thought seriously about a follow-up qualification. But then I decided 'Admirers of K Sujin are, in the paramattha sense, moments of right understanding.' And so it was true to say they all thought alike. :-) Ken H > H:>> The perspective that I sense on the part of some, though not > all, of the admirers of Khun Sujin is that paramattha dhammas are entities: true, separable existents with essence that arise and are then > annihilated. > .... > S: Zap!! #91249 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:43 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Rupa -- Its Meanings in the Suttas vs the Abhidhamma. visitorfromt... Dear Nina (Scott, Sarah), - Thank you for promptly responding to the questions : > How do they (the 5-year-old and the uninstructed 50-year-old) > develop awareness and understanding? And how do you verify that such > development leads to true (not imagined) understanding ? > > Nina answered satisfactorily on how to develop awareness & > understanding but not about its verification, but Scott has failed in > both imho. ------- N: This is a matter that is known each person individually for himself. When there is pa~n`naa there is no doubt, but we cannot know about this in another person, as Scott also indicated. Nina. T: It is true that when there is 'pa~n~naa' (of the path) there is no doubt, and so there is no problem of misunderstanding in one who knows. There is NO question about that! The question is : how may one find out whether his/her "understanding nama-rupa NOW" is true or false? The Buddha explained to Ven. Ananda that a kalyanamitta can help. What can a person without kalyanamitta do to correct himself? Tep === #91250 From: "alberto.spera" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello alberto.spera Dear Nina and Sarah Thanks for your warm welcome to DSG! I take the opportunity to thank you (and Jon and others members too) for the work you've been doing which gives people like me the opportunity to read and hear the Dhamma that A. Sujin explains in such a convincing way. I think that the audio files are a good complement to her writings, giving extra details about aspects of dhammas difficult to understand and over the past year I have downloaded the whole set (over 2GB). A recent example of my own consideration regards the kamma, kilesa and vipaka vatta, I had plenty of doubts (and still have some) on the subject, I was reading A. Sujin Survey's, the chapter on the 3rd characteristic of citta, when I thought that the five sense doors are just the way for vipaka-dhamma to arise, seeing, hearing ecc., without this dvara it would be impossible for vipaka-dhamma to do their job, that's all, end of the story (I think that moment was with anatta-sanna). The next moment avijja and lobha (or was it dosa?) had already taken possession of that thougth and I was thinking (again and again) that dvaras were ways through wich SOMEONE gets back what one somehow deserves! (and I think this is an instance of how atta-sanna accumulates) One of the doubts I still have is about the cycle of defilments, kilesa-vatta, A.Sujin writes that vipaka cycle arise with kilesa already and I'm not sure if she refers to kilesa being latent in all cittas, even in ahetuka-vipaka-citta or to the kusala or akusala cetasika of the javana-citta in the panca-dvara-vithi. Alberto Ps - Sarah, I'm from Brescia, northern italy, about 20 miles from Lake Garda, a nice place in summer, not quite like Chiantishire though. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alberto, > wellcome here. I am glad you appreciate A. Sujin. If you have any > remarks about the materials or questions about it, do write them, it > is to the benefit of us all. > Looking forward to your remarks and contributions, > Nina. > #91251 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 12:50 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/10/2008 2:33:06 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 10-okt-2008, om 17:35 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > At the > very time that there is the experiencing in one mind stream of a > single > object, there is the experiencing of other objects in a multitude > of other mind > streams. You do know that, do you not? ------- N: Other beings also experience different objects and react with attachment, aversion or wisdom, according to their accumulations. But what others experience cannot be as clearly known as what appears now to this being here now. It does not bring detachment to think and think all the time about other's mind-streams, they are fleeting anyway. Better attend to this citta here now, already difficult enough. --------------------------------------------- Howard: True, but not the point of our conversation. :-) -------------------------------------------- Nina. ========================= With metta, Howard #91252 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:00 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Sheaves of Reeds ... Non-ariyan's Understanding .. visitorfromt... Hi Howard (Nina, Scott, Sarah, Alex), - May I comment about the "take" in non-ariyans? The fact is that it is often erratic, but people rarely see their own muddled understanding as erratic. >Howard (#91232): >People rarely consider their understanding to be "their take". We rarely realize that what we think we know, we in fact only THINK we know. Frankly, it seems to me that the beginning of wisdom is a realization that we do NOT know. ----------- T: Indeed "the beginning of wisdom is a realization that we do NOT know". After that realization s/he makes an effort to abandon wrong understanding and to attain right understanding (or right view, see MN 117 about the training), which I think is called pa~n~naa or discernment in many suttas. >Tep to Nina(#91249): It is true that when there is 'pa~n~naa' (of the path) there is no doubt, and so there is no problem of misunderstanding in one who knows. There is NO question about that! >The question is : how may one find out whether his/her "understanding nama-rupa NOW" is true or false? The Buddha explained to Ven. Ananda that a kalyanamitta can help. What can a person without kalyanamitta do to correct himself? >Tep to Jon(#87029): The kind of instructed worldling's understanding (not the true pa~n~na in the strict sutta sense) in ones who have turned to the Dhamma (like you and me) is supported by unshakable faith (saddha) in the Buddha and the Teachings on wholesomeness & unwholesomeness, their advantages/disadvantages and their roots(mula). With an unshakable saddha in the Dhamma we avoid akusalas and develop kusala dhammas. We are ashamed to break the Precepts, etc. To proceed from this level of understanding to the trainer (sekha) level, we need to practice abandoning the five hindrances (using kayagatasati and indriya-samvara) and, when the mind is without the hindrances, frequently and repeatedly contemplate the Dependent Origination both forward(origination) and backward(cessation) expositions. "There is the case where a monk is a learner. He discerns, as it actually is, that 'This is stress... This is the origination of stress... This is the cessation of stress... This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress.' "This is a manner of reckoning whereby a monk who is a learner, standing at the level of a learner, can discern that 'I am a learner.' "[SN 48.53 Sekha Sutta] ........................ T: He can coorect himself through gradual training that transforms the mundane 'understanding' to 'pa~n~naa' of an ariyan. The pa~n~naa of the path (right understanding of the FNTs) is discernable by the sekha, and it is no longer erratic. So "his take" is error-free. Tep === #91253 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:36 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "...I know how insight through meditation feel. I know how lights appearing (nimitta) feel. Do you? Would you recognize description of them?..." Scott: You've misunderstood, Alex. I don't need to discuss any of this. Sincerely, Scott. #91254 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:59 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise truth_aerator Dear Scott, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Scott: You've misunderstood, Alex. I don't need to discuss any of >this. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. What have I misunderstood? Best wishes, #91255 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:04 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood - No Practise scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "What have I misunderstood?" Scott: Sorry. You've misunderstood that I might want to discuss any of this. I'm not so inclined. Apologies. Sincerely, Scott. #91256 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:26 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey quote TGrand458@... Hi Nina, (Howard) In a message dated 10/10/2008 12:53:10 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: N: Seeing sees, or citta sees, or there is just seeing. ........................................................... TG: The first statement and third statement are reasonable, the first being somewhat awkward. The second statement -- "citta sees" is a conceptual theory. I reject the latter formula as there is no "consciousness that sees," but merely -- seeing consciousness....which = "seeing." Taking the first and third statements, we need to also be vigilantly aware that this "seeing" is a conglomeration of conditions and that the "seeing itself" has "nothing of itself." It is a mere "utterly dependent" on diverse merging conditions. It is an "empty echo" of "other conditions." It is hollow in that regard. .............................................................................. ... Never mind how we call it, we need not use the term citta or nama. .............................................................................. ..... TG: I agree with this statement but find it somewhat less than with candor ... as I find that those following your religion have a near, if not total, obsession to use those terms. They ferociously cling to them IMO. .............................................................................. .............. The study of the Abhidhamma is directed towards the direct understanding of characteristics as they appear now, one at a time. .............................................................................. ... TG: I think your particular brand of Abhidhamma studies in this fashion. Be this YOUR method of study, it certainly was not the Buddha's teaching. It is a rather tortured interpretation of the Buddha's teaching. .............................................................................. ......... Then names are not important. When there are conditions for mindfulnes, there isn't even time to think: citta sees or seeing sees, there is just attending to the characteristic of whatever appears. When we study the Abhidhamma and do not forget the goal: to be aware of whatever appears now, ............................................................................ TG: This is so far removed from the goal of the Buddha's teaching I can't really even consider it Buddhism. I'll grant that it is akin to one method of the Buddha's teaching. ........................................................................... the study will be more fruitful and there will be less opportunity for the dangers you both are so concerned of: letting the self in at the backdoor, in the guise of citta, seen as an actor, a person, a self. .................................................................... TG: This would be good as long as we don't let self view in the "front door" by creating substantialist entities out of "dhammas." Seeing "dhammas" as an actor, person, or self, is not so much my concern. Its seeing "dhamams" as "little entities with their own characteristics" that is my concern. This is "related" to self view, its the same "class" of delusion, but it is not seeing "dhammas" as persons. .............................................................................. .. Returning to citta as explained in the Abhidhamma, the exposition of the different functions of cittas as they arise in processes and of those that are process freed, this an eminent way of helping us to see that they are beyond control, and impermanent. It seems that there can be seeing and hearing at the same time, but in reality many processes have passed. As soon as we think of a specific citta .................................................................. TG: I'm kind of following what you say and thinking...this isn't too bad...but then this "language" comes up (specific citta) and I think...."they think these things are entities with their own characteristics." Then I think, this method CANNOT break away from attachment because they are way too attached to the theory. This is a very complex theory but I'd say, its not even 25% as deep as the Buddha's teaching on Dependent Arising and IMO, from your writings, you haven't seen that yet. (It is 250% more convoluted though.) ;-) .......................................................................... it has passed away already. All that can be done is attending to different charactreistics that appear, quite naturally. Nothing to hold on to. The study is the condition for the right practice. But any fool can insert a self in the citta and take it for a person. ....................................................... TG: I think this last sentence misses Howard and my points. Otherwise, the first part is not too bad except that I know "characteristics" is a code-word for "ultimate realities with their own characteristics" so I cringe. ........................................................... It is possible to read the whole Tipitaka with the wrong view of self. Thinking of a self who exerts effort, who takes decisions, who wills this or that. ............................................................ TG: Sure it is. There's all sorts of misunderstandings that can accompany such a reading. A little poem... Conditionality is the key in understanding that phenomena are empty. Good post though! Thanks for your efforts, and in the larger scheme of things, were really brethren under the skin. ;-) TG OUT #91257 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/10/2008 11:56:04 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: I do not have evidence to support that vinnana (3rd factor) in DO is patisandhi citta. Furthermore DO seems to be not the ontological model of "reality" but more of a psychological account of how suffering arises and ceases. ........................................ Hi Alex Great comment on the psychological aspects of DO links. I agree. The 12 links are a very focused explanation on how a system is generating suffering. It is primarily a psychological account. TG #91258 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:48 pm Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Jon Let me reduce this to one point. > > Ph: Sure. We agree there. I just feel pushed into getting too > deep > > too fast into present realities by the A.S approach. I resent it > and > > as a result I spin too far in the opposite direction. > > Pushed? By whom?? > > Your imagination only ;-)) Ph: Direct quote from A.S, I'm 90% sure this was from one of her talks, in English with you guys: "Is there seeing now? Study it, or panna cannot grow." Now you will deny this til the cow comes home a thousand times, and I don't mind, but this is the sort of thing I find contradictory about aspects of her approach. On one hand, she criticizes people for trying to place mindfulness on specific objects because it is self placing it there, or whatever, but in the above it is pretty clear to me that she is urging us to try to differentiate between seeing and visible object, which is a far deeper and subtler thing to do than place the attention on the breath in the way Vism very,very, very, very, very....very explicitly tells the beginner to do (with counting breath between 5 and 10 times, etc, noting the gross aspects of breath the way one notes gross aspects of sound of gong... So you see, I don't think it's my imagination. I encourage you to reflect on that above quote and how it is pushing us to get deep...it would be incredibly, amazingly, breathtakingly refreshing if one of her students would one day say "well, she didn't put it well there, that sounds like wrong view" the way you are so willing to say the same about other teachers. I personally have seen moments of wrong view in all the teachers I have heard...nobody's perfect. But you guys are unwilling to admit errors in A.S. And I think it's because you want a teacher who has immaculate view so by listening to her you will have a gateway to immaculate view. Sorry, but I think subtly this is what is going on! But I say that in a friendly way, my good Dhamma friend. At work. Have to run so can't get to the rest of the post. If you address the above comment in a way, please pull and post anything that would be useful. We can keep discussing this a bit, if you'd like. Won't really go anywhere, I think, but why not.... metta, phil #91259 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:16 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. TGrand458@... Hi Nina and Howard In a message dated 10/10/2008 8:30:11 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: I notice this Q. comes back time and again, and this shows how difficult it must be to accept the truth: there are only dhammas arising because of their own conditions. Nina. ....................................................... TG: This insistence on the term "dhammas" ... its telling. How about the idea that "dhammas" have "their own conditions." Wow. How "self-contained" is that? It should be stated more along these lines... "There are only altering coreless Conditions due to altering coreless conditions." TG OUT #91260 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:20 pm Subject: Cha.t.tha Sa"ngaayana Pali version thomaslaw03 Hi Dhamma friends, There are different versions of the Pali texts within the Theravada traditions(such as Thailand and Sri Lanka's Theravadas). I wonder whether the Cha.t.tha Sa"gaayana version is now accepted by all Theravada traditions? If so, then this Pali version becomes the only standard version for all the Theravada Buddhists to follow and study. Am I right? Sincerely Thomas Law #91261 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? TGrand458@... Hi Howard and Sarah In a message dated 10/10/2008 7:10:55 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Considering and appreciating that at this moment, there are just these fleeting dhammas arising and falling away, no person in them at all, can be a condition for awareness even now as we speak of a reality, a dhamma which appears. .................................................................. TG: I don't have time to rip up the rest of your post. LOL The "awareness" you speak of above is just an example of overlaying or interjecting a "view" onto what is being experienced. There is NO NEED to ADD that view! So substantialist. "Dhammas" suck. LOL That last might be a good idea for a T-Shirt. LOL Even from an Abhidhamma point of view it should be inarguable. Why call "experiences" -- "realities"? Why unnecessarily go overboard to add a substantialist outlook onto mere experience? Just conditions...that's all. If they were so friggin "ultimately real," I don't think the Buddha would have called them hollow, void, alien, empty, and "like a mirage or conjurer's trick." This strange need to warn someone like Howard or myself that "there is no person in them at all" makes me wonder if you have any clue where we stand. That type of insertion might be better for a "intro to Buddhism" class. But I guess you're just trying to clarify where you stand. Do you have any idea at all why Howard or I might see your standpoint as "substantialist"? TG OUT #91262 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:35 pm Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi again > If you > address the above comment in a way, please pull and post anything > that would be useful. We can keep discussing this a bit, if you'd > like. Won't really go anywhere, I think, but why not.... I was rushing above. Meant to write "if there is anything in the rest of your post (which I didn't read) that adressed the above comment in any way, please pull and past..." metta, phil #91263 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. visitorfromt... Hi TG & Alex, - Thanks to TG's comment because now what Alex said below is clear. > truth_aerator@... writes: > > .. Furthermore DO seems to be not the ontological > model of "reality" but more of a psychological account of how > suffering arises and ceases. > > TG > Great comment on the psychological aspects of DO links. > I agree. The 12 links are a very focused explanation on > how a system is generating suffering. > It is primarily a psychological account. > T: It is not yet clear what might be a conflict with the DO, if any, by Khun Sujin's Abhidhamma teaching below. "...But before that there are conditions for seeing to arise, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking. They're all phenonena which are naama and ruupa. That's all. And no one can condition any reality at all. For instance, who can make up hardness here? No one." Question: "So you have choice?" Kh. Sujin: "No 'you.'" Question: "No, I mean 'a person' has choice?" Kh. Sujin: "No 'person' either. There can be thinking. Thinking can think different ways. But its only thinking. Not seeing. Not hearing. Not sleeping" ------------------------------ Is the above interpretation in conflict with the 'DO psychological account of how suffering arises and ceases'? Why or why not? In my opinion, 'no you, no person' means no birth & no suffering, i.e. Nibbana. Tep === #91264 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:16 pm Subject: Patimokkha reverendagga... Hi everybody! i was just reading a bit of D.S.G.discussion and came across a comment about the value of the Patimokkha in its entirety. There is a rule in the Patimokkha in the silk rug chapter i believe, that aside from two exceptions (if i have done work around the temple that day,and the second involving a specific period of the full moon) that i should not take a bath(wash myself)more than once every 2 weeks! Thankfully for the comfort of many,including our own selves as monks this rule is beaten down and broken every day! The point is this: it is one thing to discuss weather something still practically aplies 2,500+ years later or not or to what degree etc. and another to make up stuff and call it "Buddha Law" or just blindly adhere to something because it was written down along time ago in a land far far away!Everything that is in the vinniya as an example, was not even given to his disciples by the Venerable Gotama but was added later during the first or later recitals by monks living during a far different time in a much different culture than we now know. Someone might ask:Why are you a Theravada monk then? A: i dont see any reason why a Theravada monk should follow ANY teaching blindly. The vision of a horse running down a race track with blinders on is NOT compatable with a search for true spiritual knowledge, regardless of what our spiritual path may or may not be. Oh yes! Before i go i have a question!....... Can ANYBODY at the D.S.G. claim that they are "ENLIGHTENED"? This enquiring mind would like to know! May the Buddha's,Deva and Angels bless all of you! bhikkhu/reverend aggacitto #91265 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/10/2008 8:50:28 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Is the above interpretation in conflict with the 'DO psychological account of how suffering arises and ceases'? Why or why not? In my opinion, 'no you, no person' means no birth & no suffering, i.e. Nibbana. Tep ................................................... Hi Tep Regarding the second statement above ... conditioned phenomena have no self in regards to them. This is always the case so it really isn't tied to Nibbana. Understanding that conditionality has no self, and eliminating the sense-of-self are two different things. Completely eliminating the "self delusion" would indicate attaining Nibbana. Believing that there are "dhammas" and they are "ultimate realities with their own characteristics" is yet an entirely different thing. The understanding of "no self, no person, in reference to "ultimate realities with their own characteristics" is not at all the way I understand no-self. It is kind of like saying -- the car is "not its own thing" but the parts that make up the car "are its own thing." A very flawed outlook in my view. Conditionality renders any and every conditioned thing as "not its own thing." No-self does not JUST apply to the "surface delusion," -- person view, I, me, mine view, it applies to absolutely all conditioned phenomena in every way possible. TG OUT #91266 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 6:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Patimokkha TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/10/2008 10:16:58 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, reverendaggacitto@... writes: Oh yes! Before i go i have a question!...Oh Can ANYBODY at the D.S.G. claim that they are "ENLIGHTENED"C This enquiring mind would like to know! ........................................................... Hi Reverend My understanding was that it is a prerequisite in order to join the group. Oh wait a minute...that was UNLIGHTENED. My mistake. The person inside of my dhammas made me do it. ;-) TG #91267 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:10 pm Subject: The Essential Texts! bhikkhu0 Friends: What the Blessed Buddha Gotama actually said & did: The unsurpassable blissful advantage gained by thorough study of these 3 ancient text collections lasts much more than this single & short life ... Not much else in this petty world give such elevating lift !!! The core Ancient Authentic Sacred Buddhist Scriptures: <...> For more serious study of the ~2491 years old sacred Buddhist texts: Check: The 1881 founded Pali Text Society: http://www.palitext.com Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #91268 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:18 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 11-okt-2008, om 1:50 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Better attend to this citta here now, already difficult enough. