#93200 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 4:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - ??? Writing from Texas: -----Original Message----- From: Scott To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 7:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...And when, even worse, we presume that there is some mystery-shrouded, Platonic shadow-something that neither exists nor does not exist, that is unchanging and eternal, and which is called 'a concept,' well, that, IMO, is a dreamed up, fuzzy-minded, substantialist-eternalist story that has been swallowed whole!" Scott: I'll leave this for you discuss with TG and Herman, since you three are, despite your differences, in the same camp. Consider this, though: 8.48. Asa"nkhatalakkha.nasutta.m "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." Tii.nimaani, bhikkhave, asa"nkhatassa asa"nkhatalakkha.naani. Katamaani tii.ni? Na uppaado pa~n~naayati, na vayo pa~n~naayati, na .thitassa a~n~nathatta.m pa~n~naayati. Imaani kho, bhikkhave, tii.ni asa"nkhatassa asa"nkhatalakkha.naanii''ti. A.t.thama.m. Scott: Concepts are similar to Nibbaana, as I understand it, in that they don't have an arising, they don't have a change while persisting, nor do they have a vanishing. These three lakkha.na (uppaada, vaya, and a.thitassa a~n~nathatta) are characteristics of conditioned dhammas, not of concepts. Concepts, as I understand it, are timeless. -------------------------- Howard: I'm not sure what you mean by concepts, but what I think you mean I just don't believe in. IMO, only nibbana neither arises nor ceases and is timeless. -------------------------- Concepts, like Nibbaana, can be objects of citta but, unlike Nibbaana of course, are not ultimate realities. I don't doubt this. Let's agree to disagree as I am familiar with the way you view this. Sincerely, Scott. ======================= I do indeed agree to disagree. :-) With metta, Howard #93201 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 11:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi All In a message dated 12/3/2008 2:36:50 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Scott: Concepts are similar to Nibbaana, as I understand it, in that they don't have an arising, they don't have a change while persisting, nor do they have a vanishing ....................................................... TG: Can anyone seriously think the Buddha could have said that "concepts are similar to Nibbana" ... under any kind of comparative circumstance? Is this what its come to? I can't think of anything any more opposite. TG OUT #93202 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 12:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 12/3/2008 7:09:53 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: I'd say there is wise reflecting on concepts, such as wise reflecting on the Buddha's virtues or on the Dhamma, which leads to more calm, more detachment and further understanding. However, the reflecting on concepts can never lead to liberation by itself. ............................................. TG: I agree completely. ............................................. Ultimately it is the function of right understanding to detach and as you suggest, there has to be the development of such detachment from both the aggregates and the concepts about them. ................................................ TG: I agree completely again. A new record! ..................................................... Metta, Sarah p.s My thoughts and very best wishes to your wife and her friend's family at this time. Thank you for sharing another reminder about the importance of the Dhamma now! ......................................................... TG: Thank you so much Sarah. She had progressive cancer and some pain apparently went on for some time without her having it checked out. So she only had about 3 weeks notice when they found it. I didn't know her, but when I heard that she died holding her husbands arm screaming "help me" as her lungs were filling with blood, really hit me too. It was terrifying for her. A 51 and little time to digest it, she just wasn't at all prepared for death, not that any of us necessarily are. Very sad situation. Samsara. :-( Conditions are crushing us and we have no control over it. If "Dhamma now" means we need to keep making a vigilant effort, I agree. Thanks again Sarah! TG OUT #93203 From: TGrand458@... Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 12:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/3/2008 8:41:30 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, Would you share with us here your reminder of the dhamma now? Nina. .............................................. TG: I just posted it to Sarah. I wasn't looking to publicize it, but maybe its useful. I'll repeat it here for you... Sarah: p.s My thoughts and very best wishes to your wife and her friend's family at this time. Thank you for sharing another reminder about the importance of the Dhamma now! ......................................................... TG: Thank you so much Sarah. She had progressive cancer and some pain apparently went on for some time without her having it checked out. So she only had about 3 weeks notice when they found it. I didn't know her, but when I heard that she died holding her husbands arm screaming "help me" as her lungs were filling with blood, really hit me too. It was terrifying for her. A 51 and little time to digest it, she just wasn't at all prepared for death, not that any of us necessarily are. Very sad situation. Samsara. :-( Conditions are crushing us and we have no control over it. If "Dhamma now" means we need to keep making a vigilant effort, I agree. Thanks again Sarah! TG OUT #93204 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 6:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts truth_aerator Scott, that sutta says that Nibbana is unconditioned and samsara is conditioned. Please tell me a sutta where the Buddha says that concepts are eternal, not subject to change! > Scott: I'll leave this for you discuss with TG and Herman, since you > three are, despite your differences, in the same camp. Consider this, > though: > > 8.48. Asa"nkhatalakkha.nasutta.m > > "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. > What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, > no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three > unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." > > Tii.nimaani, bhikkhave, asa"nkhatassa asa"nkhatalakkha.naani. > Katamaani tii.ni? Na uppaado pa~n~naayati, na vayo pa~n~naayati, na > .thitassa a~n~nathatta.m pa~n~naayati. Imaani kho, bhikkhave, tii.ni > asa"nkhatassa asa"nkhatalakkha.naanii''ti. A.t.thama.m. > Scott: Concepts are similar to Nibbaana, as I understand it, in that > they don't have an arising, they don't have a change while >persisting,nor do they have a vanishing. A person with right view cannot hold anything as permanent. Concepts are fully conditioned and thus not self, like the rest of things in Samsara. With best wishes, #93205 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 6:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts truth_aerator Hi TG, Scott and all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi All > > > In a message dated 12/3/2008 2:36:50 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > scduncan@... writes: > > Scott: Concepts are similar to Nibbaana, as I understand it, in that > they don't have an arising, they don't have a change while persisting, > nor do they have a vanishing > > > ....................................................... > > > TG: Can anyone seriously think the Buddha could have said that "concepts > are similar to Nibbana" ... under any kind of comparative circumstance? Is > this what its come to? > > > I can't think of anything any more opposite. > > > TG OUT Nobody with right view can view ANYTHING in samsara as permanent. Full stop. #93206 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 8:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wonderful Paritta chanting philofillet Dear Nina > N: It is very kind of you to think of me and to feel worried about > me. The onset of pain and death in the future. That would be > thinking, thinking. What about now, Kh Sujin would say, and that is > the best reminder. Ken H : there is only the present moment. And > perhaps you read what Peter said to Lodewijk. Ph: Yes,I did. "All that really counts is anatta, the present moment" or something like that. For me at this time, those words don't really impress me, to tell the truth, but perhaps that will change in the future! For now, hearing Ken H say "there is only the present moment" again and again is akin to the boy who cried wolf, or something. Just empty words. I would have to know more about Ken, how he behaves with people, what he allows to proliferate in his mind and whatnot. That's what impresses me. A Buddhist is as a Buddhist does. "A wise man is known by behaviour." So I would also want to know more about what kind of behaviour Peter characteristically had to know whether saying "the only thing that matters is anatta" was any more that hollow words. This is still a stage I'm going through, I guess, but show me how a person acts in body, mind (not easy to show, but it's obviously the key) and speech and I will know how much weight to place on listening to him or her on the Dhamma. You, for example, are always so very, very patient with criticism, as are Sarah and Jon. Scott and Ken are patient too, though not as immaculately patient as you three. Others are less patient and less willing to put up with being berated by non- believers. So for me, it is you and Sarah and Jon who are the "best Buddhists." I know that is a primitive approach, but for now it is where I am at. I am confident conditions will be developed to get back into considering the moment with more detailed attention! :) > I appreciate parittas but just now I have lack of time. I would > rather read them than listen to them. I really appreciate your kind Perhaps it's because you like to listen to music already. I hardly ever feel like listening to music, so maybe the wonderful resonant quality of U Silananda's voice and the deliciously unfamiliar sounds of Pali phonetics provide a subsitute for Bach cello tones! As an ESL teacher, I always encourage students to use audio materials, to "shadow" (repeat after them) to learn the intonation and internalize the language better. So for a student of Pali, it would seem a good idea. Then again, perhaps unless one believes in the power of chanting and hearing chants in Pali, Pali is just a dead language that can be fully appreciated from the texts. I'm going to ask you some questions about phrases in the parittas at the Pali group you belong to, I think, so thanks in advance. Metta, Phil p.s if anyone responds to this other than NIna, please forgive me for not responding. And if you respond, Nina, it will be awhile before I can get back to you. Thanks. #93207 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 8:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Wonderful Paritta chanting philofillet Hi again Fascinated as usual by my own verbiosity, I must prliferate on my previous post. Please put on your verbal splatter glasses. I would have to know more about Ken, > how he behaves with people, what he allows to proliferate in his > mind and whatnot. That's what impresses me. A Buddhist is as a > Buddhist does. "A wise man is known by behaviour." So I would also > want to know more about what kind of behaviour Peter > characteristically had to know whether saying "the only thing that > matters is anatta" was any more that hollow words. This is still a > stage I'm going through, I guess, but show me how a person acts in > body, mind (not easy to show, but it's obviously the key) and speech > and I will know how much weight to place on listening to him or her > on the Dhamma. You, for example, are always so very, very patient > with criticism, as are Sarah and Jon. Scott and Ken are patient too, > though not as immaculately patient as you three. Others are less > patient and less willing to put up with being berated by non- > believers. So for me, it is you and Sarah and Jon who are the "best > Buddhists." I know that is a primitive approach, but for now it is > where I am at. I am confident conditions will be developed to get > back into considering the moment with more detailed attention! :) It's an interesting topic that I'd like to discuss someday. (But not now unfortunately.) THe Buddha teaches us in Dhammapada 1:1 that mind leads all, the behaviour follows citta. And KS students always remind us that behaviour is to be doubted, because what about the citta behind it? But I am feeling these days that while it is true that "mind leads