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > True, but not the point of our conversation. :-) ------- N: Yes, quite, it is the point of our conversation. Realities have to be understood. That is the essence. Which realities? Those that appear now, one at a time. Mindstreams of self or others: then the reality is just thinking, a type of naama. Nina. #91269 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:25 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 3, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, We cling to all the objects that are experienced through the senses and through the mind-door. We cling to people’s opinion about us, we want to be liked by them. Once Khun Sujin was handing a bowl of soup to someone else and then the bowl was overturned; soup was spillled all over a friend’s clothes. Sarah and I noticed that Khun Sujin was not upset and we said that we would be upset in such a situation. But being upset is dosa and thus it is not helpful. “I feel awful”, is what we usually say in such circumstances, but do we realize it when our words are motivated by akusala citta? The dosa that arises may be conditioned by strong clinging to ourselves. We cling to ourselves time and again. When we miss someone who is dear to us there is sadness and this is conditioned by clinging to our own pleasant feeling, the feeling we derive from being in the company of that person. When we realize more often our many moments of clinging, it is the beginning of right understanding and this is beneficial. It is better to know ourselves than to be ignorant our whole life. Most people do not like to have dosa, because it is accompanied by unpleasant feeling and one dislikes unpleasant feeling. However, we should not forget that it is our clinging to pleasant objects which conditions dosa. When we have experienced ourselves that attachment leads to sorrow it will help us to see its disadvantage. Moha, ignorance, is dangerous. It arises with each akusala citta. Ignorance blinds us. Because of ignorance we do not see realities as they are, we do not see what is right and what is wrong. Because of ignorance we take for beneficial what in reality is harmful. It is because of ignorance that we do not realize that clinging is harmful. Bhante Dhammadhara encouraged us to investigate more the different cittas which arise when we want to go somewhere, when we make a plan or wish to get something. Is it not most of the time clinging that motivates our walking and moving around, our bending and stretching? Which types of cittas arise when we want to rest in the afternoon, is it kusala citta or akusala citta? Is it not vital to know this? There can easily be cittas rooted in lobha and dosa. When we feel tiredness is there not often aversion? ****** Nina. #91270 From: "alberto.spera" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:26 am Subject: Re: Hello alberto.spera Hi Scott and Tep Thanks for your welcome msgs I think I'll follow Scott's advice and take my time before answering Tep's questions Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alberto (and Tep), > > Welcome to the forum. You may wish to take your time to acclimatize > yourself to the place before plunging into the following: > > T: "My questions are : ....... #91271 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 1:56 am Subject: Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 304, 305 and Tiika. nilovg Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 304, 305 Intro: In the following sections the links of the cycle of birth and death are considered under the aspect of the four Discriminations. These are deep and difficult to understand. There are four kinds of Discrimination, Pa.tisambhidaa: of meaning (attha) or the fruit of a cause, of cause (dhamma), concerned with enunciation of language (nirutti), of penetration which is the understanding of the foregoing kinds of discrimination. (See Vis. Ch XIV, 21 etc.). In Ch XIV, 24 some examples are given as to the Dependent Origination: 'Knowledge about whatever things are born, become, brought to birth, produced, completed, made manifest, is the "discrimination of meaning". Meaning is here the fruit. Knowledge about the things from which those things were born, became, were brought to birth, produced, completed, made manifest, is the "discrimination of law". Law or Dhamma is here the cause. 'Knowledge about ageing and death is the "discrimination meaning". This is discrimination of the fruit or effect of birth, namely. ageing and death. Knowledge about the origin of ageing and death is the "discrimination of law". Law or dhamma is the cause, which is birth. In section 305 the links are seen under the aspect of fruit of a cause, of attha. A preceding link conditions the next one which is then seen as the fruit or effect. --------- Text Vis.304: 5. [Kinds of profundity:] Now the Blessed One's words, 'This dependent origination is profound, Aananda, and profound it appears'(D.ii,55), refer to profundity (a) of meaning, (b) of law, (c) of teaching, and (d) of penetration. So this Wheel of Becoming should be known 'as to the kinds of profundity' in whichever way is appropriate. ------ Text Vis. 305: (a) Herein, the meaning of ageing-and-death produced and originated with birth as condition is profound owing to difficulty in understanding its origin with birth as condition thus: Neither does ageing-and-death not come about from birth, nor, failing birth, does it come about from something else; it arises [only] from birth with precisely that nature [of ageing-and-death]. -------- N: Ageing and death is seen here under the aspect of attha, the fruit of a cause. It is conditioned by birth, thus, the effect or the fruit of birth. The Tiika explains that the negation in the text is for the sake of emphasis, to eliminate doubt. It cannot be otherwise that birth conditions ageing and death. ---------- Text Vis.: And the meaning of birth with becoming as condition ... and the meaning of formations produced and originated with ignorance as condition are treatable in like manner. --------- N: Becoming, that is, kamma-process becoming, conditions birth, and here birth is seen as the fruit or effect of becoming. Ignorance conditions kamma-formations, and here kamma-formations are seen as the fruit or effect of ignorance. The conditioning dhammas are paccaya, condition, for the dhammas they condition and this is the truth, it is not otherwise, the Tiika repeats. The Tiika then explains that the compound discrimination of meaning, attha-pa.tisambhidaa, is discrimination of the fruit of a cause. -------- Text Vis.: That is why this Wheel of Becoming is profound in meaning. For it is the fruit of a cause that is called 'meaning' (attha), according as it is said, 'Knowledge about the fruit of a cause is the discrimination of meaning' (Vbh.293). --------- Conclusion: We cling to life and we may believe that it is good to be born, but we may forget that birth conditions old age, sickness and death. It has to be like that, it cannot be otherwise. Ignorance does not know how the reality that arises now is conditioned. It does not know that a fruit must have a cause. No one can control the arising of rebirth-consciousness, of naama/ruupa, of the aayatanas, the sense-bases, of the defilements arising on account of the objects that are experienced. Because of ignorance the links of the dependent origination occur, also at this moment. When we begin to know characteristics of realities appearing now, we shall have some understanding of the profundity of the Dependent Origination. --------- Nina. #91272 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:10 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi again Jon. Just one more thing...a bit of a face saver. Ph:> > But whether it is just a matter of semantics or not, the tone is > > often "must do it now!" > J:> That would not be the message in the mind of the speaker/author, I'm > sure. Ph: I think you're right. That's why in the post immediately following the one you're responding to here, I wrote one of my little correctum's, as follows: (msg# 11093, I think) >> But whether it is just a matter of semantics or not, the tone is >> often "must do it now!" >Sorry, this is wrong. The tone is not so strident, it is "should do >it now." I don't think the modal "should" should ever be applied to >panna that knows present realities. But it can be applied to >conventional activities such as following meditation instructions >etc Ph: I think I am right here. The modal "should" should never be applied to panna that knows present realities, not by a student of A.S, and certainly not by A.S, and if it is it is contrary to the whole thrust of A.S's no control approach. And there are plenty of "shoulds" used in this way. Sloppy thinking, sloppy writing? Using there "should" be awareness of realities rather than "there can be conditions for it" or something like that? Whatever. But I object on the grounds that it sets up an inconsistency. Thanks. Sorry for so many scattered posts. No wonder you missed the above! metta, phil #91273 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] glossing kusala philofillet Hi All I realized I had mis-referenced my post #, putting 11093 instead of 91093, so for fun I decided to post whatever I found in 11093 and see if it were relevant. And it is. An interesting post on how we translate kusala/akusala. I tend to use "wholesome" because of my interest in conventional morality. We see here that Sarah used to use "skillful" which I can't somehow imagine her using now. It is tres Thanissaro Bhikkhu, n'est ce pas? She is right. Kusala/akusala re best! You simply can't beat Pali (Pa.ali) for clarity sometimes! metta, phil p.s this comes from 2002 when I still salivated at the feet of a certain New Age Prophet. Ah, those were the days......not. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sarah wrote: > > Dan, > > I'll add a quick 2 cents to Ranil's..... > > I have to laugh because for years I'd use wholesome and unwholesome (and > other friends too) but a long list of objections can be raised to these > terms too, so I've been tending more to skilful and unskilful. (Really it > would be so much easier if the whole world just used kusala, akusala and > other Pali terms like your son in kindergarten. > > I think these are really translation points and the use of skilful in > translation in the Atthasalani may not even be consistent. Sometimes it's > hard to know without the Pali terms. For example, Atth (PTS) p.83: > > "Moreover, from the absence of the faultiness, hate, and torments of the > 'corruptions,' kusala has the sense of 'faultlessness.' Understanding is > described as skilfulness. 'Good' has the sense of 'brought about by > skilfulness.' " > > Hmmmm > > I think I'd make sure I add 'kusala' in brackets after using one of these > terms. > > Hope this catches you to ponder before you run off... > > Sarah > > #91274 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:23 am Subject: Triple round, was Hello. nilovg Dear Alberto, --------- A: One of the doubts I still have is about the cycle of defilments, kilesa-vatta, A.Sujin writes that vipaka cycle arise with kilesa already and I'm not sure if she refers to kilesa being latent in all cittas, even in ahetuka-vipaka-citta or to the kusala or akusala cetasika of the javana-citta in the panca-dvara-vithi. ------------- N: Kamma conditions seeing a pleasant or unpleasant object and the same for the other sense-cognitions. On account of what is experienced, defilements arise which can motivate kamma. Kamma again produces vipaaka, and thus, the triple round spins forever. It is more intricate when looking at the details. Ignorance also conditions kusala kamma, but it does not arise together with it. It conditions it by way of natural decisive support-condition. So long as ignorance is not eradicated there are conditions for the performing of kamma. Ignorance is accumulated in each citta as latent tendency, also in kusala citta. With Larry I am making a study of the Dependent Origination, Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, and I will quote: As to ‘triple round’, the Tiika explains that these are the rounds of kilesa (defilements), kamma and vipaaka, and, connected with these, vipaaka, kilesa and kamma. Defilements condition the performing of kamma which produces vipaaka in the form of rebirth and of sense-cognitions during life. On account of vipaaka defilements tend to arise and these motivate the committing of kamma. Thus the round of rebirths goes on and on. -------- Text Vis. 289: 1. Herein, between formations and rebirth-linking consciousness there is one link consisting of cause-fruit. ------ N: Kamma-formations condition vi~n~naa.na, which is vipaakacitta, including rebirth-consciousness. ---------- Text Vis.: Between feeling and craving there is one link consisting of fruit-cause. -------- N: Feeling as link of the Dependent Origination is vipaaka. It conditions craving which is cause. -------- Text Vis.: And between becoming and birth there is one link consisting of cause-fruit. -------- N:As we have seen, there are two meanings of becoming, bhava: becoming in the sense of kamma-process becoming, kamma-bhava, and in the sense of rebirth-process becoming, upatti-bhava. Kamma-process becoming is kamma that is the cause of rebirth, and rebirth-process becoming is the result of kamma in the form of rebirth. Bhava, becoming, is used here in the sense of rebirth-process becoming, thus, it is cause. Birth, jaati, is result. ------- Text Vis.:This is how it should be understood that 'it has three links with cause, fruit, cause, as parts'. --------- If Survey is not clear to you, please indicate the Chapter, so that I can look it up. Vipaakacitta is conditioned by accumulated kamma and defilements. Yes, ignorance has been accumulated and without ignorance there would not be any kamma producing vipaaka. Nina. #91275 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:27 am Subject: Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, We should study realities so that right understanding can develop to the degree that it can see the true nature of realities, that it can see them as not a living being, not a person, not self. When we study the Dhamma and carefully consider it in all details, we shall more and more see the danger of akusala and we shall be inclined to develop all levels of kusala. We should know that if we do not develop kusala we shall become ever more entangled by defilements. We may believe that everything belongs to us, but such a belief occurs only at the moments when víthi-cittas, cittas in processes, arise. When víthi-cittas do not arise, we do not see, hear, smell, taste or experience tangible object, we do not experience any object through the six doors. At the moments when we are fast asleep, even though we have not reached the end of our lifespan, there is no attachment, no longing or yearning, no infatuation with anything; there is no clinging to the khandhas we are used to taking for self. The reason is that at such moments víthi-cittas do not arise which know objects through the six doors. Thus, only at the moments of our life when we are fast asleep there is no attachment or involvement with the sense objects or with the matters we think about. Why then do we not develop paññå so that attachment and clinging to the objects which appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be less akusala? ---------- Nina. #91276 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:24 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav kenhowardau Hi Phil (and Jon), A couple of questions for you, Phil: ------------- Ph: > <. . .> in the above it is pretty clear to me that she is urging us to try to differentiate between seeing and visible object, which is a far deeper and subtler thing to do than place the attention on the breath in the way Vism very,very, very, very, very....very explicitly tells the beginner to do (with counting breath between 5 and 10 times, etc, noting the gross aspects of breath the way one notes gross aspects of sound of gong... ------------ What is your definition of 'jhana beginner?' Does a beginner necessarily know what jhana is? If someone doesn't know what jhana is, will breath-counting make him any the wiser? Ken H #91277 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Old kamma & present behav nilovg Hi Phil, Op 11-okt-2008, om 3:48 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > Ph: Direct quote from A.S, I'm 90% sure this was from one of her > talks, in English with you guys: "Is there seeing now? Study it, or > panna cannot grow." Now you will deny this til the cow comes home a > thousand times, and I don't mind, but this is the sort of thing I > find contradictory about aspects of her approach. On one hand, she > criticizes people for trying to place mindfulness on specific objects > because it is self placing it there, or whatever, but in the above it > is pretty clear to me that she is urging us to try to differentiate > between seeing and visible object ------ N: Let me butt in shortly. Seeing when it appears now can be object of considering and awareness, if there are the right conditions. This is always understood. Also, she explained many times that nobody can direct sati. There are no contradictions if seen in the context of all her explanations over the years. It is kind of reminder: if the present reality is not 'studied' with sati, how can pa~n`naa grow. Seeing seems so ordinary, it occurs all day long, but we are so forgetful, immediately involved in the stories on account of visible object. We build up long, long stories all the time. It is refreshing to hear her reminders, I find. Nina. #91278 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Old kamma & present behav visitorfromt... Hi Phil and Nina - Thank you both. Your comments are good food for thought. > > > Ph: Direct quote from A.S, I'm 90% sure this was from one of her > > talks, in English with you guys: "Is there seeing now? Study it, > > or panna cannot grow." > > Now you will deny this til the cow comes home a thousand times, > > and I don't mind, but this is the sort of thing I > > find contradictory about aspects of her approach. On one hand, she > > criticizes people for trying to place mindfulness on specific > > objects because it is self placing it there, or whatever, > > but in the above it > > is pretty clear to me that she is urging us to try to > > differentiate between seeing and visible object ... > ------ T: I guess there are two opposite views in almost anything. In this case her students (always) claim that they only see paramattha dhammas : there are 'seeing' and 'the seen' without 'the see-er'. So, to them they have no problem "trying to place mindfulness on specific objects" like other people do. However, it is arguable whether her students (and She) actually see the ultimate realities 'the way they really are' (yathabutha-dassana), or they only think they do. That's one reason I always ask them for a verification, because verification draws the sharp line between true and false, theory and practice, reality and fabrication, existence and non-existence. ....................... > N: Let me butt in shortly. Seeing when it appears now can be object > of considering and awareness, if there are the right conditions. > This is always understood. Also, she explained many times > that nobody can direct sati. > There are no contradictions if seen in the context of > all her explanations over the years. It is kind of reminder: if the > present reality is not 'studied' with sati, how can pa~n`naa grow. > Seeing seems so ordinary, it occurs all day long, but we are so > forgetful, immediately involved in the stories on account of visible > object. We build up long, long stories all the time. > It is refreshing to hear her reminders, I find. > T: There seems to be a contradiction in your explanation, dear Nina. If 'sati' (and consciousness) cannot be directed to the present reality, then how can there be awareness of its arising or passing away? It makes sense to me that when sati is established on the present reality there can be its awareness and understanding, here & now. Tep === #91279 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:22 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood jonoabb Hi Tep > I have no question about your good intention to explain what you > understand, but this explanation is an action that is conditioned by > intention, isn't it? Yet, you oft declare that you do not have > intention that leads to a wholesome action(kusala kamma) or to abandon > unwholesomeness (no action, no practice, no training, no intention). Actually, that's not what I've been saying. I've said that kusala consciousness can and does arise without being prompted by any specific thought about having kusala. (An example of what I have in mind here would be when one finds oneself thinking about, or mulling over, a point of dhamma as one goes about one's daily activites.) > >Jon: > To my understanding, the key to the development of the awareness/ > understanding spoken of by the Buddha is the realisation or acceptance > that it is awareness/understanding in relation to a > presently arising dhamma that is being spoken of. > > T: Realization (sacchikiriyaa) is NOT acceptance. Acceptance is found > even in a 5-year-old kid. I'm not sure I understand the point you are making here. I was using the terms "realisation" and "acceptance" in their common, everyday sense. > A 5-year-old kid can "understand" too. An adult who lies and commits > adultery and gets drunk can also understand. So what kind of > understanding do you think the Buddha talked about? To answer your (rhetorical?) question, the understanding the Buddha talked about is the understanding of dhammas. It is understanding of a kind that cannot arise in one who has not heard the dhamma in that lifetime. > T: A drunk man can understand a presently arising dhamma too : when he > falls down and his head hits the ground he understands "hardness" in > the present moment. Would that understanding do him any good? We are talking about the understanding that comes from hearing the teachings and is not known otherwise. > >If one can appreciate that this is the context in which the suttas > are to be understood, it puts a different light on the Buddha's > message. Hoping this makes sense. > > T: But that is elementary, dear Jon. It is time to complete the > elementary course and move up to the higher level. I'm sorry if it's too basic for you, but it's the best I can do ;-)) > What did the Buddha teach about full understanding (pari~n~naa)? That it comes much later on ;-)) Jon #91280 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:23 am Subject: Re: Looping & repeating things in DO jonoabb Hi Rinze I've enjoyed reading your many posts since you joined the list. I see you have the benefit of familiarity with the teachings as a part of your upbringing and culture. Very fortunate! I hope you don't if I butt into your exchange with Alex and Tep, although the point I raise is not one being discussed in that thread. You said: > But, if we act with Yoniso Manasikara, and consider the heard, as > only the heard, and remain with equanimity, at the Feeling stage of > the PS cycle, then, even though PS will continue, its outcome is > progressively reduced, till the idea of the `crow', does not matter > anymore. I've heard this kind of notion before, that the chain of DO can be somehow interrupted at the Feelings link by the interposition of yoniso manasikaara, and that from this may come the development of insight (leading in due course to enlightenment). Quite apart from the problem of how "acting with yoniso manisakara" can be achieved, I wonder how you see this notion in the context of the Buddha's explanation of the reverse order of DO, where it is explained that it is the ceasing of ignorance that leads in due course to the ceasing of becoming (i.e., to enlightenment). As far as I know, the notion of the interposition of yoniso manisakara at the Feelings link is not something mentioned by the Buddha or in the texts. Thanks for your keen interest. Jon #91281 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:27 am Subject: Enter The Abhidhammika! Re: Step-by-step method for development of Noble Path jonoabb Hi Suan I'm not sure what (or even how many) things I'm being accused of and found guilty of here, but since this is the first time I've been subjected to such an inquisition I'm going to have to ask for mercy. Please don't make me walk the virtual plank and be banned forever! Could I plead for just a temporary suspension of posting privileges or something like that? (Tomorrow being a Sunday, I'm safe from execution for the time being, anyway.) While my sentence is being considered, would you mind providing some textual reference (with translation) to this term "attanomati", as it's new to me, apart from earlier usage by yourself. Finally, could you please clarify whether my sins include stating to be my understanding of the Dhamma something that is not the Dhamma, because this was not clear to me from your post. If yes, then please indicate in what respect it is not the Dhamma. Jon > Thank you, Jon. You have answered my questions. > > The answer you gave belongs to the category of attanomati (personal > opinion, personal conviction, or personal conclusion as you put it). > > When we made categorical statements based on our own personal > opinions or conclusions, we should also declare that those > statements were of such nature. > > Such a disclaimer would help us to distinguish between the Buddha's > teachings and non-Buddhist teachings. > > Our own personal opinions should not be made to appear as though > representing the Buddha's teachings or Buddhist teachings. > > I hope that you and the above named people agree with my position > regarding our own personal opinions, however fantastic they may be. > ... #91282 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddhist teachings jonoabb Hi Alex > Are there any sutta quotes that call "meditation" be silabataparamasa? Sorry, but I don't believe I've said anything about meditation being silabattaparamasa. Is this an ambush ;-)) (just kidding, of course) > What about all the quotes featuring formal meditations? Happy to discuss, if you'd like to bring one up. > Buddha has clearly said that it is *impossible* to reach Anagami > stage without reaching Jhana. Suttas tell it, I believe them, this > settles it. If you are citing the sutta passage below as establishing the above comment, perhaps you could highlight the exact section or otherwise explain how you get this from the sutta. Thanks, Alex. Jon > ========================================================= > "It is not possible that one could, knowing and seeing overcome the > lower bonds of the sensual world without coming to this path and > method.... Ananda, what is the path and method, to dispel the lower > bonds of the sensual world? Ananda, the bhikkhu secluding the mind > thoroughly, by dispelling things of demerit, removes all bodily > transgressions that bring remorse. Then secluding the mind, from > sensual thoughts and thoughts of demerit, with thoughts and > discursive thoughts and with joy and pleasantness born of seclusion > abides in the first jhana. Established in it he reflects all things > that matter, all feelings, all perceptive things, all intentions, all > conscious signs are impermanent, unpleasant, an illness, an abscess, > an arrow, a misfortune, an ailment, foreign, destined for > destruction, is void, and devoid of a self. Then he turns the mind to > the deathless element: This is peaceful, this is exalted, such as the > appeasement of all determinations, the giving up of all endearments, > the destruction of craving, detachment, cessation and extinction (* > 1). With that mind he comes to the destruction of desires. If he does > not destroy desires on account of greed and interest for those same > things. He arises spontaneously, with the destruction of the five > lower bonds, of the sensual world, not to proceed. Ananda, this too > is a method for overcoming the five lower bonds of the sensual > world.. " > > http://www.budsas.org/ebud/majjhima/064-maha-malunkhyaputta-e1.htm > ============================ #91283 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:41 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Nina > N: Let me butt in shortly. Seeing when it appears now can be object > of considering and awareness, if there are the right conditions. This > is always understood. Also, she explained many times that nobody can > direct sati. There are no contradictions if seen in the context of > all her explanations over the years. It is kind of reminder: if the > present reality is not 'studied' with sati, how can pa~n`naa grow. Ph: OK Nina...I guess I am too concerned about semantics. If she said "if present-reality is not 'studied' with sait, how can panna grow" I would have no trouble with it. The problem is, as I was just saying to Scott, *I* tended to try to grasp visible object as a result of hearing that sort of thing, out of greed for progress, so it was my thing... > Seeing seems so ordinary, it occurs all day long, but we are so > forgetful, immediately involved in the stories on account of visible > object. We build up long, long stories all the time. It is refreshing > to hear her reminders, I find. Ph: Yes, as I posted the other day to you (it was just before you went away for a few days, so you might not have seen it) I feel there is more awareness of the building up of stories, the proliferations, the "honeyballs" as I call them. I like to drop them. So there is more awareness of the product of thinking that follows seeing/hearing/smelling etc than there is of the seeing/hearing/smelling etc...well, as we know, the thinking follows immediately... Thanks always for your patience with my bitching, Nina. metta, phil #91284 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:09 am Subject: Talking with Scott philofillet Hi all I just had a very good talk with Scott by Skype. We had been planning to start talking about the Patthana, but predictably enough the talk went all over the place. First I told him that I'd been having second thoughts about studying Patthana after having read in Nina's book words to the effect that "we can't understand the conditional relations unless we understand the realities themselves" or something like that. (The other day at the Abhidhamma section at e-sangha I tried doing the self check to Ch. 1 of Abhidhamma in Daily Life and I couldn't even list the unviersal cetasikas, so I realized I need to get back to studying the basics) So we didn't really talk about root condition as planned. I think I brought up the basic problem I had been struggling with (well, not so much really) and bitching about at DSG, about how my understanding is so feeble, so there was a resistance to being told that we must confirm the relations in our own lives, the truth of the Patthana in our daily life etc. I told him about how (as I was just posting to Nina) I would try to grasp visible object, try to distinguish seeing from visible object, that I would go around doing that, and I though it was just getting in the way of really understanding. He said that though he is reluctant (as he's been posting to Tep) to talk about personal experience when it comes to attainments, he is able to appreciate that there have been moments - and he asked me if there hadn't been such moments - of awareness of the moment thinking begins after seeing, just moments of that kind of awareness that come up, and I could appreciate that and say yes, they come. Oh, we talked early on, or at least I talked, about how fascinating it is how different areas of the tipitaka are compelling for awhile, and then others. I had this great enthusiasm about Abhidhamma about 4 years ago, and it subsided and just abotu disappeared 2 years ago and all I wanted to do was study suttas, and now I want to study Abhidhamma again and my notebooks full of sutta quotations are not grabbing at me like they did a few weeks ago. There's no control over that kind of thing. I told Scott that some of the posts he has written at DSG have been impressive in this respect, in particular the one about whether we really have an effect on others, or whatever it was. The fact that I read it and basically agreed with it indicated to me that my interest in Abhidhamma was stil alive. I told him that I value the conventional side of things, that for me there is a kind of refuge that I have created through conventional considerations, conceptual considerations, stories about avoiding being harmful to others and so on. I told him that I am very fond of SN 47:19, the sutta about the two acrobats in which we learn that "by protecting oneself one protects others....by protecting others one protects oneself" and my ability to explain my pet theory about this sutta showed me that I will have to discuss it here more instead of just holding on to it. The basic theory was that since it is "by patience, harmlessess, lovingkindness and sympathy" that we protect ourselves by protecting others, there is a conceptual, conventional approach implied, since the objects of lovingkness, sympathy etc are conceptual. This provides the kind of refuge, or outer ring of conventionally harmless behaviour within which "by protecting oneself one protects others takes place", which is through satipatthana. Anyways, he very gently helped me to see that my pet theory is not as solid as I thought, though I haven't rejected it completely, and N. Thera's booklet on this sutta is kind of in line with it, I think. (Not suprisingly, N. Thera is very big on a kind of socially redemptive side of Dhamma, Dhamma serving to save our rotten world kind of thing, if I recall his introduction to "The Heart of Meditation.") Anyways, let's see...I am probably forgetting something, but I guess I'll wrap it up there. I found Scott to be a very good person to talk to, with a nice mellow confidence that came through down the line. We also found that we are around the same age and both play bass guitar and well, we just kind of hit it off, I think. I hope we'll talk once a month or so. Next time we might get into more technical matters, we'll see.... metta, phil #91285 From: "alberto.spera" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:11 am Subject: Re: Triple round, was Hello. alberto.spera Dear Nina Thanks very much for your helpful comments, I also found helpful one of your old posts about the threefold classification of kilesa, the last one being anusaya kilesa. I think part of my confusion is due to the standard use of term anusaya on its own and with its standard translation as latent tendencies that doesn't match with the standard translation of the term kilesa as defilements, that's why I agree that it's worthwile learning the specific pali terms, it needs more effort at the beginning but in the long run should makes things a little bit easier. Alberto Ps I was referring to chapter 14 of SoPD "The cycle of defilement revolves when objects are experienced through the sense-doors and through the mind-door. Defilements which arise in the series or succession of javana, cause the committing of kamma. Then the cycle of kamma revolves, akusala kamma and kusala kamma, performed through body, speech and mind." --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alberto, > --------- > A: One of the doubts I still have is about the cycle of defilments, > kilesa-vatta, A.Sujin writes that vipaka cycle arise with kilesa > already and I'm not sure if she refers to kilesa being latent in all > cittas, even in ahetuka-vipaka-citta or to the kusala or akusala > cetasika of the javana-citta in the panca-dvara-vithi. > ------------- > N: Kamma conditions seeing a pleasant or unpleasant object and the > same for the other sense-cognitions. On account of what is > experienced, defilements arise which can motivate kamma. Kamma again > produces vipaaka, and thus, the triple round spins forever. > It is more intricate when looking at the details. Ignorance also > conditions kusala kamma, but it does not arise together with it. It > conditions it by way of natural decisive support-condition. So long > as ignorance is not eradicated there are conditions for the > performing of kamma. Ignorance is accumulated in each citta as latent > tendency, also in kusala citta. > > With Larry I am making a study of the Dependent Origination, > Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, and I will quote: ................. > > #91286 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:18 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Ken > A couple of questions for you, Phil: > > ------------- > Ph: > <. . .> in the above it is pretty clear to me that she is > urging us to try to differentiate between seeing and visible object, > which is a far deeper and subtler thing to do than place the attention > on the breath in the way Vism very,very, very, very, very....very > explicitly tells the beginner to do (with counting breath between 5 > and 10 times, etc, noting the gross aspects of breath the way one > notes gross aspects of sound of gong... > ------------ > > What is your definition of 'jhana beginner?' Does a beginner > necessarily know what jhana is? Ph: Oh, I don't want to get into this. I know you think the beginner in that passage already has developed sati. Fair enough, you might be right, you might be wrong. I don't know. I feelvery easygoing tonight after talking to Dr. Scott. > If someone doesn't know what jhana is, will breath-counting make him > any the wiser? Ph: I don't know. I don't feel like thinking about it now. metta, phil p.s perhaps we can take this passage up in detail at some point. I'll accept that I might not understand it yet if you accept that you might not. Let's see if it comes up again. #91287 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:22 am Subject: Re: Cha.t.tha Sa"ngaayana Pali version abhidhammika Hello Thomas Law How are you? You asked: "I wonder whether the Cha.t.tha Sa"gaayana version is now accepted by all Theravada traditions? If so, then this Pali version becomes the only standard version for all the Theravada Buddhists to follow and study. Am I right?" Suan answered: The Sangaayanaa means reciting together of Pali Tipitaka by learned Theravada monks from all over the world. So, the Cha.t.tha Sangaayaa Edition of Pali Tipitaka is the product of collaborative effort of learned Theravada monks from different nations. It is the standard international version. Having said that, some learned Theravada monks and some Pali scholars may have their favourite versions as well. However, if we have the Cha.t.tha Sangaayanaa version, it is the same as having all the available versions from different nations. This is because the Cha.t.tha Sangaayanaa Print Edition has included, as foot notes, variant readings from all other versions for our convenient comparative study. For example, in Section 1, Brahmajaalasutta, Siilakkhandhavaggapaa.li, Diighanikaayo, we find the expression "bhagavantam pi.t.thito pi.t.thito anubandhaa". The word `anubandhaa' in the above expression in Cha.t.tha Sangaayanaa Edition has its variant `anubaddhaa' in Sinhala version and Roman version. This variant appears in the foot note space under the text body of the page. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "thomaslaw03" wrote: Hi Dhamma friends, There are different versions of the Pali texts within the Theravada traditions(such as Thailand and Sri Lanka's Theravadas). I wonder whether the Cha.t.tha Sa"gaayana version is now accepted by all Theravada traditions? If so, then this Pali version becomes the only standard version for all the Theravada Buddhists to follow and study. Am I right? Sincerely Thomas Law #91288 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Tep) - In a message dated 10/11/2008 1:28:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes: It is kind of like saying -- the car is "not its own thing" but the parts that make up the car "are its own thing." A very flawed outlook in my view. Conditionality renders any and every conditioned thing as "not its own thing." No-self does not JUST apply to the "surface delusion," -- person view, I, me, mine view, it applies to absolutely all conditioned phenomena in every way possible. ================================== TG, in my opinion this is exactly right - a thoroughgoing refutation of substantialism and own being. And one might add, complementary to this, the thoroughgoing refutation of nihilism to the effect that all dhammas, actual and unimagined, and all aggregations of these, actual and unimagined, while not at all their "own thing," are also not "nothing at all." Nothing anywhere at any level of simplicity or complexity has or is self, but denial of self is not a denial absolute. There IS a middle-way ontology: the way of conditionality - the Buddha's way. With metta, Howard #91289 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:44 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 10/11/2008 3:18:32 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 11-okt-2008, om 1:50 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Better attend to this citta here now, already difficult enough. > --------------------------------------------- > Howard: > True, but not the point of our conversation. :-) ------- N: Yes, quite, it is the point of our conversation. Realities have to be understood. That is the essence. Which realities? Those that appear now, one at a time. Mindstreams of self or others: then the reality is just thinking, a type of naama. Nina. ================================= Our conversation pertained to your saying that when you, for example, are seeing, "there is no Lodewijk," and my response that the fact is that Lodewijk doesn't cease when you are seeing visible object rather than cognizing him. My point was that multiple namarupic streams are a fact, whether there is the knowing of one by another or not at some time. There is no disputing by me that when you are seeing, you are not thinking! I already made it clear that my point is the difference between "existing" and "being observed by another." Lodewijk exists, though only as a coherent, dynamic aggregation of phenomena, i.e., as a namarupic stream which lacks own being, and this middle-way, existential status of Lodewijk's is independent of whether you are thinking of him or not. That has been the conversation, Nina. So, I still quite maintain that what you were saying in that last post was true, but not the point of our conversation. With metta, Howard #91290 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Tep > T: I guess there are two opposite views in almost anything. In this > case her students (always) claim that they only see paramattha dhammas > : there are 'seeing' and 'the seen' without 'the see-er'. Ph: Well, I'm not sure of that. Isn't there usually a concession that there is always a lot of thinking after moments of seeing, etc, and it is usually all that thinking that people are aware of? My problem has been more that there are encouragements to see at the level above. In Nina's post, she worded it in a way that I am more comfortable with, that there can be sati that studies seeing etc. I don't get the message that people "claim" the above as you describe it, but they certainly do insist on talking/posting in these terms. I sometimes have wondered if one doesn't just fill the head with lots of paramattha ideas, that in their approach mindfulness in the body is not given the central position that the Buddha gave it. But I don't know about this, really. I find that when I returned to meditating about 2 years ago, it felt that the Dhamma was more in my body and mind and not just in my head, but what will happen Tep. I am getting interested in Abhidhamma again. last time this happened, I lost interest in meditating. Actually, you know what Tep? I know from our offlist exchange about 6 months ago that we share the same approach to meditation, so I would like to ask you to be my meditation mentor to help encourage me as you did then. Do you have skype? I would like to talk with you, but if not, may I exchange posts with you off-list? I find DSG is not a suitable place to talk about meditation techniques. So, to them > they have no problem "trying to place mindfulness on specific objects" > like other people do. Ph: Well, I don't know about this. One of the famous catch phrases of the Sujin World are the words of the Ven. Dhammadaro who said "one moment of sati in a lifetime? wealthy man!" There is a very subtle and refined understanding of sati that I don't quite get. I was saying to Scott when we talked that while I know the Satipatthana sutta explains that "he knows he is walking" is about the propulsion of the rupas involved and so on, those details, there are many levels of sati, starting at the sati that recalls, for example, a sutta passage. And the conventional understanding of postures, movements etc...I think it is valuable and has a protective aspect. I'm off topic. But I wouldn't agree that "to them they have not problem 'trying to place mindfulness on specific objects". I mean, they always complain about how we are attached to that, how much lobha there is for us who follow the breath,f or example. > > However, it is arguable whether her students (and She) actually see > the ultimate realities 'the way they really are' (yathabutha- dassana), > or they only think they do. That's one reason I always ask them for a > verification, because verification draws the sharp line between true > and false, theory and practice, reality and fabrication, existence and > non-existence. Ph: Must be difficult to verify in words if one does see them as they really are, but I don't share your impression that they claim that this. My concern is more that people are secretly trying to have this and that kind of penetrative experience, but I am thinking now that is just projection on my part. So Tep, may I skype you sometime to ask you about meditation and share some things? Even if you don't have skype, I can call you for dirt cheap, something like one dollar for 30 minutes. It's wonderful! Or I could just e-mail you offlist. metta, phil #91291 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:57 am Subject: Re: Talking with Phil scottduncan2 Dear All, As Phil notes, we had a great chat earlier today. Did you know that Phil, an early innovator in the Montreal music scene of the day, was years ahead of the indie music scene by founding a drum and bass duo, only to be trumped in recent times by Death From Above 1979? Well, I learned that about him... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiQUSsHMWWI&feature=related (Not Phil but should have been Phil.) Seriously, though, we had a good Dhamma discussion. Two Canadians just tend naturally to do that. I thought I was more or less inarticulate but we did manage to make sense to each other more or less. As Phil noted, we'd planned to talk about object condition but ranged all over instead. So much for plans... I think we circled around the whole thing about using conventional notions and thoughts in an attempt to set up conditions for the arising of kusala. I sort of suggested that its just thinking and that we can't 'set up conditions' by wanting to. Also, we talked about trying to apply the apparent suggestion to know the moment now - the Abhidhamma of daily life sort of thing. Phil noted how he had taken this to be something to try to do, whereas I suggested it can't be 'done' but is happening and it takes sati arising of its own conditions, and that this somehow echos into experience later and is all thought to death about. The old DSG discussion, I guess, of practise versus no-practise. We talked about Dhamma used as pop-psychology (I'm against it, as some might know ;-)); about aversion and desire being the basis of wanting to be 'mindful' - aversion towards akusala and so-called conscious attempts at forcing akusala to go away. I think I suggested (or tried to suggest) again that while one can't help feeling aversion towards akusala or desire for kusala, thinking about it won't change what arises and aversion or desire are both akusala. Thoughts about non-desire are not the same thing as non-desire. We talked about form of a woman, about how desire for form of a woman arises too quickly to be stayed by thoughts but what about the times desire for form of a woman doesn't arise? And might some of these even be the guarding of the sense door by sati? We talked about anger and worry. I droned on for a bit about how the Western notion of unconscious determination is not like the Abhidhamma notion of the speed with which moments of consciousness arise and fall away because all non-Dhamma psychology is based on a belief in self and Dhamma is no self. I also droned on about how on about how I don't think it useful to consider 'self' early on and then somehow graduate to 'no-self' later, suggesting that it is anatta from the beginning, whether pa~n~naa has penetrated it or not; that the way the Buddha saw things after enlightenment is the way things are, and 'ignorance-based perception' is just that and not to be 'used' to further anything. I think we politely, as fellow-Canadians, and tacitly agreed to disagree on this whole thing. We talked about the SN47:19(9) Sedaka Sutta about protecting oneself and protecting others. Anything else, Phil? I've totally paraphrased everything, of course. (Transcripts available upon request - ha ha). All in all, it was good and I highly recommend Phil to everyone. ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #91292 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. upasaka_howard Hi, all - In a message dated 10/11/2008 9:25:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: Nothing anywhere at any level of simplicity or complexity has or is self, but denial of self is not a denial absolute. ============================ A clarification of the foregoing, lest it be misinterpreted: The denial of self in all phenomena and aggregations of phenomena IS absolute. What is not denied absolutely are the mere phenomena. Their existence is neither intrinsic nor is it imagined. It is actual but fleeting and utterly contingent, and inseparable from other causally related conditions. With metta, Howard #91293 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:21 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav visitorfromt... Hi Phil, - Please feel free to email me off-list anytime to discuss meditation or anything. But please do not expect much from me in terms of meditative skill. Although I have meditated (off and on due to laziness) more than ten years now, still there are deep questions that I do not know how to answer. Anapanasati alone is like a large, deep and dark forest that although I have a good map of it (Ptsm III; and it is so complex!), I have just been wandering at the perimeter. So, please think of me as a meditation partner rather than a mentor. I do not have Skype. Coincidentally, my daughter just asked me to set it up so that we can talk while she is in Afghanistan in December and early next year. Once I have it working (within a week or so), I'll immediately tell you, Phil. Let me reply to your good points on the DSG approach in another post, soon. Thanks again. Your friend, Tep === #91294 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:27 am Subject: Re: Hello visitorfromt... Hi Alberto, - --- "alberto.spera" wrote: > > Hi Scott and Tep > Thanks for your welcome msgs > I think I'll follow Scott's advice and take my time before answering > Tep's questions > Alberto > > T: But Scott is often pessimistic about me due to his incurable one- sided views. So you'd better be careful. ;-) Tep === > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > > > Dear Alberto (and Tep), > > > > Welcome to the forum. You may wish to take your time to acclimatize > > yourself to the place before plunging into the following: > > > > T: "My questions are : > ....... > #91295 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. visitorfromt... Hi TG and Howard, - >TG: The understanding of "no self, no person, in reference to "ultimate realities with their own characteristics" is not at all the way I understand no-self. No-self does not JUST apply to the "surface delusion," -- person view, I, me, mine view, it applies to absolutely all conditioned phenomena in every way possible. >Howard: ... the thoroughgoing refutation of nihilism to the effect that all dhammas, actual and unimagined, and all aggregations of these, actual and unimagined, while not at all their "own thing," are also not "nothing at all." ... Nothing anywhere at any level of simplicity or complexity has or is self, but denial of self is not a denial absolute. T: The application of no-self to "all conditioned phenomena in every way possible", or all dhammas, is supported by clear understanding of what atta means AND what anatta means. Tep === > #91296 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:31 am Subject: Dhammas view, God view TGrand458@... Hi Folks In order to increase my popularity I had this idea that I thought I'd communicate... Religious Christians, Muslims, Jews, etc. who deeply believe in God, who have deep faith, do lose some of their sense-of-self as they transfer it to "another power." This involves the imagination, but it still works to a certain degree. Jodo Shinshu Buddhists do much the same thing with "faith" in "other power." I think this is also what Abhidhammikas do by tranferring "self view" onto the "actors/players" of "dhammas." The theory of "Dhammas" becomes their basis whereby they transfer all other conceptual imagination onto and are able to "let go" of believing in the "self" traditionally considered a "self." It is a transference to "other power," not too dissimilar from the religions mentioned above. It even pronounces similar accolades such as "This is the Ultimate Real." The problem is: this type of transference is always limited because, although in effect, it denies the self, or the ability of self, it attaches onto "something else" as the ultimate. The sense-of-self is reduced by this process, at least temporarily, but it creates a whole new schemata of attachment. In the long run, I think it will be a failure...and in many cases inadvertently increase self view through the transference process. In that case, the "other" will become the thing attached to and seen as a "self" of "its own." The conditionality the Buddha taught is entirely different. Being that all phenomena are conditioned, empty, hollow, alien, coreless, like a mirage, like a conjurer's trick, insubstantial, etc. there is NOTHING the mind can hold onto. No ultimate Dhammas, no nothing. It is only this approach that can totally eliminate self view...because detachment from phenomena is COMPLETE. There is, in the final analysis, no basis to hold onto. Conditionality does not substitute a new basis in order to get rid of the old. It does not substitute a new delusion in order to get rid of the old. There is no basis that underlies phenomena except conditionality. Conditionality is in the end undefinable. "Impermanence" posits nothing. "No-self" is merely the "emptiness of something." "Dukkha" is only something to avoid, to detach from. There is no basis for attachment in this teaching. No ultimate realities. Nothing with "their own" characteristics. TG #91297 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/11/2008 11:21:09 A.M. Mountain Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: T: The application of no-self to "all conditioned phenomena in every way possible", or all dhammas, is supported by clear understanding of what atta means AND what anatta means. Tep .............................................. Hi Tep Your statement above is problematic. Maybe yes, maybe no. Depending on how "clear" (or correct) the understanding is. TG #91298 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:40 am Subject: Re: Survey Quote .. "My Self" visitorfromt... Dear Nina, - >N: Why then do we not develop pa~n~naa so that attachment and clinging to the objects which appear through the six doors will be eradicated and there will be less akusala? T: When such "attachment and clinging" is eradicated, why are all akusala NOT eliminated? Why does one who has clinging to an object (nama or rupa) inside or outside, far or near; past, future, or present; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; think of it as 'my self' [a self or of anything pertaining to a self]? #91299 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 10:50 am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. visitorfromt... Hi TG, - >T: The application of no-self to "all conditioned phenomena in every way possible", or all dhammas, is supported by clear understanding of what atta means AND what anatta means. .............................................. Hi Tep Your statement above is problematic. Maybe yes, maybe no. Depending on how "clear" (or correct) the understanding is. TG ............................................... T: Clear in the sense that there is no doubt when one contemplates anatta in all dhammas. Tep === #91300 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Triple round, was Hello. nilovg Dear Alberto, Op 11-okt-2008, om 15:11 heeft alberto.spera het volgende geschreven: > I also found helpful one > of your old posts about the threefold classification of kilesa, > the last one being anusaya kilesa. > I think part of my confusion is due to the standard use of term > anusaya on its own and with its standard translation as latent > tendencies that doesn't match with the standard translation of the > term kilesa as defilements, that's why I agree that it's worthwile > learning the specific pali terms, ------- N: Kilesa is classified as a specific group of defilements as you noticed. But we can also use the term kilesa or defilements in a more general way for all that is akusala, and then we can distinguish three levels. Nina. #91301 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Rupa -- Its Meanings in the Suttas vs the Abhidhamma. nilovg Dear Tep, Op 10-okt-2008, om 23:43 heeft visitorfromtexas het volgende geschreven: > The question is : how may one find out whether his/her "understanding > nama-rupa NOW" is true or false? The Buddha explained to Ven. Ananda > that a kalyanamitta can help. What can a person without kalyanamitta > do to correct himself? ------- N: The Teachings are our best friend in Dhamma. But true, we can easily misunderstand what we read. I would say: go on being aware of the nama or rupa appearing at this moment. Just persevering. Right understanding will grow and find out what is true and what is false. Nina. #91302 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:54 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood visitorfromt... Hi Jon, - I hope you were not upset because I assumed that you had said something and you did not think so. Well, let me correct the miscommunication problem. >>Tep: you oft declare that you do not have intention that leads to a wholesome action(kusala kamma) or to abandon unwholesomeness (no action, no practice, no training, no intention). >Jon: Actually, that's not what I've been saying. I've said that kusala consciousness can and does arise without being prompted by any specific thought about having kusala. (An example of what I have in mind here would be when one finds oneself thinking about, or mulling over, a point of dhamma as one goes about one's daily activites.) T: It is still hard for me to follow/agree with you even after your second attempt. This is what I understand : You must have an intention to think about or mull over a point of dhamma, otherwise there is no thinking (= mental action or mano- kamma). Feeling, perception, contact, intention, attention all these arise together as the 'nama' which is originated by consciousness and vice versa [vinnana pacaya namarupam; namarupa pacaya vinnanam]. These five cetasikas are thought, aren't they? .................. T: The rest of my conversation confused you, because you wrote back : 1. About 'realization' being different from 'acceptance' you say that "it is awareness/understanding in relation to a presently arising dhamma" is "the key to the development of the awareness/ understanding spoken of by the Buddha". But I dismiss "acceptance" as being too "low". >Jon:I'm not sure I understand the point you are making here. I was using the terms "realisation" and "acceptance" in their common, everyday sense. T: My point was: a presently arising dhamma is not understood by a worldling whose understanding is like that of a 5-year-old kid in comparison to that of the noble one who realizes the dhamma here & now. Realization in Buddhism is a special term. 2. The kind of "understanding" that the Buddha talked about is that of a noble disciple, not that of any adult who normally lies and commits adultery and gets drunk (almost)everyday. >Jon: To answer your (rhetorical?) question, the understanding the Buddha talked about is the understanding of dhammas. It is understanding of a kind that cannot arise in one who has not heard the dhamma in that lifetime. T: Sorry Jon, I might be "flying" too high. ;-) Tep === #91303 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Old kamma & present behav nilovg Dear Tep, sorry, I did not get your Q. Nina. Op 11-okt-2008, om 14:20 heeft visitorfromtexas het volgende geschreven: > If 'sati' (and consciousness) cannot be directed to the present > reality, then how can there be awareness of its arising or passing > away? It makes sense to me that when sati is established on the > present reality there can be its awareness and understanding, here & > now. #91304 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Talking with Scott nilovg Dear Phil' delighted to hear about your talk with Scott. The topics covered were quite a bit. Thanks a lot for your report. Nina. Op 11-okt-2008, om 15:09 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > I just had a very good talk with Scott by Skype. #91305 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:07 am Subject: An "Approval Post" (Apologies!) Re: [dsg] Dhammas view, God view upasaka_howard Hi, TG - In a message dated 10/11/2008 1:32:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, TGrand458@... writes, IMO, a well thought out analysis ending with this beautiful summation: The conditionality the Buddha taught is entirely different. Being that all phenomena are conditioned, empty, hollow, alien, coreless, like a mirage, like a conjurer's trick, insubstantial, etc. there is NOTHING the mind can hold onto. No ultimate Dhammas, no nothing. It is only this approach that can totally eliminate self view...because detachment from phenomena is COMPLETE. There is, in the final analysis, no basis to hold onto. Conditionality does not substitute a new basis in order to get rid of the old. It does not substitute a new delusion in order to get rid of the old. There is no basis that underlies phenomena except conditionality. Conditionality is in the end undefinable. "Impermanence" posits nothing. "No-self" is merely the "emptiness of something." "Dukkha" is only something to avoid, to detach from. There is no basis for attachment in this teaching. No ultimate realities. Nothing with "their own" characteristics. ================================ Saddhu x 3!! :-) With metta, Howard #91306 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:28 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Old kamma & present ... satindriyassa samudayo visitorfromt... Dear Nina, - This is a very sincere question ! Thank you for not guessing wrongly or replying tangentially. Dear Tep, sorry, I did not get your Q. Nina. Op 11-okt-2008, om 14:20 heeft visitorfromtexas het volgende geschreven: > If 'sati' (and consciousness) cannot be directed to the present > reality, then how can there be awareness of its arising or passing > away? It makes sense to me that when sati is established on the > present reality there can be its awareness and understanding, here & > now. ...................................... T: My question addresses what you said earlier that "she explained many times that nobody can direct sati." : > N: Let me butt in shortly. Seeing when it appears now can be object > of considering and awareness, if there are the right conditions. > This is always understood. Also, she explained many times > that nobody can direct sati. > There are no contradictions if seen in the context of > all her explanations over the years. It is kind of reminder: if the > present reality is not 'studied' with sati, how can pa~n`naa grow. > Seeing seems so ordinary, it occurs all day long, but we are so > forgetful, immediately involved in the stories on account of visible > object. We build up long, long stories all the time. > It is refreshing to hear her reminders, I find. > T: The mental blockage is the thinking that there is "nobody", "no person" who CAN direct sati because is uncontrollable. In actuality there is adverting of consciousness, zeal, and attention to establishing that originates sati as satindriya. Ptsm IV, 10 : The origin of adverting with the purpose of establishing is the origin of the mindfulness faculty. The origin of zeal through the influence of the establishing is the origin of the mindfulness faculty. The origin of attention through the influence of the establishing is the origin of the mindfulness faculty. ... 'Upatthaanatthaaya aavajjanaaya samudayo satindriyassa samudayo hoti Upatthaanavasena chandassa samudayo satindriyassa samudayo hoti Upatthaanavasena manasikaarassa samudayo satindriyassa samudayo hoti' ... If 'sati' (following adverting consciousness) cannot be directed to the present reality, then how can there be awareness of its arising or passing away? It makes sense to me that when sati is established on the present reality there can be its awareness and understanding, here & now. I hope I have adequately answered your sincere question. Tep === #91307 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 2:40 pm Subject: Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. kenhowardau Hi TG and Howard, If I have understood you correctly, you have been telling us (for the past several years) that anatta does not mean no self, it means "no own being." According to your theory, not only does a self (or an immortal soul) lack its own being, but so too does everything else lack its own being. There are no paramattha dhammas - no absolute realities - and the self is no less real (no less existent) than anything else. Have I understood you correctly? Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, TG (and Tep) - > > In a message dated 10/11/2008 1:28:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > TGrand458@... writes: > > It is kind of like saying -- the car is "not its own thing" but the parts > that make up the car "are its own thing." A very flawed outlook in my > view. > Conditionality renders any and every conditioned thing as "not its own > thing." > No-self does not JUST apply to the "surface delusion," -- person view, I, > me, mine view, it applies to absolutely all conditioned phenomena in every > way > possible. > ================================== > TG, in my opinion this is exactly right - a thoroughgoing refutation of > substantialism and own being. And one might add, complementary to this, the > thoroughgoing refutation of nihilism to the effect that all dhammas, actual > and unimagined, and all aggregations of these, actual and unimagined, while not > at all their "own thing," are also not "nothing at all." > Nothing anywhere at any level of simplicity or complexity has or is > self, but denial of self is not a denial absolute. There IS a middle-way > ontology: the way of conditionality - the Buddha's way. > > With metta, > Howard > > > /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like > flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none â€" such a seeker > gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn- out skin./ > > (From the Uraga Sutta) > #91308 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. TGrand458@... Hi Ken H, and Howard, In a message dated 10/11/2008 3:40:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi TG and Howard, If I have understood you correctly, you have been telling us (for the past several years) that anatta does not mean no self, it means "no own being." According to your theory, not only does a self (or an immortal soul) lack its own being, but so too does everything else lack its own being. There are no paramattha dhammas - no absolute realities - and the self is no less real (no less existent) than anything else. Have I understood you correctly? Ken H ............................................................ TG: Your reference to an "immortal soul" is completely alien to any of my discussions. I have indicated there is 'no self' in any way, shape, or form ... so your comment "the self is no less real than anything else" is a non-sequitur. Did not the Buddha say "All THINGS are not Self"? I believe so. He did not say "All People are not Self." I'm guessing you may be looking at the surface of the "self issue" and not the root. It is only from understanding the principles of conditionality that the "self issue" is seen from the root IMO. Quite frankly, I have no idea what you've understood. Our posts generally present a reasonably clear line of thought. But since you are unclear as to the message, it is very unlikely you have understood us. Howard, of course, will have to speak for himself. Best wishes. “…whatever kind of form...whatever kind of feeling…whatever kind of perception…whatever kind of volitional formations…whatever kind of consciousness there is, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: a bhikkhu (Buddhist monk) inspects it, ponders it, and carefully investigates it, and it would appear to him to be void, hollow, insubstantial. For what substance could there be in form… feeling…perception…volitional formations…consciousness?â€? (The Buddha . . . Connected Discourses of the Buddha, vol. 1, pg. 952 -- 953) TG #91309 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:07 pm Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav visitorfromt... Hi Phil, - You actually disagree with everything I wrote! But you put it so subtly that it is friendly. Thank you for that. >Ph: Well, I'm not sure of that. ... >I don't get the message that people "claim" the above as you describe it, but ... >Well, I don't know about this. ... >Isn't there usually a concession that there is always a lot of thinking after moments of seeing, etc, and it is usually all that thinking that people are aware of? ... >But I wouldn't agree that "to them they have not problem 'trying to place mindfulness on specific objects". I mean, they always complain about how we are attached to that, how much lobha there is for us who follow the breath, for example. >Must be difficult to verify in words if one does see them as they really are, but I don't share your impression that they claim that this. T: Your middle-way approach to Dhamma discussion sounds more like the Gandhi's strategy of peaceful co-existence. Suddenly I feel like a Hitler in comparison. ;-)) >Ph: My concern is more that people are secretly trying to have this and that kind of penetrative experience. My problem has been more that there are encouragements to see at the level above. >I am getting interested in Abhidhamma again. Last time this happened, I lost interest in meditating. T: With the comfortable disposition toward the higher Dhamma, not interested in advancing to "the level above" in this life time, there is no sanctuary better than DSG, Phil. Sincerely, Tep === #91310 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 4:56 pm Subject: Enter The Abhidhammika! Re: Step-by-step method for development of Noble Path visitorfromt... Dear Suan, Jon, Sarah, (Phil, Alex), - I appreciate your initiative, Suan. Suan wrote (#91097): >>Jon wrote: >>"there is no such thing as a step-by-step method or practice for the development of the path." >Are you sure about your above statement, which is very categorical and final-sounding? >Where did you get that idea or that teaching from? Or is it your own personal conviction (attanomati)? >If that idea was not your own personal conviction, it would help if you could name the source and cite the relevant statements from that source. >Do other people named above such as Nina also accept that teaching or Jon's personal conviction if the latter was Jon's answer? >Jon, you also wrote in your original message as follows. "The path is developed by the gradual accrual of the understanding of dhammas, and this is not something that occurs by virtue of the "doing" of specific things." >Was the above statement also your own personal opinion or conclusion? I think your answer would be `yes'. Please confirm or deny my guessing. ------------------------------------------ T: Thank you very much Suan for the two important and relevant questions you have asked. The denial of the step-by-step/gradual development in Buddhism is unfortunate, and it must be explained by Jon and others who share the same opinion. The denial of Buddhist practice by influential members such as Jon and Sarah (the moderators) is also very serious. Unfortunately, Jon has not been straightforward enough in his defence so far. >Jon: Well it's just my reading of the texts based on what I've heard and read over the years. ... As I say, just my reading of the texts. ... No particular source. It's a conclusion come to rather than something read or heard somewhere. >Jon: If you think the statement is incorrect, please do discuss further (perhaps with an example from the texts of a step-by-step method or practice for the development of the path (in the sense Tep and Alex were suggesting)). >Jon: Finally, could you please clarify whether my sins include stating to be my understanding of the Dhamma something that is not the Dhamma, because this was not clear to me from your post. If yes, then please indicate in what respect it is not the Dhamma. T: Jon, the burden of proof is yours. Sincerely, Tep, The Visitor from Texas ---------------------- #91311 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. visitorfromt... Hi Howard, - Although I have read your view on self, no self and not self for a number of years, it has not been clear enough to me. Please forgive me for being dense (thick skull, dull). >>In a message dated 10/11/2008 9:25:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: >>Nothing anywhere at any level of simplicity or complexity has or is self, but denial of self is not a denial absolute. ============================ A clarification of the foregoing, lest it be misinterpreted: The denial of self in all phenomena and aggregations of phenomena IS absolute. What is not denied absolutely are the mere phenomena. Their existence is neither intrinsic nor is it imagined. It is actual but fleeting and utterly contingent, and inseparable from other causally related conditions. With metta, Howard =========================== T: What is the 'self' you are talking about? You mean soul? With this simple meaning it is crystal clear to all Buddhists that there is no soul in anything. No self = no soul, plain and simple. But 'anatta' does not mean 'no soul', according to Anatta-lakkhana Sutta. Personally, I do not see any motivation to redefine or re-clarify anatta, just study the sutta and study it well with discernment(pajanati). "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir." Tep: That is the crux of what anatta anupassana means : any thing that is dukkha since it is "subject to change", is not to be regarded as 'me, mine or my self'. That contemplation(anupassana) is of utmost importance, since it leads to Nibbana : "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness. "When he finds estrangement, passion fades out. With the fading of passion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is knowledge that he is liberated. He understands: 'Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out, what can be done is done, of this there is no more beyond.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html Sometimes, we enjoy defining, discussing, then redefining, and writing essays and poems about leaves, branches and trees, so much that nobody care about the forest. Tep === #91312 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:47 pm Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Phil" wrote: > > > . . . KH: > > What is your definition of 'jhana beginner?' Does a beginner > > necessarily know what jhana is? > > Ph: Oh, I don't want to get into this. <. . .> Hi Phil, I realise you don't want to talk about anatta and no-control, so don't worry about not replying. When you give a purported example of controllability and say that it is represented that way in the Visuddhimagga "very, very, very, very, very....very explicitly" I do feel compelled to at least register my disagreement. There is always a risk that silence could be taken for consent - and I wouldn't want that! :-) Ken H PS: In the original message you wrote: ". . it is pretty clear to me that she is urging us to try to differentiate between seeing and visible object, which is a far deeper and subtler thing to do than . . ." Nama experiences an object. Rupa doesn't experience anything. Seeing experiences visible object. Visible object doesn't experience anything. Is that so hard to understand? KH #91313 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 3:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. upasaka_howard Hi, Tep - In a message dated 10/11/2008 8:39:54 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, indriyabala@... writes: Hi Howard, - Although I have read your view on self, no self and not self for a number of years, it has not been clear enough to me. Please forgive me for being dense (thick skull, dull). >>In a message dated 10/11/2008 9:25:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, Upasaka writes: >>Nothing anywhere at any level of simplicity or complexity has or is self, but denial of self is not a denial absolute. ============================ A clarification of the foregoing, lest it be misinterpreted: The denial of self in all phenomena and aggregations of phenomena IS absolute. What is not denied absolutely are the mere phenomena. Their existence is neither intrinsic nor is it imagined. It is actual but fleeting and utterly contingent, and inseparable from other causally related conditions. With metta, Howard =========================== T: What is the 'self' you are talking about? You mean soul? ----------------------------------------------- Howard: A "self" in anything would be an independent essence, a lasting core of identity. In a person, such an alleged thing could be called its soul. The most important self that needs to be seen as illusion is exactly that - the personal self (or soul). --------------------------------------------- With this simple meaning it is crystal clear to all Buddhists that there is no soul in anything. No self = no soul, plain and simple. But 'anatta' does not mean 'no soul', according to Anatta-lakkhana Sutta. -------------------------------------------- Howard: You are confusing me here, Tep. It seems that you are speaking of a contradiction. ------------------------------------------- Personally, I do not see any motivation to redefine or re-clarify anatta, just study the sutta and study it well with discernment(pajanati). "Now is what is impermanent, what is painful since subject to change, fit to be regarded thus: 'This is mine, this is I, this is my self'"? — "No, venerable sir." -------------------------------------------- Howard: This is one of a multitude of examples in which the Buddha is rejecting a self in the person. ------------------------------------------- Tep: That is the crux of what anatta anupassana means : any thing that is dukkha since it is "subject to change", is not to be regarded as 'me, mine or my self'. That contemplation(anupassana) is of utmost importance, since it leads to Nibbana : "Bhikkhus, when a noble follower who has heard (the truth) sees thus, he finds estrangement in form, he finds estrangement in feeling, he finds estrangement in perception, he finds estrangement in determinations, he finds estrangement in consciousness. "When he finds estrangement, passion fades out. With the fading of passion, he is liberated. When liberated, there is knowledge that he is liberated. He understands: 'Birth is exhausted, the holy life has been lived out, what can be done is done, of this there is no more beyond.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html Sometimes, we enjoy defining, discussing, then redefining, and writing essays and poems about leaves, branches and trees, so much that nobody care about the forest. Tep ============================= With metta, Howard #91314 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:41 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood scottduncan2 Dear Tep, Others, I'd like to know the relationship between pa~n~naa, ~naa.na, and di.t.thi? Can anyone make any comments? Sincerely, Scott. #91315 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:44 pm Subject: Re: Cha.t.tha Sa"ngaayana Pali version thomaslaw03 Hello Suan Lu Zaw, Thank you very much for your reply. (1) Do you mean that only the "Print Edition" (not CD version) of Cha.t.tha Sangaayanaa (CS) has included, in foot notes, variant readings from all other versions for convenient comparative study? (2) In PTS version, MN vol. III, p. 115: "Na kho, AAnanda, arahati saavako satthaara.m anubandhitu.m yadida.m sutta.m geyya.m veyyakara.nassa hetu" Jim Anderson indicated to me that the CSCD version reads "... veyyaakara.na.m tassa hetu", instead of " ... veyyakara.nassa hetu" in the PTS version. Could you tell me, do the Thai and Sinhala versions have the same words as the PTS or the CS version does? Thank you. Regards, Thomas Law --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > > Hello Thomas Law > > How are you? > > You asked: > > "I wonder whether the Cha.t.tha Sa"gaayana version is now accepted > by all Theravada traditions? If so, then this Pali version becomes > the only standard version for all the Theravada Buddhists to follow > and study. Am I right?" > > Suan answered: > > The Sangaayanaa means reciting together of Pali Tipitaka by learned > Theravada monks from all over the world. So, the Cha.t.tha Sangaayaa > Edition of Pali Tipitaka is the product of collaborative effort of > learned Theravada monks from different nations. It is the standard > international version. > > Having said that, some learned Theravada monks and some Pali > scholars may have their favourite versions as well. > > However, if we have the Cha.t.tha Sangaayanaa version, it is the > same as having all the available versions from different nations. > > This is because the Cha.t.tha Sangaayanaa Print Edition has > included, as foot notes, variant readings from all other versions > for our convenient comparative study. > > For example, in Section 1, Brahmajaalasutta, > Siilakkhandhavaggapaa.li, Diighanikaayo, we find the > expression "bhagavantam pi.t.thito pi.t.thito anubandhaa". > > The word `anubandhaa' in the above expression in Cha.t.tha > Sangaayanaa Edition has its variant `anubaddhaa' in Sinhala version > and Roman version. This variant appears in the foot note space under > the text body of the page. > > Best wishes, > > Suan Lu Zaw > > www.bodhiology.org > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "thomaslaw03" > wrote: > > Hi Dhamma friends, > > There are different versions of the Pali texts within the Theravada > traditions(such as Thailand and Sri Lanka's Theravadas). I wonder > whether the Cha.t.tha Sa"gaayana version is now accepted by all > Theravada traditions? If so, then this Pali version becomes the only > standard version for all the Theravada Buddhists to follow and study. > Am I right? > > Sincerely > > Thomas Law > #91316 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:10 pm Subject: Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. visitorfromt... Hello Howard, - Thank you for the quick reply. No, Howard. I am not contradicting to the simple 'soul" meaning of attaa. As I posted in details about 'attaa' before (DSG message # 75804), if you remember, there are five different meanings of it. By means of the negative prefix an- plus attaa the word 'anattaa' means not-self. But the meaning of anattaa of the five aggregates in Anatta- lakkhana Sutta has nothing to do with 'soul' or 'permanent identity', but rather in the sense of 'no core', where core is the rendition of 'saara' [essential, the innermost, substance, essence]. Hence "all things are not self" (sabba dhamma anattaa). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel202.html#thera vada Tep === #91317 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:08 pm Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood visitorfromt... Dear Scott, - Thank you for asking a good question. --- "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Tep, Others, > > I'd like to know the relationship between pa~n~naa, ~naa.na, and > di.t.thi? Can anyone make any comments? > T: The answer below is based on the Patisambhidamagga (Path of Discrimination). 1. The word ~nana means the relevant kinds of knowledge in one who knows the actualities (sacca) taught by the Buddha. In the Ptsm there are 73 kinds of knowledges. The first 10 are: suttamaya~nana, silamaya~nana, bhavanamaya~nana, dhammathiti~nana, sammasana~nana, udayabbaya nupassana ~nana, vipassana~nana, adinava~nana, sankharupekkha~nana, and gotrabhu~nana. 2. Views (ditthi) are not knowledge, they are characterized by misinterpretation(abhinivesa). The escape from (wrong) views is the attainment of the path of stream-entry. The Ptsm defines 'view' as follows: What is view? Misapprehending by misinterpreting is view. [Ptsm II, 1] 3. Understanding is pa~n~naa; it is related to knowledge because whatever sacca that is understood is a ~nana. For example, understanding of restraint(sila) after hearing is silamaya~nana. Understanding of concentrating after restraining is bhavanamaya~nana. Understanding of contemplating dissolution after reflecting on an object is vipassana~nana. Tep === #91318 From: "reverendaggacitto" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:37 pm Subject: Patimokkha Correction reverendagga... Hi guys! Thought i would let you know i need to correct something previously written concerning the Patimokkha. The rule concerning bathing only once every two weeks is actually in "The Alcoholic Drink Chapter" and the exceptions are five not two... 1.The last month and a half of the hot season. 2.The first month of the rains. 3.A time of work. 4.A time of going on a journey. 5.A time of wind or rain. As well "spelling champ" me seems to have mispelled Vinaya "Vinniya" although i could have sworn i've seen it spelled that way before. May the Buddha's, Deva and Angels bless all of you! bhikkhu/reverend aggacitto #91319 From: "Atula Siriwardane" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 8:33 pm Subject: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta asiri57 Can someone post a link for the Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta Atula #91320 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 9:37 pm Subject: Even & imperturbable ease is Equanimity! bhikkhu0 Friends: Balanced Equanimity is the Tenth Mental Perfection: Equanimity characteristically induces & promotes impartial neutrality... It's function is to look upon things with an even unreactive indifference! It's manifestation is the gradual stilling of both attraction & repulsion.. It's proximate cause is seeing, that all inherit the results of their actions. It's effect is utter purification & perfection of all other mental qualities, by ending both discontent & delight, thereby providing the necessary equal calm required for their complete assessment & accomplishment. Equanimity means Unaffectable.. Equanimity means Unprovokable.. Equanimity means Undisturbable.. Equanimity means Unexcitable.. Equanimity means Imperturbable.. Equanimity means Disengaged.. Equanimity means Disentangled.. Equanimity means Detached.. Equanimity means Immovable.. Equanimity means Unbeatable.. Equanimity means Untemptable.. Equanimity means Wholly Immune.. Equanimity means Indifferent.. Equanimity means Impartial.. Equanimity means Unbiased.. Equanimity means Disinterested.. Equanimity means Balanced.. Even like a smiling mountain! Cool Calm is the ultimate Balm! The Threefold Equanimity (UpekkhÄ?): If Indifferent towards both: Internal states & external phenomena, Living beings & lifeless things, Past, present & future events, How can one be hurt, upset, disturbed or distressed ? Calm is his mind. Calm is his speech. Calm is his action. So is the Tranquility; So is the Equanimity; of one freed by the Insight of right Knowledge. Dhammapada 96 Although a man is richly dressed and adorned, if he is in peace, at ease, in equanimity, calmed, composed, controlled, celibate and harmless towards all beings, then verily he is a Holy One, a recluse, a sage ... Dhammapada 142 Equanimity towards one's own internal states - that is indeed a link to Enlightenment. Equanimity regarding external phenomena & conditions - that is indeed also a link to Enlightenment. Samyutta Nikaya V Bojjhanga-samyutta. Such noble friend finally develops the link to awakening that is Equanimity during Awareness of in-&-out breathing, which protect against damaging mental states, tends to detachment, to ceasing, tends to release & culminates in complete self-surrender... If, friends, Awareness of in-&-out breathing, is so cultivated and so made much of, it is indeed of great fruit, of great advantage! One whose Awareness of breathing in-&-out is perfected, well developed, and gradually brought to refined growth thus, according to the teaching of the Buddha, such one illuminates the entire world, just like the full moon freed from clouds. Samyutta Nikaya V Anapana-samyutta. The Blessed One once said: Now how, Ananda, in the discipline of a Noble One is there the unsurpassable development of the senses? There is the case where, when seeing a form with the eye, there arises in a monk what is agreeable, or what is disagreeable, or what is both agreeable & disagreeable. He recognizes that: This agreeable thing has arisen in me, or this disagreeable thing... or this both agreeable & disagreeable thing, has arisen in me: And that is constructed, conditioned, coarse & dependently co-arisen! But this is peaceful, this is exquisite, namely even & equal equanimity! Instantly, that arisen agreeable or disagreeable thing ceases, and Equanimity takes it's calm stance! Just as a man with good eyes, having closed them, might open them; or when open, might close them, that is how quickly, how rapidly, how easily, no matter what it refers to, Equanimity make whatever arisen agreeable thing... or disagreeable thing... or both agreeable & disagreeable thing cease right there, and Equanimity takes it's even stance! In the discipline of The Noble One, this is called the unsurpassable development of the senses with regard to visible forms cognizable by the eye. Similar is the supreme development of the other senses. MN 152 With the fading of rapturous joy, he remains in equanimity, aware & alert, still physically sensitive to bodily pleasure. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare: 'In aware Equanimity, one abides in pleasure...' With the stilling of pleasure & pain as with the earlier disappearance of elation & frustration, he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: sole Awareness purified by equanimity, - neither pleasure nor pain - This is called right concentration... The elimination of both sensual desires & of discontent, the ejection of laziness, the calming of all regrets, just this pure Equanimity being aware of all mental properties exactly at the moment they appear: That I call the direct knowledge of release the breakthrough from ignorance. Sutta Nipata V 13: Udaya's Questions Equanimity is 'Tatra-majjhattata', which designates the evenly balanced keeping to the moderate middle of all things. It has as characteristic, that it effects the balance of consciousness and mental properties as a single function of single taste, which prevents both overt excessiveness and any lack or insufficiency. Equanimity thereby puts an end to biased partiality by manifesting moderation well within range of the properly reasoned midway. Visuddhimagga XIV The Buddha once explained: I would make my bed in a charnel ground, with a skeleton for my pillow.. And cowherd boys came up and spat on me, urinated on me, threw dirt at me, and poked sticks into my ears! While others, exultant & thrilled brought me offerings of food, caskets of perfume & incense and garlands of flowers! Yet I do not recall, that I ever showed any partiality towards any of them... I was the same to them all! Neither arousing any fondness nor any aversion! This was my ultimate perfection of equanimity... MN 12 Lomahamsanapariyaya The Hair-raising Presentation Cariyapitaka III 15 <...> Even is Equanimity! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #91321 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:53 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Quote Survey. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 11-okt-2008, om 15:44 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Lodewijk exists, though only as a > coherent, dynamic aggregation of phenomena, i.e., as a namarupic > stream which lacks > own being, and this middle-way, existential status of Lodewijk's is > independent of whether you are thinking of him or not. ------ N: It is a matter of different approaches. I do not take to the word exists, even though you add I have not met such terms in the Abhidhamma and I find it simpler to follow the Abhidhamma, why change it? What I call Lodewijk is just citta, cetasika and rupa that arise and fall away each moment. There is no person who exists. It is best to begin thinking in the right way, although we have not eradicated the idea of person who exists. It is very urgent to find out: is it kusala citta or akusala citta which thinks, reasons, writes? There is a lot of atta-sa~n~naa, and as Scott says in his report about his conversation with Phil: We have to realise when there is ignorance-based perception. Most of the time, since we have not eradicated ignorance. You prefer to work out things by reasoning in a logical way (your accumulations, I understand), but I cannot live like that, it is not my life. I do not find anything useful for myself in reasonings like: a car accident, etc. do not tell me it does not take place. Or: you tell me that Lodewijk does not exist. Or, if you etc. etc. To me these are all ways of thinking and we have to find out: kusala or akusala? Nina. #91322 From: han tun Date: Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:56 pm Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta hantun1 Dear Atula, > Can someone post a link for the Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta Han: Please try the following link. http://mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/3Samyutta-Nikaya/Samyutta2/15-Kassapa\ -Samyutta/01-Kassapavaggo-p.html It is the last sutta on the page of the web-link. Han #91323 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:33 am Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta visitorfromt... Dear Han, - You amazed me by quickly locating the sutta in the huge Mettanet archive. > > It is the last sutta on the page of the web-link. > > Han > How did you do it? Respectfully, Tep === #91324 From: han tun Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:26 am Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta hantun1 Dear Friend Tep (and Atula), I have the index of suttas in Burmese. It gives the location of the sutta in the Nikayas. Once I get the Nikaya reference, I compare it with Mettanet archieve to get the location in Mettanet. Then it becomes easy. The only problem is the font. The font in Mettanet is unreadable as it is. I have to convert it into HTML by comparing with the Pali text in Burmese. The finished product for this sutta is as follows: SN 16.13 Saddhammappatiruupaka Sutta Eka.m samaya.m bhagavaa saavatthiya.m viharati jetavane anaathapi.n.dikassa aaraame. Atha kho aayasmaa mahaakassapo yena bhagavaa tenupasaâ€?nkami upasaâ€?nkamitvaa bhagavanta.m abhivaadetvaa ekamanta.m nisiidi, ekamanta.m nisinno kho aayasmaa mahaakassapo bhagavanta.m etadavoca: [ko nu kho bhante, hetu ko paccayo yena pubbe appataraani ceva sikkhaapadaani ahesu.m, bahutaraa ca bhikkhu a~n~naaya sa.n.thahi.msu? ko pana bhante hetu ko paccayo yenetarahi bahutaraani ceva sikkhaapadaani appataraa ca bhikkhuu a~n~naaya sa.n.thahantii]ti? Eva~nceta.m kassapa hoti sattesu haayamaanesu saddhamme antaradhaayamaane bahutaraani ceva sikkhaapadaani honti. Appataraa ca bhikkhuu a~n~naaya sa.n.thahanti. Na taava kassapa saddhammassa antaradhaana.m hoti. Yaava na saddhammappatiruupaka.m loke uppajjati. Yato ca kho kassapa saddhammappatiruupaka.m loke uppajjati, atha saddhammassa antaradhaana.m hoti. Seyyathaapi kassapa, na taava jaataruupassa antaradhaana.m hoti. Yaava na jaataruupappatiruupaka.m loke uppajjati. Yato ca kho kassapa, jaataruupappatiruupaka.m loke uppajjati, atha kho jaataruupassa antaradhaana.m hoti. Evameva kho kassapa, na taava saddhammassa antaradhaana.m hoti, yaava na saddhammappatiruupaka.m loke uppajjati. Yato ca kho kassapa saddhammappatiruupaka.m loke uppajjati, atha saddhammassa antaradhaana.m hoti. Na kho kassapa, pathaviidhaatu saddhamma.m antaradhaapeti, na aapodhaatu saddhamma.m antaradhaapeti, na tejodhaatu saddhamma.m antaradhaapeti, na vaayodhaatu saddhamma.m antaradhaapeti. Atha kho idheva te uppajjanti moghapurisaa, ye ima.m saddhamma.m antaradhaapenti. Seyyathaapi kassapa, naavaa aadikeneva opilavati, na kho kassapa, eva.m saddhammassa antaradhaana.m hoti. Pa~nca kho me kassapa, okkamaniyaa dhammaa saddhammassa sammosaaya antaradhaanaaya sa.mvattanti. Katame pa~nca? Idha kassapa, bhikkhuu bhikkhuniyo upaasakaa upaasikaayo satthari agaaravaa viharanti appatissaa, dhamme agaaravaa viharanti appatissaa, sa.mghe agaaravaa viharanti appatissaa, sikkhaaya agaaravaa viharanti appatissaa, samaadhismi.m agaaravaa viharanti appatissaa. Ime kho kassapa, pa~nca okkamaniyaa dhammaa saddhammassa sammosaaya antaradhaanaaya sa.mvattanti. Pa~nca kho me kassapa, dhammaa saddhammassa .thitiyaa asammosaaya antaradhaanaaya sa.mvattanti. Katame pa~nca? Idha kassapa, bhikkhuu bhikkhuniyo upaasakaa upaasikaayo satthari sagaaravaa viharanti sappatissaa, dhamme sagaaravaa viharanti sappatissaa, sa.mghe sagaaravaa viharanti sappatissaa, sikkhaaya sagaaravaa viharanti sappatissaa, samaadhismi.m sagaaravaa viharanti sappatissaa. Ime kho kassapa, pa~nca dhammaa saddhammassa .thitiyaa asammosaaya antaradhaanaaya sa.mvattantiiti. Yours truly, Han #91325 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:37 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood ... No Practice, No Ariyans ... jonoabb Hi Tep > This message is longer than normal because there are mutual > misunderstandings that must be corrected. Thanks for taking the time and trouble to set out things at length. I hope you don't mind if I narrow the focus a little. > It all started with my comment on your no-practice, no-intention for > understanding of nama-rupa 'now'. Well this "no-practice, no-intention" characterisation is not one I accept, because it doesn't describe what I've been saying (or trying to say. Clearly the teachings talk about both practice and intention in some detail. Our difference is, I think, in the interpretation of "practice" as found in the texts. > >Jon: In quoting from my post here you've omitted the bits that I > would see as being the most significant, namely, that what the texts > are describing is: what kusala (including awareness/insight) is, and > what the conditions for its development are. It's this that is > addresses your question; the rest was really just supplementary > comment. > > T: First, I want to make an important note that it has not been clear > to me that the 'satipatthana bhavana' as described in DN 22 is the > same as the "no-action, no-practice philosophy" that you are talking > about. [How could it be possible?] You will see that in the earlier passage of mine just above yours I said: "What the texts are describing is: what kusala (including awareness/ insight) is, and what the conditions for its development are." To me this is the key, knowing more about what the Buddha meant by awareness/insight, and about the conditions for its development. > Note again that "practice" is > 'patipadaa' in Pali. For example, Sekha Patipadaa Sutta is known as > "the practice of one in training", MN 53. > No 'patipadaa', no 'sekha puggalas'. No training, no ariyans !! > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.053.than.html As I said, I don't deny (and have never denied) the textual references to patipadaa. > Jon, I would not have asked you for a clarification if it were clear > from the beginning ! So it is your duty to clearly show that the no- > action, no-practice philosophy that you call "understanding namas & > rupas now" is the same as satipatthana bhavana in DN 22. I can't do this because I've never suggested a "no-action, no- practice philosophy" ;-)) > >Jon: Regarding my observation, "Kusala of all kinds can and does > arise without there being the specific intention that it should", is > it your experience (I'm talking about in life in general here) that > kusala arises only at times when you think about doing something to > make or encourage it to? I suspect not. > > T: Yes, encourage the arising of a kusala by appropriate attention to > its supporting conditions ! Attention is action (cetana is kamma). I'd like to rephrase my question, because I'm not sure that you've answered it. The question is: Is it your experience in life that kusala can only arise at times when there is a specific intention that it should, that is to say, at times when you think about doing something to make or encourage it to? Or can it arise without such deliberate encouragement? I'll keep it to this much for now (if there's anything I haven't responded on that you'd particularly like to follow-up on, please feel free to mention). Jon #91326 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:39 am Subject: Re: DO jonoabb Hi Alex and Rinze Butting in to share a sentiment with you both ... > Rinze: You must understand that the Dhamma cannot be comprehended in an > >abstract sense, but has to be understood in an actual situation, > >for that is when the Dhamma comes into `play'. We always find > >ourselves, in a situation, and how we face that situation, is what > >Dhamma is all about. > > Alex: > This is why I like suttas so much. Less abstracted telephone book > dry classifications. > > Rinze: > I share your sentiments here. I'd just like to add that, as I've been discussing with Phil, the same goes for the Abhidhamma. Once it's realised that the Abhidhamma is talking about the actual present moment and is not a dry list of theoretical classifications, it takes on a whole new perspective. So I do share the sentiment ;-)) Jon #91327 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:00 am Subject: cittas gazita2002 Hello Nina and other dhamma friends, Was wondering how sati could arise with patisandhi citta when that citta is vipaka - so asked TA Sujin. here is what I understood her to say. If patisandhi citta is kusala vipaka and it is in the case of human existence, then sati arises. TA explained how santirana citta performs the function of patisandhi citta. Santirana citta in a process of cittas - sense door process - has more cetasikas arising with it than the actual sense door citta -panca dvara vajjhana citta. It is a vipaka citta in the sense door process , and in this function it is ahetuka - no roots - but when it performs function of patisandhi citta iin human plane and higher it is sahetuka vipaka citta [accompanied by wholesome roots such as alobha, adosa, amoha and sati because it is kusala]. Santirana and not sampaticchana [ which is also ahetuka vipaka citta ] performs the function of patisandhi citta because it is the 2nd one in the process to arise at heart base and therefore stronger/more established. I know this is not new for you Nina, bec of Abhidhamma in Daily Life among other things, however it seems to be soo good for understanding when we go back to the Abhidhamma and see that all these functions are beyond any control. Aids understanding of anatta, would you agree? Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #91328 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? jonoabb Hi Alex & Tep > Dear Scott, Sarah, Jon and all DSG'ers > > I'd like you to answer what Tep has said: > > > T: For those who believe in "predetermination" or determintic fate > >we must ask them as follows: Well I'm not one who believes in "predetermination" or deterministic fate. And I've never seen such views put forward on this list. > >How do you determine whether all events are 100% deterministic, i.e. > > if an event is not destined to happen, then it will never happen? > >If an event is destined to happen, then it will? Not sure why you'd think I'd hold such an idea. > > That is the belief of the no-practice, do-nothing people. With that > > kind of belief there is no use to practice the Dhamma, because if > >you > > are going to become an arahant, then you WILL BE arahant even if > >you > > commit heinous crimes all the time. These views have not been expressed on the list, to my knowledge. It might be worthwhile taking a closer look at what some of us have been saying, as there's obviously a major communication gap here ! ;-)) Jon #91329 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:29 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav jonoabb Hi Phil > Ph: Direct quote from A.S, I'm 90% sure this was from one of her > talks, in English with you guys: "Is there seeing now? Study it, or > panna cannot grow." Pity you can't give a reference so we can confirm 100% and also look at the context. But let's assume it was said. The question then is, was it intended as some sort of instruction to be implemented at the time, or was it a reminder that the growth of panna depends on the direct awareness of presently arising dhammas such as seeing? >." Now you will deny this til the cow comes home a > thousand times, and I don't mind, but this is the sort of thing I > find contradictory about aspects of her approach. On one hand, she > criticizes people for trying to place mindfulness on specific objects > in the above it > is pretty clear to me that she is urging us to try to differentiate > between seeing and visible object, which is a far deeper and subtler > thing to do than place the attention on the breath in the way Vism > very,very, very, very, very....very explicitly tells the beginner to > do (with counting breath between 5 and 10 times, etc, noting the > gross aspects of breath the way one notes gross aspects of sound of > gong... A good topic for discussion some day. But we'd need to look at more than just the one paragraph in order to get the whole picture. > So you see, I don't think it's my imagination. I encourage you to > reflect on that above quote and how it is pushing us to get deep...it > would be incredibly, amazingly, breathtakingly refreshing if one of > her students would one day say "well, she didn't put it well there, > that sounds like wrong view" the way you are so willing to say the > same about other teachers. I personally have seen moments of wrong > view in all the teachers I have heard...nobody's perfect. But you > guys are unwilling to admit errors in A.S. And I think it's because > you want a teacher who has immaculate view so by listening to her you > will have a gateway to immaculate view. Sorry, but I think subtly > this is what is going on! But I say that in a friendly way, my good > Dhamma friend. Thanks, Phil. I wouldn't want to get into such a discussion on the basis of a short quote of unconfirmed origin and uncertain context. > At work. Have to run so can't get to the rest of the post. If you > address the above comment in a way, please pull and post anything > that would be useful. We can keep discussing this a bit, if you'd > like. Won't really go anywhere, I think, but why not.... Nothing to hand to bring in to the discussion at the moment. Jon PS Yes, happy to Skype again, if we can find a suitable time (I am now on GMT +12) #91330 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:30 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav jonoabb Hi Phil > Ph: I think I am right here. The modal "should" should never be > applied to panna that knows present realities, not by a student of > A.S, and certainly not by A.S, and if it is it is contrary to the > whole thrust of A.S's no control approach. And there are plenty > of "shoulds" used in this way. Sloppy thinking, sloppy writing? > Using there "should" be awareness of realities rather than "there > can be conditions for it" or something like that? Whatever. But I > object on the grounds that it sets up an inconsistency. > > Thanks. Sorry for so many scattered posts. No wonder you missed > the above! Sorry I missed it. But on the issue you raise here, I don't think it's quite as simple and straightforward as you suggest. After all, the Buddha used all sorts of expressions that could be read as not being consistent with his own teaching (like "self" in the Dhammapada, for one example). No point in feeling too strongly about it ;-)) Jon #91331 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:31 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood ... No Practice, No Ariyans ... visitorfromt... Hi Jon, - For this post let me just answer your main question. > >Jon: Regarding my observation, "Kusala of all kinds can and does > arise without there being the specific intention that it should", >is it your experience (I'm talking about in life in general here) >that kusala arises only at times when you think about doing >something to make or encourage it to? I suspect not. > > > T: Yes, encourage the arising of a kusala by appropriate attention to its supporting conditions ! Attention is action (cetana is kamma). Jon: I'd like to rephrase my question, because I'm not sure that you've answered it. The question is: Is it your experience in life that kusala can only arise at times when there is a specific intention that it should, that is to say, at times when you think about doing something to make or encourage it to? Or can it arise without such deliberate encouragement? I'll keep it to this much for now (if there's anything I haven't responded on that you'd particularly like to follow-up on, please feel free to mention). ...................... T: So let me rephrase the answer as well. In my experience kusala does NOT arise without controlled action (through desire, will or intent) to restraint the sensing faculties (from akusalas) along with effort to generate desire, endeavor, activate persistence, uphold and exert my intent for the arising of kusalas that have not yet arisen. ALSO maintaining, increasing, developing, and culminating of the already-arisen kusalas still require desire, endeavor, persistence, upholding and exertion of my intent. No intention, no action. No kusala action; zero gain of kusala. Tep === #91332 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: DSG's method rinzeee Dear Sarah (& Sukin), (Read the whole post please, do not skip a word) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > Alex: If Sarah refuses to answer, or answers in a very vague and indirect manner, then it would mean that either she doesn't understand the method - or there isn't one. Same applies to other DSG'ers. I'd like to see clear outline, in point form, clear summary of steps neccessary to realize ariyanhood. Sarah: 1) Understand the reality appearing now 2) Understand the reality appearing now 3) Understand the reality appearing now 4) Understand the reality appearing now 5) Understand the reality appearing now Rinze: You (inside this vehicle) hear the train hooting away, just a short distance from the vehicle, but have just enough time to escape from the impending disasterous situation! What would you do? Sarah: Hopefully escape….. Sukin: I don't want to die and would try to change the situation if there was a threat to my life. Rinze: Phew! Thank Goodness! I thought you would be trying to "Understand the reality appearing now!" :-)) Perhaps, that's what this Bhikku was trying to do (True story, read below)… The Tsunami struck the shores of Sri Lanka on 26TH Dec. 2005, a Poya Day. A popular Bhikku (famous for his Dhamma sermons) from Colombo was traveling down south in a car, with his driver, on that road to one of the Buddhist temples, to deliver a sermon. The first set of waves whiplashed the coastal belt of Sri Lanka (around 9 am I think), from Trincomalee in the east coast, around the coastal belt down south, to the outskirts of Colombo in the west coast. The waves struck this vehicle, the driver stopped the vehicle and got out first, suspecting danger, requesting earnestly for this Bhikku to follow suit. But he refused asking him to go. The driver lived to tell the tale but not this Bhikku! The point I'm trying to make is this; no matter how well we seem to know and understand the Dhamma, when the time comes to put it to the `test', or rather, when the occasion arises, we take the easy way out! Why? Because of the underlying tendencies (attachment to this Body), is so great! Quite unaware, we do make this sort of decisions, in our day to day affairs, though the issue is not the train coming at us but, Suffering raising its ugly face! Wouldn't we be fooling ourselves, if we imagine that, we could face any future situation, in a "Kay sera sera.." attitude, which is aptly put, in your own words, albeit differently:- "….but doesn't it all depend on the conditions at the time?" – Yes, it does depend! So let's not do anything about it now! "Who knows what accumulated tendencies might arise and what actions might follow? Do we know what cittas will arise next even now?" – Of course we don't, so we'll wait and see! I believe there is `Skill' in Dhamma (I know you know this but just to refresh your mind). An athlete doesn't develop her running skills on the track, she develops it off the track. And then, when the occasion arises, her skills are displayed on the track. In just that same way, there are enlightenment factors in Dhamma (read the section on Mixed Categories in Abhidhamma), they have to be acquired and developed. And when developed, they rise to the occasion when needed. Perhaps you may understand this differently. You may say, "well that is what understanding the reality right here and now" means. I see that as the athlete who is developing her skills on the track! Of course Sati-sampajanna has to be developed in the here and now. But there is a way! We got to see the Path first, before we could trod on it. The athlete sees `the way' and develops her `skills' off the track. When the occasion arise (on the track – her path) she achieves her goal! Sarah, we know that there is no Self. We also know that there is no self even in a Puthujjana! The Dhamma is like a double edged sword, it cuts both ways. You develop Akusala Dhamma you can do wonders in the name of Science (actually non-science / avijja). You develop Kusala Dhamma, in just that same way you can become an Arahant (which is true science / vijja). In both these scenarios we know that there were only cetasikas that were being `manipulated' (conditioned) to achieve some objective. Lord Buddha talks of Iddipada. The Abhidhamma states they are Will, Effort, Thought, Reason. Hasn't Bill Gates come to what he is today through these very same cetasikas, as the Arahants did to attain Arahantship? Hence my opinion that the Dhamma is like a double edged sword, it works both ways. If you read the autobiographies of most of these successful entrepreneurs, you will find that their beginnings are small and they have succeeded through sheer will power and untiring effort, not forgetting the right decisions they took at the right moment (mindfulness) and all the `enlightenment factors' relating to their goal. My son is attending a seminar these days on "7 Habits of Highly Effective People" conducted by one Stephen Covey from the organization of FranklinCovey of US. He says, most of the ideas discussed, reminded him of Buddhism, though in a different context! So no wonder, Lord Buddha's instructions to Cunda in these words, "There are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, Cunda, do not delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my instructions to you." On Effacement Sutta MN 8 BTW Sarah, I too will try to escape :-). Oh!, one more thing, could you explain what you understand by the Laws of Causal Relation with regard to 1) Nissaya, Dependence (the 8th), 2) Purejata, Pre-existence (the 10th), & 3) Asevana, Habitual (the 12th relations). I don't need an expert opinion but what you think about it, does it matter (sort of). Please do not quote `the book' and leave it at that. I would like your candid opinion, what you understand. Metta Rinze #91333 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:47 am Subject: Re: DSG's method rinzeee Dear Sukin, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: Rinze: You (inside this vehicle) hear the train hooting away, just a short distance from the vehicle, but have just enough time to escape from the impending disasterous situation! What would you do? Sukin: I can only tell you about right now, and there is no train approaching me. ;-) I don't want to die and would try to change the situation if there was a threat to my life.….. Rinze: Why didn't you reply with a "I will read a novel" or "I will go to sleep" or "I will count the stars" or some such thing? Sukin, I'm not fooling or something. I have a reason to ask this, to make something clear. I know this is mere speculation, but give it your serious thought, for we all may die someday in someway! (What a morbid thought, eh!:- )) Metta Rinze #91334 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:48 am Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta visitorfromt... Dear Friend Han, - I like your tip for quick retrieving of specific Pali text from the Mettanet archive. Thank you very much. The last paragraph of SN 16.13 states: "But these five qualities tend to the stability, the non-confusion, the non-disappearance of the true Dhamma. Which five? There is the case where the monks, nuns, male lay followers, & female lay followers live with respect, with deference, for the Teacher. They live with respect, with deference, for the Dhamma... for the Sangha... for the Training... for concentration. These are the five qualities that tend to the stability, the non-confusion, the non-disappearance of the true Dhamma." What if they live with the thought "no you, no monks, no nuns ...no Buddha", will the true Dhamma disappear or not? Tep === #91335 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:52 am Subject: Re: Talking with Scott philofillet Hi Scott and all I thought I'd go back and re-read my report on our talk to see if there was anything important I'd missed. I think the only thing I found (other than a typo in which I wrote "my ability to explain" when I had meant to write "my inability" to explain) missing about... ....your comment that Buddhism in the West has evolved more to be a kind of pop-psychology, if I recall correctly, and that you clearly reject the "using self to get rid of self" kind of thing. I said that I am comfortable with this, and think that a clearly defined sense of self can be useful in conditioning behaviour in certain conventional ways, which are helpful in the long run for developing understanding, i.e I professed my belief in the "using self to get rid of self" kind of thing and said that it seems to me that the Buddha also taught in ways that are inexplicable except by surmising that he too saw benefit in encouraging moral behaviour by conventional considerations of person's seeking benefits. The example I gave was the sutta in which the Buddha said that married couples who live with their virtue in perfect tune can be together again after death in the Deva realm. We agreed that this is difficult to explain, and you said that perhaps we can surmise that in Deva realm there are more advanced degrees of understanding by which we can be together in ways that we can't understand from our current point of view, if I recall correctly, and do correct me if I'm wrong. And then I think an important point. I said that I wondered if there can not be atta view involved in a subtle even when one is studying Abhidhamma and professes that there are only nama and rupa, only dhammas at work. And you said there can't be, there is no self, or something like that, but I thought today that you were too easy about rejecting sakkaya ditthi involved in Abdhidhamma understanding so readily. I still feel there can be subtler forms of sakkaya ditthi at work. I can't put my finger on it. TG wrote a post about it today, I think, as well, making little selves out of the dhammas, but I would think it's more we make a little self out of panna in particular. I just know that when you asked me, when I was talking about how the clearly defined and utterly false sense of Phil behaving in certain ways to do good etc, you asked me whether under that there is not an understanding that there are just dhammas at work, or words to that effect, and when you asked me that I felt a kind of *joy* at the thought of those processes at work, a kind of comforting understanding that there are dhammas at work, that kusala is being accumulated, that abstaining from akusala is being accumulated. So for me at least there is a kind of atta view involved even in considerations of dhammas at work. I can't put my finger on it and it's too deep to talk about now, and aren't feeling so inclined now anyways, but thought I would document that exchange as best possible and put down a few thoughts that came up today. But very nice that there wasn't a single "i should have said this!" kind of thought after our talk, and that's because talking with you was completely void of any sense of having to try to score points or prove anything. I don't know if that's because of the nature of talking rather than posting (I doubt it) or because you are a swell guy (possible) but it was nice. Thanks also for your report, which I'll read now. Better not have misquoted me, punk. metta, phil #91336 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:54 am Subject: Re: Looping & repeating things in DO rinzeee Dear Tep --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "visitorfromtexas" wrote: > > Dear Rinze and Alex, - Tep: Recollecting what you told me once that "there is no person" anywhere, I have a question for you after the following quote. >Rinze: >You must understand that the Dhamma cannot be comprehended in an abstract sense, but has to be understood in an actual situation, for that is when the Dhamma comes into `play'. Tep: Does the abstract sense of the Dhamma correspond to the "ultimate sense" or what else? Rinze: What I meant by `abstract sense' here is not the `ultimate sense', but in concrete content as opposed to imaginations, as it would be, when we actually experience something. Tep: How do you understand the paramattha dhammas in "an actual situation"? Rinze: If I may re-open that discussion on Rupa that you terminated, Lord Buddha answers just this very same question, in Satipattana Sutta. He starts with Kaya-anupassana. One such contemplation is observing the body in accordance with the postures it is placed in, when walking, standing, sitting, lying, bathing, going forward / backward, eating, urinating, defecating,etc etc. These are "actual situations". 1) In Kaya-anupassana - the 4 elements pathavi, apo, tejo, vayo. 2) In Vedana-anupassana - the feelings 3) In Citta-anupassana – The mind (Citta) 4) In Dhamma-anupassana – The contents of the mind, that is cetasikas, or conventionally – the hindrances, the 5 clinging aggregates, the enlightenment factors etc etc. And so, if one is mindfull and aware, all the `paramattha dhammas' are investigated – Consciousness (3), Name (2&4) & Matter (1). Metta Rinze #91337 From: "rinzeee" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 2:58 am Subject: Re: DO rinzeee Dear Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: Alex: Semi-Free will: When a volition arises, does one allow it to grow and develop or not. Ex: if unwholesome volition arises for the trainee, does one indulge in it or restrain it? Same with wholesome volition. Will trainee allow vedana to become craving, or restrain at vedana? Rinze: Good question. Lord Buddha answers this very same question comprehensively in All the Taints- MN 2, the gist of it is reproduced below: The Blessed One said, "Monks, the ending of the taints is for one who knows & sees, I tell you, not for one who does not know & does not see. For one who knows what & sees what? Appropriate attention & inappropriate attention. When a monk attends inappropriately, unarisen taints arise, and arisen taints increase. When a monk attends appropriately, unarisen taints do not arise, and arisen taints are abandoned. There are taints to be abandoned by seeing, those to be abandoned by restraining, those to be abandoned by using, those to be abandoned by tolerating, those to be abandoned by avoiding, those to be abandoned by destroying, and those to be abandoned by developing."- All the Taints MN 2 This is how I understand the issue and there is evidence that it works. Let's take one object, say Anger. In fact we are told by therapists that when angry, to count to ten, or to take a deep breath. And we have found that anger subsides by those technics. We also know that, this is just a temporary measure. Because this anger that has been `bottled' up inside, will burst out one day, with a vigor, far greater in strength than it's individual occurances, more so when it is related to one particular person. Lord Buddha asks us to understand Anger (or the `reality' right now - Sarah :-)). How? By seeing PS `behind' the Anger. As I said before, PS is a cyclic process occurring ceaselessly not sporadically. What is the evidence for this? We are told that Citta arises ceaselessly in a particular order. 17 cittas constitute an object, which is a very very short period for us to understand the object. Hence we continue to attend to the object, as long as is necessary, to face our immediate requirement, in a conceivable sense. If we still continue to hold on much longer, then we not only desire it, we delight in it, and we are relishing it, enjoying it. Read Lord Buddha below: The Blessed One said: "There is the case, monks, -- perceives earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he conceives [things] about earth, he conceives [things] in earth, he conceives [things] coming out of earth, he conceives earth as 'mine,' he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you." - The Root Sequence MN 01. So if we are alert (mindful), we could `catch' the anger before it builds up to a crescendo, at the Vedana / Upadana link in PS (refer the previous illustration on PS in a previous post), and retard the cycle somewhat, by trying to be equanamous. Those who are in to bad habits like, drinking, smoking, drugs and so on, this is the way to give up. When given up, the PS for that `object' is broken at the Vedana / Upadana link. I was a heavy cigarette smoker once (around 10 years since I stopped), now it doesn't even occur to me to smoke, even for fun. The dependent conditions have been `up rooted' altogether from the `stem'. Hence the PS for smoking is non existent in me, so to speak! :-)) . To answer your question specifically, when volition arises allow it to develop and grow, depending on the object. The criteria (evidence) should be, (1) the unarisen unwholesomeness in you does not arise, (2) the arisen unwholesomeness is abandoned, (3) the unarisen wholesomeness is allowed to arise & (4) the arisen wholesomeness is further developed. Eventually this volition matures as `Right Thought' and the act of doing it as `Right Effort'. It is this volition, I believe, constitute as the kamma with neither bright nor dark results. "Punna, there are four kinds of kamma proclaimed by me after realization myself with direct knowledge. What are the four? There is dark kamma with dark ripening, there is bright kamma with bright ripening, there is dark-and-bright kamma with dark-and-bright ripening, and there is kamma that is not dark and not bright with neither-dark-nor-bright ripening that conduces to the exhaustion of kamma." – The Dog-Duty Ascetic –MN 57. Metta Rinze. #91338 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:00 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Jon > Sorry I missed it. Thanks. I think you'll see in the post I wrote to Nina that I have seen my concerns in this area settled for the time being. The way Nina rephrased it, based on an her understanding that comes from listening to AS for many years, was satisfactory. As for the "you guys never admit AS is wrong" thing, I have never heard a single case of her being said to be incorrect on anything, and I think it would be refreshing and reassure me that there is not some sort of clinging-to-rules-and- rites (always forget the Pali) involved in your (plural) listening to her. But I will leave that with you... metta, phil #91339 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:06 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Ken > PS: In the original message you wrote: ". . it is pretty clear to me > that she is urging us to try to differentiate between seeing and > visible object, which is a far deeper and subtler thing to do > than . . ." > > Nama experiences an object. Rupa doesn't experience anything. Seeing > experiences visible object. Visible object doesn't experience > anything. Is that so hard to understand? Ken! Surrogate slap on the wrist from AS! Back to the books. Knowing nama from rupa is the first tender insight, one of the ~nnanas, or something like that. If one tried to have it, it would be.....DA DA DA DAH!...self at work, seeking to control cittas!!!!!!! And since you read my post you will know that I was writing about trying to have it. Tender insight, Ken, tender insight! Not just the book definition your wrote down above. metta, phil #91340 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:10 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Tep > T: Your middle-way approach to Dhamma discussion sounds more like the > Gandhi's strategy of peaceful co-existence. Suddenly I feel like a > Hitler in comparison. ;-)) Ph: Very astute, you got me there! :) I am trying as usual to extricate myself from debate. I don't have the patience for it that you do, I don't have the tenacity for it (as Scott said, I think) that you do. Or perhaps the time. I do admire your persistence. > > >Ph: My concern is more that people are secretly trying to have this > and that kind of penetrative experience. My problem has been more > that there are encouragements to see at the level above. > >I am getting interested in Abhidhamma again. Last time this happened, > I lost interest in meditating. > > T: With the comfortable disposition toward the higher Dhamma, not > interested in advancing to "the level above" in this life time, there > is no sanctuary better than DSG, Phil. Ph: Yes! metta, phil #91341 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:14 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Tep Thank you. I will take you up on the below. I remember from our past exchange that what you wrote to me was very helpful. My current problem is that in the tradition that comes down through Ajahn Lee, which we both favour, there are so many different methods for focussing on the breath, and I would like some feedback from you on which ones you employ or have employed. I think that's about it, really. Once I settle on one, I will settle on one. My lifestyle doesn't suit pursuing deep attainments in meditation, but I find very important benefits in samattha meditation even short of jhanas. This is not the place to talk about it though! You will hear from me in a few days I think. Thanks! metta, phil > Please feel free to email me off-list anytime to discuss meditation or > anything. But please do not expect much from me in terms of meditative > skill. Although I have meditated (off and on due to laziness) more > than ten years now, still there are deep questions that I do not know > how to answer. > > #91342 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:21 am Subject: Re: Dhammas view, God view philofillet Hi TG I think there is a lot to be said for what you write below. You're trying to get at something that I can never quite put my finger on. I wonder if, as I wrote to Scott, it could be said that panna in particular is reified or whatever...I hope that all fans of Abhidhamma will reflect on the below and see if it doesn't resonate in anyway...it certainly does with me, I get all tingly when I think of dhammas performing functions to abstain from akusala and weaken defilements. And I think they *do* do that, but there is something very needy in my understanding (such that it is, hardly any) of how they do so... metta, phil > I think this is also what Abhidhammikas do by tranferring "self view" onto > the "actors/players" of "dhammas." The theory of "Dhammas" becomes their > basis whereby they transfer all other conceptual imagination onto and are able to > "let go" of believing in the "self" traditionally considered a "self." #91343 From: han tun Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:36 am Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta hantun1 Dear Tep, > Tep: What if they live with the thought "no you, no monks, no nuns ...no Buddha", will the true Dhamma disappear or not? Han: I honestly do not know, Tep. As far as I am concerned, whether the true Dhamma will disappear or not, I have my own personal views of anattaa. When someone abuses me I will say there is “no-Hanâ€? so that I will not have anger towards the abuser. When I am meditating, there is definitely “yes-Hanâ€? who is meditating. If I am following a wrong Path by having that kind of consideration, so be it! Yours truly, Han #91344 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood sarahprocter... Dear Scott & all, --- On Fri, 10/10/08, Scott wrote: >Scott: I find two forms of the word (PTS PED). "Pari~n~naa. ..accurate or exact knowledge, comprehension, full understanding. .." "Pari~n~na.. .knowing, recognising, understanding. .." >Scott: Do you have a source for the reference from the suttas so I can check the Paa.li? The latter form seems more general but I don't know the term... .... Sarah: it refers to the 3 levels of understanding following the stages of insight. See more in U.P. under 'parinnas', such as the following message of Nina's: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/22710 Metta, Sarah ========= #91345 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Hello sarahprocter... Dear Alberto, --- On Fri, 10/10/08, alberto.spera wrote: >Thanks for your warm welcome to DSG! I take the opportunity to thank you (and Jon and others members too) for the work you've been doing which gives people like me the opportunity to read and hear the Dhamma that A. Sujin explains in such a convincing way. >I think that the audio files are a good complement to her writings, giving extra details about aspects of dhammas difficult to understand and over the past year I have downloaded the whole set (over 2GB). .... S: A big 'thank you' to you too for your kind comments and for letting us know. I think your response is amazing and like Scott, it reminds me of the joy and wonder I felt when I came across such explanations. .... A:> A recent example of my own consideration regards the kamma, kilesa and vipaka vatta, ... S: Yes, this reminds me of some recent discussions I've been having with Howard and Alex and how D.O. in this light 'fits in' with the 4 NT. Because of past kamma, in this life there is rebirth, followed by other vipaka cittas. On account of such vipaka, kilesa arise, further kamma, round and round in samsara. This is the truth of Dukkha - clinging to and ignorance on account of impermanent dhammas, leading to the conditioning of yet more impermanent dhammas life after life. Only one way out of course, the Noble 8fold Path. ... A:>...I was reading A. Sujin Survey's, the chapter on the 3rd characteristic of citta, when I thought that the five sense doors are just the way for vipaka-dhamma to arise, seeing, hearing ecc., without this dvara it would be impossible for vipaka-dhamma to do their job, that's all, end of the story (I think that moment was with anatta-sanna) . The next moment avijja and lobha (or was it dosa?) had already taken possession of that thougth and I was thinking (again and again) that dvaras were ways through wich SOMEONE gets back what one somehow deserves! (and I think this is an instance of how atta-sanna accumulates) .... S: Excellent reflections - yes, as you say, moments of wise reflection, some level of understanding of anatta-sanna, followed by akusala cittas and atta-sanna. This is the way that right understanding develops - understanding such dhammas when they arise very naturally, without an attempt to analyse, follow a practice or do anything special. ... A:> One of the doubts I still have is about the cycle of defilments, kilesa-vatta, A.Sujin writes that vipaka cycle arise with kilesa already and I'm not sure if she refers to kilesa being latent in all cittas, even in ahetuka-vipaka- citta or to the kusala or akusala cetasika of the javana-citta in the panca-dvara- vithi. ... S: Nina's already responded. Yes, latent tendencies at each moment until eradicated. Metta, Sarah .... >Ps - Sarah, I'm from Brescia, northern italy, about 20 miles from Lake Garda, a nice place in summer, not quite like Chiantishire though. ... S: I'll check it on the map - perhaps we'll have a get-together of Dhamma friends in Italy! ============= #91346 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mirages: was Concept Permanent and unconditioned? sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Sat, 11/10/08, kenhowardau wrote: >S: > As you (Ken) once suggested, anatta can never be too extreme (or something along those lines). ------------ - K:> Thanks for remembering my moment in the sun, Sarah. :-) To be a little more precise, I think I said it could never be taken "too far." We perceive problems with anatta only when we don't take it far enough. >To put it another way: there are only dhammas - and 'only' means only! :-) .... S: Yes, very well said:-) When we appreciate this, it doesn't matter what the topic is - trees, rivers, Ken & Sarah, Nina & Lodewijk - there are only, only dhammas. Actually you've had many moments in the sun. Can you remind me of the vacuum cleaner one? Actually, what I'd like would be for you to skim through all your past posts, pick out all the best one-liners and put them in a series of posts to me:-)) [think about it on days when the surf's flat, or else send us some new ones (or both!!):-)]. .... S: > Well you were obviously very sheltered in Bangkok, ... ------------ --------- -- K:> Yes, I conveniently forgot that. I remembered seconds after posting and thought seriously about a follow-up qualification. But then I decided 'Admirers of K Sujin are, in the paramattha sense, moments of right understanding. ' And so it was true to say they all thought alike. :-) ... S: Sounds like a bit of a stretch of the fine print, but OK, I'll let it go and save my energy for the big battles... Metta, Sarah ====== #91347 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dependent origination sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sat, 11/10/08, Alex wrote: A:> I do not have evidence to support that vinnana (3rd factor) in DO is patisandhi citta. .... S: I'm sure I said patisandhi citta (birth) and subsequent vipaka cittas. I've given you textual evidence before which you've rejected, so we'll leave it there. Ignorance leads kamma which leads to birth yet again, round and round. When ignorance is eradicated, no further kamma, no further births. Metta, Sarah ======== #91348 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what is Considering sarahprocter... Hi Alex, >> S: Like now, there is seeing, there is thinking and so on. >Considering and appreciating that at this moment, there are just >these fleeting dhammas arising and falling away, no person in them >at >all, can be a condition for awareness even now as we speak of a >reality, a dhamma which appears. ... A:> Is considering the same as thinking? Can you please explain what "considering" is and what it isn't? ... S: Yes, in this context it's thinking with panna, wise thinking. There can be considering with ignorance and attachment or there can be considering with understanding and awareness. When it's with right understanding of dhammas, it may lead to the development of satipatthana. Pariyatti leading to patipatti or the two conditions in the sutta you quoted, 'voice of another' and 'wise attention' leading to the development of insight. ... A:> Isn't considering doing something, or is it doing nothing? ... S: Good questions! (Wise) considering refers to particular kinds of cittas arising in mind-door processes accompanied by wholesome mental factors such as panna, sati, vitakka, viriya, cetana, manasikara and so on. All are conditioned, so it's not a matter of *doing* or *not doing* anything. As soon as we think about *doing* or *not doing* in this context, there is no longer wise consideration, but unwise consideration with an idea of self *doing*/*not-doing*. Metta, Sarah ========= #91349 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? sarahprocter... Dear Alex, Tep, TG & all, --- On Sat, 11/10/08, Alex wrote: >Dear Scott, Sarah, Jon and all DSG'ers >I'd like you to answer what Tep has said: >>---"visitorfromtex as" wrote: > T: For those who believe in "predetermination" or determintic fate >we must ask them as follows: > >How do you determine whether all events are 100% deterministic, i.e. > if an event is not destined to happen, then it will never happen? >If an event is destined to happen, then it will? ... S: For once, I fully agree with TG when he wrote to you (Alex): "I'd just "chuck" that line of thought about the pros or cons of predetermination. Its an empty street. Its very much on the order of wondering about the origins of the universe, etc. I think the inquiry is "self view" motivated." S: I couldn't have said it better myself. Metta, Sarah ======= #91350 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sat, 11/10/08, Alex wrote: >> S: A gradual training, no steps to be followed by a self. > .... A:> Sure, it is just nama reaching this and that step. However the "gradual" shows that arahatship isn't reached suddenly and without have to go through certain stages. ... S: So far, so agreed:-) ... >>S: Sorry, the translation above won't do and the understanding of >realities can never occur *during* jhana. ... A:> How deep in meditation did you get to? Any actual experiences to back that up? It is quite sad when arm-chair speculations hijack actual experience. .... S: "Actual experience" is a very convenient cop-out when what one says is at odds with the teachings. What are the objects of jhana cittas, Alex? Are they concepts or realities? For example, the nimitta 'earth kasina' - is it a nama, a rupa or a pa~n~natti? .... A:> For me, insights happened ONLY during meditation, not after. ... S: If you are saying that you believe that in your experience, there were jhanas with insights occurring during them, I'd say, clearly there was no jhana, no insight and no understanding. .... >S:"Whatever exists therein of material form, feeling, perception, >formations, and consciousness [S: i.e 5 khandhas], he sees those >states as impermanent, as suffering, as a disease, as a tumour, as a >barb, as a calamity, as an affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, >as void, as not self.....etc" A:> Another proof of what I've said. In that sutta and MN111, the seeing of realities is in present tense AS THEY ARE OCCURING. ... S: Yes, there can only ever be right understanding of realities when they occur. ... A:> The only level when one has to come out is the 8th one (neither perception nor non-perception) and Nirodha Samapatti. ... S: So you are telling me that a) the various khandhas are the objects of jhana cittas up to the "8th one" and that at moments of such jhana cittas, the panna arises which understands those dhammas as anicca, dukkha and anatta? In this case, why did all the jhana attainers before and during the Buddha's life need to bother to hear his teachings? Metta, Sarah ========= #91360 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:11 am Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta visitorfromt... Dear Han, - I think I had a real concern due to my perceived disappearing of the true Dhamma (similar to the global warming problem). The question I asked below was not meant to criticize anyone : > Tep: What if they live with the thought "no you, no monks, no nuns ...no Buddha", will the true Dhamma disappear or not? Han: I honestly do not know, Tep. As far as I am concerned, whether the true Dhamma will disappear or not, I have my own personal views of anattaa. When someone abuses me I will say there is “no-Hanâ€? so that I will not have anger towards the abuser. When I am meditating, there is definitely “yes-Hanâ€? who is meditating. If I am following a wrong Path by having that kind of consideration, so be it! T: Yours is a cute & peaceful approach to living in the two different worlds of conventional and ultimate truths. You're doing fine. But to me the reality is here and now; its characteristics can be contemplated with mindful awareness, even when the ultimate meaning (Nibbana) is not yet clear as is seen by an arahant. Thus there is only one world, and in this world the Dhamma never disappears. Tep === #91361 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. visitorfromt... Hi Howard, - It is nice when we understand each other correctly and quickly. >No, Howard. I am not contradicting to the simple 'soul" meaning of attaa. As I posted in details about 'attaa' before (DSG message # 75804), if you remember, there are five different meanings of it. By means of the negative prefix an- plus attaa the word 'anattaa' means not-self. But the meaning of anattaa of the five aggregates in Anatta- lakkhana Sutta has nothing to do with 'soul' or 'permanent identity', but rather in the sense of 'no core', where core is the rendition of 'saara' [essential, the innermost, substance, essence]. Hence "all things are not self" (sabba dhamma anattaa). http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel202.html#thera vada Tep ============================ Ahh, thank you. I misunderstood you. I see now that you were just indicating more than one sense or usage. I think that the "self in the person" sense is the most common and most important, but I also think the meaning of "core" (or "identity" or "unchanging essence") is the most fundamental and most general, with other usages being instances of it. With metta, Howard .......................... What a relief it is ! Yes, that is more or less the same as I understand it too. Have a great day, Tep === #91362 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:41 am Subject: Re: Rupa -- Its Meanings in the Suttas vs the Abhidhamma. visitorfromt... Dear Sarah (Jon, Alex, Suan, TG, Han, Howard, Nina), - Your reply below seems to capture an important issue that is fundamental to most of our disagreements. Maybe we can gain some fruitful understanding this time -- a breakthrough? Maybe I can soon rest in peace and no more bother you and Jon or other DSG abhidhammikas? We were discussing the case of a 5-year-old girl and a 50-year-old woman who was uninstructed in the basic Teachings on elements(dhatus) and nama-rupa. They just knew hardness in head hairs and could relate it to the earth outside, but they did not have mindful awareness of the nama-rupa in the present moment. Is the following thinking different? : "...But before that there are conditions for seeing to arise, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking. They're all phenonena which are naama and ruupa. That's all. And no one can condition any reality at all. For instance, who can make up hardness here? No one." >>S: Why? Because awareness and understanding haven't been developed. ... >T: How do they (the 5-year-old and the uninstructed 50-year-old) develop awareness and understanding? And how do you verify that such development leads to true (not imagined) understanding ? .... >S: Again, "Friend, there are two conditions for the arising of right view: the voice of another (S: parato ghosa), and wise attention (S: yoniso manasikara) ." There has to be the listening and considering over and over again until the idea of self is completely eradicated. >At moments of right understanding of realities, there is verification, no doubt at all about what the path is. Of course, later there may be doubt again, but this too can be known as a conditioned reality. T: Firstly let me thank you for the straightforward answer to my qrestion, no beating around and above the bushes. Now please pardon me if my blunt reply may frustrate you : I think the idea does not work, Sarah. Why? Because there are two holes in the proposed idea. 1) The Arahant Sariputta, whom you quoted, talked to another monk (or monks) who had Dhamma-vinaya, and the 'voice of another' clearly meant voice of an arahant or the Teacher. Can this idea for developing real-time, here & now, "right understanding of realities" be implemented by a householder who has no saddha in the Buddha and the Dhamma? How can they have saddha if there is no arahant around? Without unshakable saddha in the Buddha and His Teachings wise attention is starved of food (ahaara) for its support [AN 10.61 Avijja Sutta]. 2) In case of an unusual Buddhist who has unshakable saddha in the Buddha and the Dhamma, still that is not enough as food to support "right view" samma-ditthi or "right understanding of realities". And you know that there are 9 knowledges (~nana) before stream-entry, starting with namarupa pariccheda ~naana. The Vism suggests in chapter XVIII how to develop this first knowledge. So we have a long way to go before we can rest the issue. The woods are lovely, dark and deep, but we have miles to go before we can sleep. Tep === #91363 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:00 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav visitorfromt... Hi Phil, - I just read the other post but decided to reply to this one. --- "Phil" wrote: > My current problem is that in the tradition that comes down through Ajahn Lee, which we both favour, there are so many different methods for focussing on the breath, and I would like some feedback from you on which ones you employ or have employed. I think that's about it, really. >My lifestyle doesn't suit pursuing deep attainments in meditation, > but I find very important benefits in samattha meditation even short > of jhanas. T: There is a long chain of connection from Ajahn Mun to Ajahn Lee to Ajaan Thanissaro. My admiration and respect for Ajahn Mun is deepest since he was the only Forest Monk who explained very clearly the meaning of namarupa-pariccheda~nana and yathabhuta~nana. If you can have both enthusiasm and time to read his Dhamma talk (below) just sections 8 and 9 before our off-list discussion starts; it may help us to communicate more effectively. But reading the talk is not a precondition to our discussion at all. (I am always pleased to discuss the samatha-vipassana meditation with you -- regardless.) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai/mun/released.html However, I have not practiced exactly what Ajahn Mun taught. Ajahn Lee's anapanasati method is much more convenient to follow. On the other bigger hand, Ajahn Mun was capable to draw a much bigger picture that explains higher insight knowledges better than any other Forest monks (including Ajahn Chah) ever can. Believe it or not. Thanks. Tep === #91364 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:21 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas view, God view truth_aerator Hello TG, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi Folks Ultimately one is supposed to let go of *all* clinging, clinging to theories included. Unless one has direct perception of such & such nama&rupa it may be useless to spend time thinking about them. If one isn't percieving something (this or that namarupa) then it is speculation to talk about it. In other words, too much theorizing is dependent on self belief (even subconscious belief) of 'I am the thinker'. If one doesn't cling to ideas, then there would be no philosophical arguments of "there are only 72, not 75 or 100 dhammas!" IMHO. Best wishes, #91365 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, >---, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex & Tep > Well I'm not one who believes in "predetermination" or deterministic >ate. And I've never seen such views put forward on this list. If there is no-control, then how is it different from predetermination or "fatalism"? After all, there is no-control of whatever is going to happen :) > These views have not been expressed on the list, to my knowledge. >It might be worthwhile taking a closer look at what some of us have >been saying, as there's obviously a major communication gap here ! ;- Not just communication gap, but lack of considering what some theories imply. Best wishes, #91366 From: han tun Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:36 pm Subject: Re: anupubbasikkhaa hantun1 Dear Sarah, > > Han: What you said is also plausible. But I find the Introductory Note by Thanissaro Bhikkhu in his article on Refuge: An Introduction to the Buddha, Dhamma, & Sangha, which is exactly in line with the explanation given by the Burmese Sayadaw. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/refuge.html > > Quote from the Refuge: [The readings on Dhamma form the core of the book, organized in a pattern — called a graduated discourse (anupubbi-katha) — that the Buddha himself often used when introducing his teachings to new listeners. After beginning with the joys of generosity, he would describe the joys of a virtuous life, followed by the rewards of generosity and virtue to be experienced here and, after death, in heaven; the drawbacks of sensual pleasures, even heavenly ones; and the rewards of renunciation. Then, when he sensed that his listeners were inclined to look favorably on renunciation as a way to true happiness, he would discuss the central message of his teaching: the four noble truths.] End Quote. --------------- > Sarah: I don't have a problem with this. However, if the Buddha thought the 'targeted' audience would only be able to hear the first parts on dana and sila, I don't believe he would have taught the anupubbasikkhaa. For example, in the case of Yasa, he knew that he was ripe to hear and penetrate the four noble truths and this was the way of teaching to indicate that the dana and sila which he already understood, while wholesome, were not the way out of samsara. By the end of the teaching, Yasa was enlightened - he appreciated the transience of other kinds of kusala and their results. > Another example would be in the Anathapindika sutta where the teaching begins by elaborating on the great kinds of dana as wholesome, as Anathapindika understood so well, but how these are nothing to a finger-snap or metta and that this in turn is nothing to the understanding of impermanence. Again, I think it's building on the listener's understanding, indicating how in the end, it's only the insight into dhammas as being anicca, dukkha and anatta that is the path. Other kinds of kusala don't lead to an end of suffering. --------------- Han: Although you do not have the problem with my quote, I take it that you disagree with the interpretation of the Burmese Sayadaw. I will not say anything against your views because I always respect the opinion of others, but I will follow the interpretation of the Burmese Sayadaw. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #91367 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "If there is no-control, then how is it different from predetermination or 'fatalism'? After all, there is no-control of whatever is going to happen." Scott: If one supposes that one can choose to do something now in order to cause some exact thing to occur later - to control events, then one is, in fact, imagining that one can predetermine events. Sincerely, Scott. #91368 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? TGrand458@... Hi Alex, All In a message dated 10/12/2008 5:30:14 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: If there is no-control, then how is it different from predetermination or "fatalism"? After all, there is no-control of whatever is going to happen :) ............................................... Phenomena alter in accordance to conditions/momentums. If those conditions include the Buddha's teaching or acute awareness of conditionality happenings, and a human being capable of understanding them, then there is a basis for making an effort to overcome suffering. This effort is merely a reaction to conditions. The "influence" of an understood teaching produces an "effort" as a result. Its a conditional relationship. From a "self-view" point of view, it appears as if there is a "controller." But in actuality, it is conditions being forged into place due to conditional circumstances. The more affective the conditions (better teaching, less obstructions, etc.), the more momentum the reactions will have toward achieving the goal. The inclination of the mind (and all conditions) is to continue the same momentum unless deflected by "other factors." If we really were "in control," and we wanted to overcome suffering, we would already be enlightened. But there isn't that control. The conditions need to mature. Part of those conditions may include a deluded view that thinks there is control and that view is actually a condition that works toward the goal of overcoming "itself" (the deluded view) ... if it acquires enough insight. Hey...if it weren't complicated it wouldn't be any fun. :-/ TG #91369 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "If there is no-control, then how is it different from > predetermination or 'fatalism'? After all, there is no-control of > whatever is going to happen." > > Scott: If one supposes that one can choose to do something now in > order to cause some exact thing to occur later - to control events, > then one is, in fact, imagining that one can predetermine events. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Dear Scott, you have misunderstood what I've meant by predetermination. By predetrmination I meant that the circumstances are determined by something else (causes and conditions) without any input of "your own". When I've wrote this topic, I thought about talking about it with you. Was this inevitable? Or was there a deliberate choice by nama-rupic stream called "Alex" to type this message? Best wishes, #91370 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? truth_aerator Hi TG, Thank you for your wonderful reply, Best wishes, #91371 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/12/2008 6:32:03 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Scott, you have misunderstood what I've meant by predetermination. By predetrmination I meant that the circumstances are determined by something else (causes and conditions) without any input of "your own". ........................................... No offense... Doesn't this seem an obvious case of "self view"? You don't need the quote marks on "your own" as if that isn't what you mean. It is the only thing you could mean. What else could it be that could pre-empt 'conditions'? Maybe God and Self is all I can think of. TG #91372 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? TGrand458@... In a message dated 10/12/2008 6:36:57 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi TG, Thank you for your wonderful reply, Best wishes, ............................................. Your welcome. But you may not think the follow up so wonderful. ;-) Hope it makes sense though. TG #91373 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? truth_aerator Hi Sarah, >---sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > .... > S: "Actual experience" is a very convenient cop-out when what one >says is at odds with the teachings. It doesn't have to be at odds. > > What are the objects of jhana cittas, Alex? Are they concepts or >realities? For example, the nimitta 'earth kasina' - is it a nama, a >rupa or a pa~n~natti? Concepts vs "ultimate realities" became a popular topic later on. In suttas such as MN111 there is a description of what is seen in 1st Jhana -> "directed thought, evaluation, rapture, pleasure, singleness of mind, contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness, desire, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention" vitakko vicaro piti sukha cittekaggata phasso vedana sanna cetana cittam chando adhimokkho viriyam sati upekkha manasikaro > .... > A:> For me, insights happened ONLY during meditation, not after. > ... >S: If you are saying that you believe that in your experience, >there were jhanas Note I've said "meditation". >with insights occurring during them, I'd say, clearly there was no >jhana, no insight and no understanding. How do you know? Because it doesn't fit with commentaries? "Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path. And just as a clean cloth, free of stains, would properly absorb a dye, in the same way, as Suppabuddha the leper was sitting in that very seat, the dustless, stainless Dhamma eye arose within him, "Whatever is subject to origination is all subject to cessation." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html Note when the insight has happened, during guided meditation. Or immeadetely afterwards but before the purifying effects have ceased. > ... > S: So you are telling me that a) the various khandhas are the >objects of jhana cittas up to the "8th one" and that at moments of >such jhana cittas, the panna arises which understands those dhammas >as anicca, dukkha and anatta? In Aruppa the objects are the corresponding phenomena (infinite space, infinite consciousness, nothingness, neither perception nor non perception) I am aware that Base of Infinite space & nothingness is considered to be 'conceptual' while base of infinite consciousness is "ultimate". In Rupa Jhana there can be various objects. But whatever objects are used, sattipatthana does happen WHILE sutta Jhana. Only from neither perception nor non perception does one has to emerge from in order to recollect what has happened there. >In this case, why did all the jhana attainers before and during the >Buddha's life need to bother to hear his teachings? Because you need to know how to apply the proper Jhana rather than aimlessly bliss out. Because you need to know to avoid any metaphysical speculations like that of Alara Kalama & Udakka Ramaputta. Best wishes, #91374 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:17 pm Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav philofillet Hi Tep Thanks.Printing it out now. Looking foward to our discussion. Gve me a couple of days. metta, phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "visitorfromtexas" wrote: > > Hi Phil, - > > I just read the other post but decided to reply to this one. > #91375 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "you have misunderstood what I've meant by predetermination..." Scott: No I haven't, Alex. Aeons ago or minutes ago, to imagine that one can 'predetermine' a future which is only determined by the natural order of the arising consciousness based on a complex set of conditions is to believe in predetermination by something that doesn't exist. A: "By predetrmination I meant that the circumstances are determined by something else (causes and conditions) without any input of 'your own'." Scott: See TG's reply. There is no 'you', and never was. A: "When I've wrote this topic, I thought about talking about it with you. Was this inevitable? Or was there a deliberate choice by nama-rupic stream called 'Alex' to type this message?" Scott: This is the root of magical thinking, Alex, if you imagine that I replied to you because you thought I would. Speech is conditioned by citta, Alex. This is not some sort of mystical process here. Sincerely, Scott. #91376 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:19 pm Subject: Re: Was it inevitable aeons ago that this would be written? truth_aerator Dear Scott, TG and all Was the effects that happened the way they happened today, inevitable from causes conditions that happened Aeons and Aeons ago? And that effects have happened today the only way that they could have happened and that they couldn't have happened otherwise? Best wishes, #91377 From: "Phil" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 8:22 pm Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta philofillet Hello Han and all > Han: I honestly do not know, Tep. As far as I am concerned, whether > the true Dhamma will disappear or not, I have my own personal views of > anattaa. When someone abuses me I will say there is “no-Hanâ€?Eso > that I will not have anger towards the abuser. When I am meditating, > there is definitely “yes-Hanâ€?Ewho is meditating. If I am following > a wrong Path by having that kind of consideration, so be it! This is just how I see it, Han. If you are on that wrong path, I am there with you. The Phil that is meditating is the observer who observes to some degree or other the way things come and go. Perhaps there will eventually be see through that observer, dissolving of it by wisdom. But if not it will still not have been a waste or harmful to have been better able to see things come and go thanks to that observer. And yes, no Phil when there is abuse - well, perhaps there is Phil receiving vipaka that can be received wisely so that the khamma is dried out there... metta, phil #91378 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Was it inevitable aeons ago that this would be written? upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Scott & TG) - In a message dated 10/12/2008 10:20:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Scott, TG and all Was the effects that happened the way they happened today, inevitable from causes conditions that happened Aeons and Aeons ago? And that effects have happened today the only way that they could have happened and that they couldn't have happened otherwise? --------------------------------------------------- They could have (and likely would have) happened differently had the preconditions been different. But the preconditions were as they were. What other choice is there? Either events occur due to conditions or randomly. What other basis is there for things happening than the conditions that lead to them? Human choosing consists of nothing but conditions, and these conditions do not arise randomly, but they, themselves, arise due to conditions. What else? It seems that what you presume is autonomy for willing. Others seem to go to an opposite extreme, ignoring willing or ignoring its having any effect. For me, these are both errors. -------------------------------------------------- Best wishes, ========================= With metta, Howard #91379 From: han tun Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:02 pm Subject: Re: Pali version of Saddhamma Patirupaka Sutta hantun1 Dear Tep and Phil, > > Han: I honestly do not know, Tep. As far as I am concerned, whether the true Dhamma will disappear or not, I have my own personal views of anattaa. When someone abuses me I will say there is “no-Hanâ€? so that I will not have anger towards the abuser. When I am meditating, there is definitely “yes-Hanâ€? who is meditating. If I am following a wrong Path by having that kind of consideration, so be it! > Tep: Yours is a cute & peaceful approach to living in the two different worlds of conventional and ultimate truths. You're doing fine. But to me the reality is here and now; its characteristics can be contemplated with mindful awareness, even when the ultimate meaning (Nibbana) is not yet clear as is seen by an arahant. Thus there is only one world, and in this world the Dhamma never disappears. Han: I like your idea. I also hope the Dhamma never disappears. -------------------- > Phil: This is just how I see it, Han. If you are on that wrong path, I am there with you. The Phil that is meditating is the observer who observes to some degree or other the way things come and go. Perhaps there will eventually be see through that observer, dissolving of it by wisdom. But if not it will still not have been a waste or harmful to have been better able to see things come and go thanks to that observer. And yes, no Phil when there is abuse - well, perhaps there is Phil receiving vipaka that can be received wisely so that the khamma is dried out there. Han: It is very true about receiving vipaaka. We may not be able to avoid vipaaka that is due, but we can, as you said, try to receive it wisely and let the old kamma dies there, without making a new kamma. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #91380 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 9:02 pm Subject: Re: Concept Permanent and unconditioned? visitorfromt... Hi to both Sarah and Alex (also to Nina and Han), - >---sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > .... > S: "Actual experience" is a very convenient cop-out when what one >says is at odds with the teachings. Alex: It doesn't have to be at odds. ................... T: What one says can be made perfectly in tune with the teachings the same way a recorded sound is a perfect copy of the original sound. But one may never know whether the teachings that one is mimicking so well may be verifiable by the "actual experience" which is reality. The teachings can be in error. Believe it or not. Experiencing is better, greatly better, because if one's experience is at odds with the Teachings which are of course error-free, then one uses the discovery to adjust and experiment again until one's experience finally is NOT at odds with the Teachings. This is known as verification by direct experience. Hoping you might agree, Tep === #91381 From: "thomaslaw03" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 4:14 pm Subject: Re: Cha.t.tha Sa"ngaayana Pali version thomaslaw03 Dear Suan Lu Zaw, Thank you very much for your reply. I will be patient to wait for your finding about the texts. Regards, Sincerely, Thomas Law --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > Hello Thomas Law > > In reply to your question (1): > > Yes, CD Edition (version 3, so far) does not include variant > readings from other Pali Tipitaka versions. Perhaps, future versions > may include those variant readings. > > Regarding your question (2): > > As I use Chattha Sangaayana CD version 3, I do not have Print > Edition of the Whole Set of Pali Tipitaka. I have only > Siilakkhandhavagga of Diighanikaayo as part of Print Edition. > > To answer your question (2), I may need to visit National Library of > Australia or the ANU university library to consult the Print Edition > of Majjhimanikaaya. And, it may require your patience to wait as I > will have to wait for my spare time for the visit. <...> #91382 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 5:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Was it inevitable aeons ago that this would be written? TGrand458@... Houston, we have a communication problem. ;-) In a message dated 10/12/2008 8:20:07 P.M. Mountain Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear Scott, TG and all Was the effects that happened the way they happened today, inevitable from causes conditions that happened Aeons and Aeons ago? And that effects have happened today the only way that they could have happened and that they couldn't have happened otherwise? Best wishes, #91383 From: "alberto.spera" Date: Sun Oct 12, 2008 11:32 pm Subject: Re: Hello alberto.spera Hi Tep Here's you completed questionnaire :-) Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "visitorfromtexas" wrote: > > Hello, Alberto - > ......................... > My questions are : > > 1. What "formal meditation" did your learn during the first 3-4 years > of study ? A: Goenka > > 2. Without understanding much of the Suttanta material, how do you > know whether A. Sujin's teaching is in accordance with the Buddha's > Dhamma or if it is something different? A: Because she gives a whole picture of Dhamma Exactly, please tell me how > you know that she is "someone who actually knows them as they are" ? > A: Because she thinks very little > 3. Why are you so confident that you "had the chance to accumulate a > little samma-magga" ? A: Because now I can study the whole picture of Dhamma > > #91384 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:01 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 3, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, We can easily mislead ourselves with regard to kusala and akusala. We should remember that all that is taught in the Abhidhamma concerns our daily life; it teaches reality and we have to verify what is taught ourselves. Do we confuse indifferent feeling with calm? Indifferent feeling can accompany kusala citta as well as akusala citta. The citta rooted in attachment can be accompanied by pleasant feeling but also by indifferent feeling, and the citta rooted in ignorance is invariably accompanied by indifferent feeling. Thus we see that when indifferent feeling arises there is not necessarily calm, although feeling that is neither pleasant nor unpleasant may seem calm to us. When we consider more what has been taught about feeling, we shall realize how difficult it is to know the characteristic of true calm which is wholesome. Calm arises with kusala citta and the feeling can be pleasant or indifferent. There is seeing now. Are the cittas which arise shortly after seeing has fallen away kusala or akusala? When we are not engaged with dåna, síla or bhåvana, it must be akusala citta. Sense-impressions are usually followed by akusala cittas. The feeling may be indifferent, it may seem that we are not particularly glad about what is seen. Still, most of the time there is clinging. We cling to all our experiences, we want to go on seeing and hearing, we do not want to be without these experiences. We cling to life, we want to go on living and receiving sense-impressions. We think about the sense- impressions we experienced, about events that occurred, about people. When we are mindful of the cittas that think we can find out that these are mostly akusala cittas. Is there clinging now? So long as clinging has not been eradicated we have to be reborn. Even before the Buddha’s time there were wise people who saw the disadvantages of sense-impressions. They developed jhåna, a high degree of calm, in order to be temporarily freed from sense- impressions. The attainment of jhåna is extremely difficult and only those who have accumulated the right conditions for jhåna can attain it. But even if one has no conditions for the development of jhåna, there can still be moments of calm in daily life. However, right understanding which knows the characteristic of calm is essential. We should not forget that calm accompanies kusala citta and that it falls away with the citta; nobody can induce calm to stay on. ******* Nina. #91385 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:05 am Subject: Survey Quote. nilovg Dear friends, Realities appear only at the moments víthi-cittas, cittas in processes arise. When a citta arises and then falls away it has disappeared completely. When a rúpa arises and then falls away it also has disappeared completely. The visible object which just a moment ago appeared through the eyes has completely fallen away, and also each of the cittas which arose just a few moments ago in the eye- door process have fallen away completely. All cittas and all rúpas arise and then fall away, they are gone forever. However, so long as the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa have not been realized through direct understanding, through insight, we cannot grasp what falling away means. We have not realised through the development of vipassanå the falling away of any reality. We may say that at this moment seeing-consciousness falls away, that receiving-consciousness, investigating-consciousness, determining-consciousness, javana-cittas and registering-consciousness fall away, but the falling away of dhammas has not yet been penetrated by insight. Paññå should be developed so that it can penetrate the arising and falling away of nåma and rúpa. Even if paññå has not reached that degree yet, it is most beneficial to listen to the Dhamma and to consider it, so that right understanding can develop and become keener, more refined. Right understanding can be accumulated and then it can be a condition for satipatthåna to arise and to be mindful of the characteristics of the dhammas which arise and fall away. In that way paññå can gradually develop and penetrate the characteristics of dhammas so that they will be realized as not a living being, not a person, not self. ****** Nina. #91386 From: "visitorfromtexas" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:17 am Subject: Re: Hello visitorfromt... Hi Alberto, - It is fun to be entertained by your minimal reply that gives me the burden of guessing, i.e. "Tep, fill in the blanks yourself". ;-) ---"alberto.spera" wrote: Hi Tep Here's you completed questionnaire :-) Alberto > > 1. What "formal meditation" did your learn during the first 3-4 years of study ? A: Goenka > 2. Without understanding much of the Suttanta material, how do you > know whether A. Sujin's teaching is in accordance with the Buddha's > Dhamma or if it is something different? A: Because she gives a whole picture of Dhamma Exactly, please tell me how you know that she is "someone who actually knows them as they are" ? > A: Because she thinks very little > 3. Why are you so confident that you "had the chance to accumulate a > little samma-magga" ? A: Because now I can study the whole picture of Dhamma .................... T: What did you NOT learn from Goenka? The "whole picture" may change a lot after you have joined DSG for just a week, because nobody "thinks very little" around here! Good luck and have fun, Tep === #91387 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:09 am Subject: Final Freedom! bhikkhu0 Friends: The Supreme Goal Ahead: The Blessed Buddha Gotama once said: The purpose of morality, is control of behaviour. The purpose of controlled behaviour, is absence of regrets. The purpose of absence of regrets, is joy. The purpose of joy , is satisfaction. The purpose of satisfaction, is calm. The purpose of calm, is happiness. The purpose of happiness, is concentration. The purpose of concentration , is understanding. The purpose of understanding, is turning away. The purpose of turning away, is disillusion. The purpose of disillusion, is mental release. The purpose of mental release, is NibbÄ?na, Final Freedom without remnants of clinging... Final Freedom! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) .... #91388 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 12:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: dependent origination .. "No you, no person", she said. kenhowardau Hi TG (and Howard). ------- <. . .> TG: > Your reference to an "immortal soul" is completely alien to any of my discussions. ------- OK, delete all reference to an immortal soul! :-) Actually, though, I can't see how an immortal soul could be any more (or less) alien to right understanding than any other kind of soul (lasting self). Whether a self is imagined to last one second or an eternity, belief in that self is still the same cetasika - micha- ditthi. ----------------- TG: > I have indicated there is 'no self' in any way, shape, or form ... so your comment "the self is no less real than anything else" is a non-sequitur. ----------------- You have said that there is no self, but you have also said there are no paramattha dhammas. That means you don't know what no-self (anatta) is. Anatta is a characteristic of paramattha dhammas. ------------------- TG: > Did not the Buddha say "All THINGS are not Self"? I believe so. He did not say "All People are not Self." ------------------- That's right, all paramattha dhammas are not self: they possess the anatta characteristic. People are just concepts. Concepts lack sabhava: they don't possess real characteristics. --------------- TG: > I'm guessing you may be looking at the surface of the "self issue" and not the root. It is only from understanding the principles of conditionality that the "self issue" is seen from the root IMO. Quite frankly, I have no idea what you've understood. Our posts generally present a reasonably clear line of thought. But since you are unclear as to the message, it is very unlikely you have understood us. Howard,of course, will have to speak for himself. ----------------- I think I have understood your theories well enough to know where they are going wrong. I think I understand why you (and so many other Buddhists) reject the Abhidhamma and the ancient commentaries. Let's face it, Buddhists are just people, and, generally speaking, people cling to belief in self. Most Buddhists want to have it both ways: they want to believe in the Buddha's teaching (of anatta) and still hold out hope for some kind of lasting existence. Therefore, the majority of Buddhists *must* reject the Abhidhamma. The Abhidhamma explains how there can be a reality without self. People don't want to know that! Ken H #91389 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:37 am Subject: Enter The Abhidhammika! Re: Step-by-step method for development of Noble Path jonoabb Hi Tep > T: The denial of the step-by-step/gradual > development in Buddhism is unfortunate, and it must be explained by > Jon and others who share the same opinion. The denial of Buddhist > practice by influential members such as Jon and Sarah (the moderators) > is also very serious. I'm not sure if this was Suan's point, or if his point related only to the manner of expression (too "categorical"). That's why I'm seeking clarification from him. > Unfortunately, Jon has not been straightforward enough in his defence > so far. But I can't offer a defence if I'm unable to understand the charge ;-)) > >Jon: Finally, could you please clarify whether my sins include > stating to be my understanding of the Dhamma something that is not the > Dhamma, because this was not clear to me from your post. If yes, then > please indicate in what respect it is not the Dhamma. > > T: Jon, the burden of proof is yours. The burden of proof is always on the prosecution. Except of course in an inquisition (where it's "guilty until proved innocent"). Jon #91390 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:38 am Subject: Re: DSG's method for Attaining Ariyanhood jonoabb Hi Tep > T: It is still hard for me to follow/agree with you even after your > second attempt. This is what I understand : > You must have an intention to think about or mull over a point of > dhamma, otherwise there is no thinking (= mental action or mano- > kamma). Yes, I agree that the mental factor of intention (cetana), being one of the universal's, accompanies every moment of consciousness and thus also moments of kusala consciousness. But my statement about kusala arising without the specific intention that it do so, and my question to you about your experience in life, refer not to the accompanying cetana cetasika but to the conventional concept of the intention to make something happen. This is something that precedes (not accompanies) the consciousness in question. Jon #91391 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:40 am Subject: Re: Old kamma & present behav jonoabb Hi Phil > Thanks. I think you'll see in the post I wrote to Nina that I have > seen my concerns in this area settled for the time being. The way Nina > rephrased it, based on an her understanding that comes from listening > to AS for many years, was satisfactory. Yes, I was very glad to see that. Good to have that one cleared up. > As for the "you guys never > admit AS is wrong" thing, I have never heard a single case of her being > said to be incorrect on anything, and I think it would be refreshing > and reassure me that there is not some sort of clinging-to-rules- and- > rites (always forget the Pali) involved in your (plural) listening to > her. But I will leave that with you... I'm sure everyone makes a slip now and then, but I take it that's not what you're talking about here. Nor a matter of straight out textual reference or interpretation (known errors here). If what you're wondering about is a considered expression of view then, based on experience to date, I wouldn't expect to hear anything that I would recognise as being "wrong". Actually, when we get around to uploading the talks from 30 years ago (from the reel-to-reel tapes series), you'll get a chance to see for yourself how much change consistency there is over that span of years. Jon #91392 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 3:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Was it inevitable aeons ago that Alex would write this? jonoabb Hi Alex > If there is no-control, then how is it different from predetermination > or "fatalism"? After all, there is no-control of whatever is going to > happen :) Thanks for clarifying what you see as the connection between "no- control" and "fatalism". I hope I can explain. To my understanding, "no-control" is in essence a reference to the anattaness of dhammas. I think the expression used in the texts is that dhammas are "not subject to mastery". "Fatalism" on a different scale altogether. It refers I believe to the occurring of events in relation to a given individual. So it's something that is spoken of in the context of the conventional world. So there is really no connection between the two. Hoping this makes sense. Jon #91393 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:17 am Subject: Re: Sangiiti Sutta Corner: DN 33 Threes (7-12) scottduncan2 Dear Friends, Moving on from #90793 Threes (1-6) (cy: #90912,#90952). CSCD Tayo akusalasa'nkappaa â€" kaamasa'nkappo, byaapaadasa'nkappo, vihi.msaasa'nkappo. Walshe DN 33.1.10(7) Three kinds of unwholesome motivation (sankappa): *1029 through sensuality, enmity, cruelty. Olds [ 3.7 ] Three unskillful principles (sa'nkappaa,[ 3.7-12 ] aims, motivations, goals): the pleasure-principle, the anger-principle, the harm-principle RD's [ 3.7 ] Three kinds of bad purposes...[as in v.] 3.7 Sankappa. 'There is no difference in the meaning (content, attha) of sankappa and vitakka.' Comy. Cf. Compendium, p.238. CSCD Tayo kusalasa'nkappaa â€" nekkhammasa'nkappo, abyaapaadasa'nkappo, avihi.msaasa'nkappo. Walshe DN 33.1.10(8) Three kinds of wholesome motivation: through renunciation, non-enmity, non-cruelty. Olds [ 3.8 ] Three skillful principles: the giving-up principle, the non-anger principle, the non-harm principle RD's [ 3.8 ] Three kinds of good purposes...[as in vi.]. CSCD Tisso akusalasa~n~naa â€" kaamasa~n~naa, byaapaadasa~n~naa, vihi.msaasa~n~naa. Walshe DN 33.1.10(9) Three kinds of unwholesome perception: of sensuality, of enmity, of cruelty. Olds [ 3.9 ] Three unskillful perceptions (sa~n~naa): the pleasure-perception, the anger-perception, the harm-perception RD's [ 3.9 ] Three kinds of bad notions...[as in v.]. CSCD Tisso kusalasa~n~naa â€" nekkhammasa~n~naa, abyaapaadasa~n~naa, avihi.msaasa~n~naa. Walshe DN 33.1.10(10) Three kinds of wholesome perception: of renunciation, of non-enmity, of non-cruelty. Olds [ 3.10 ] Three skillful perceptions: the giving-up perception, the non-anger perception, the non-harm perception RD's [ 3.10 ] Three kinds of good notions...[as in vi.]. CSCD Tisso akusaladhaatuyo â€" kaamadhaatu, byaapaadadhaatu, vihi.msaadhaatu. Walshe DN 33.1.10(11) Three unwholesome elements: sensuality, enmity, cruelty. Olds [ 3.11 ] Three unskillful elements (dhaatuyo): the pleasure-element, the anger-element, the harm-element RD's [ 3.11 ] Three bad elements, to wit, of sense-desire, enmity, cruelty. CSCD Tisso kusaladhaatuyo â€" nekkhammadhaatu, abyaapaadadhaatu, avihi.msaadhaatu. Walshe DN 33.1.10(12) Three wholesome elements: renunciation, non-enmity, cruelty. Olds [ 3.12 ] Three skillful elements: the giving-up element, the non-anger element, the non-harm element RD's [ 3.12 ] Three good elements, ...[as in vi.]. Sincerely, Scott/connie. #91394 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Quote Survey. sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Sun, 12/10/08, upasaka@... wrote: ============ ========= ======== >>H:> But Khun Sujin is also in error, I believe, when she then goes on to say not only that there is no person apart from the dhammas, but that there is no person at all. That ignores interrelatedness. It is analysis-bound and synthesis-avoiding. It is one-sided and tends towards nihilistic wrong view, as I see it. .... >S: In answer to a recent question of TG's about why I stress anatta so much, I think that your last comment indicates an effort to re-introduce self in the form of 'interrelatedness' , 'aggregation' and so on. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---- >Howard: I don't think that clinging to "self" is the motivation. Rather it is a desire to not throw the relational-reality baby out with the reificational bath water. ... S: When we say that 'yes, there are only namas and rupas, BUT it's wrong to say there is no person at all, because it ignores inter-relatedness, relational-reality and so on', to me it suggests a strong clinging to atta. That's fine, there's clinging to atta until it's finally eradicated at the stage of sotapatti-magga. It's very deep-rooted and the Dhamma is very subtle. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ----- >S:Simply, there is no person at all! ... Metta, Sarah ========= #91395 From: "alberto.spera" Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:33 am Subject: Re: Hello alberto.spera Hi Tep It wasn't my intention to criticize Goenka, I think there are many far worst meditation techniques than his around, and I must admit I actually enjoyed those retreats quite a lot. I also apologize about the (too) terse style of my writing, I write like this even in italian! Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "visitorfromtexas" wrote: > > > Hi Alberto, - > > It is fun to be entertained by your minimal reply that gives me the > burden of guessing, i.e. "Tep, fill in the blanks yourself". ;-) > #91396 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Talking with Scott sarahprocter... Hi Phil & Scott, --- On Sun, 12/10/08, Phil wrote: >Thanks also for your report, which I'll read now. Better not have misquoted me, punk. ... S: :-)) thanks to you both for the great reports and glad to hear you found so much in common and so many interesting dhamma points were discussed. Looking forward to the reports on your chat wit Tep next - I'm sure it won't keep to the agenda either:-). I also recommended you, Phil, to Sukin when he returns. Metta, Sarah ========= #91397 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Hello nilovg Dear Alberto, Op 13-okt-2008, om 14:33 heeft alberto.spera het volgende geschreven: > I also apologize about the (too) terse style of my writing, I write > like this even in italian! ------ N: Wonderful, I like it. My husband asked whether you like us to send hardcover Kh Sujin's Perfections, and later on Rupas that will come out as a book. It is our pleasure to send out books as a present, but I know that some people prefer on line rather than hardcover. Just let me know off line. Nina. #91398 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: DSG's method sarahprocter... Dear Rinze, This is an interesting discussion. Actually, when I read your hypothetical scenario with the car travelling down the coast and the train, I was thinking of the Tsunami and all the damage and loss that occurred when the train ran off the line, after the line was buckled. --- On Sun, 12/10/08, rinzeee wrote: >>Rinze: You (inside this vehicle) hear the train hooting away, just a short distance from the vehicle, but have just enough time to escape from the impending disasterous situation! What would you do? >Sarah: Hopefully escape….. Sukin: I don't want to die and would try to change the situation if there was a threat to my life. >Rinze: Phew! Thank Goodness! I thought you would be trying to "Understand the reality appearing now!" :-)) .... S: The point is that "understanding the reality now" does not mean standing still or not running away. This is a complete misconception. When there is right understanding of a reality, there's no light that turns on, there's no outer change in habit or appearance, no sitting around waiting for the train:-). ... R:>The waves struck this vehicle, the driver stopped the vehicle and got out first, suspecting danger, requesting earnestly for this Bhikku to follow suit. But he refused asking him to go. The driver lived to tell the tale but not this Bhikku! ... S: We can't say anything about whether there was or was not any understanding. The bhikkhu may not have realised the danger, for example, or may have been in a state of shock. We can never tell by the outer appearances. ... R:> The point I'm trying to make is this; no matter how well we seem to know and understand the Dhamma, when the time comes to put it to the `test', or rather, when the occasion arises, we take the easy way out! Why? Because of the underlying tendencies (attachment to this Body), is so great! Quite unaware, we do make this sort of decisions, in our day to day affairs, though the issue is not the train coming at us but, Suffering raising its ugly face! .... S: I disagree that escaping the danger is any indication of lack of understanding of the Dhamma or a failure of any 'test'. Sitting still might be an indication of wrong view and attachment too. Judging someone's understanding by their actions in such scenarios indicates a lack of understanding of realities to me, too. ... R:> Wouldn't we be fooling ourselves, if we imagine that, we could face any future situation, in a "Kay sera sera.." attitude, which is aptly put, in your own words, albeit differently: - "….but doesn't it all depend on the conditions at the time?" – Yes, it does depend! So let's not do anything about it now! .... S: Again, this sounds like a wrong understanding of conditioned dhammas to me - an idea of Self not doing anything. ... R:> "Who knows what accumulated tendencies might arise and what actions might follow? Do we know what cittas will arise next even now?" – Of course we don't, so we'll wait and see! ... S: Again, the idea of "we'll wait and see", sounds like Self doing something:-) ... R: >I believe there is `Skill' in Dhamma (I know you know this but just to refresh your mind). An athlete doesn't develop her running skills on the track, she develops it off the track. And then, when the occasion arises, her skills are displayed on the track. In just that same way, there are enlightenment factors in Dhamma (read the section on Mixed Categories in Abhidhamma), they have to be acquired and developed. And when developed, they rise to the occasion when needed. Perhaps you may understand this differently. You may say, "well that is what understanding the reality right here and now" means. I see that as the athlete who is developing her skills on the track! ... S: yes, the enlightenment factors have to be developed. They develop, but no Self develops them. ....... R:> Of course Sati-sampajanna has to be developed in the here and now. But there is a way! We got to see the Path first, before we could trod on it. The athlete sees `the way' and develops her `skills' off the track. When the occasion arise (on the track – her path) she achieves her goal! .... S: Again, the path factors develop by the right conditions. *We* don't see or do anything. "We" is an illusion. ... R:> Sarah, we know that there is no Self. We also know that there is no self even in a Puthujjana! The Dhamma is like a double edged sword, it cuts both ways. You develop Akusala Dhamma you can do wonders in the name of Science (actually non-science / avijja). You develop Kusala Dhamma, in just that same way you can become an Arahant (which is true science / vijja). .... S: Again, "you" don't do anything.... ... Metta, Sarah ======= #91399 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Oct 13, 2008 6:22 am Subject: Rinze's qus on conditions -was: DSG's method sarahprocter... Dear Rinze, R:> Oh!, one more thing, could you explain what you understand by the Laws of Causal Relation with regard to 1) Nissaya, Dependence (the 8th), 2) Purejata, Pre-existence (the 10th), & 3) Asevana, Habitual (the 12th relations). I don't need an expert opinion but what you think about it, does it matter (sort of). Please do not quote `the book' and leave it at that. I would like your candid opinion, what you understand. ... 1) 4 kinds of nissaya paccaya as I recall. It can refer to either rupas or namas as condition for other rupas or namas arising dependently on it/them. For example, the sense-bases and the heart base are nissaya paccaya for the namas which depend on them. The primary rupas all depend on each other by this condition too. 2) Purejata paccaya refers to the prior arising of rupa (as either object or base)which conditions cittas and cetasikas. For example, visible object conditions seeing consciousness by way of having arisen already. If it hadn't arisen, there could not be any seeing of it. 3) Asevana paccaya is relatively easy to understand. It just refers to the way the javana cittas condition each other in a series, hence 'the habit'. Let me know where your questions are coming from and whether you'd like to discuss these in more detail or related to daily life, such as when escaping danger! Metta Sarah =======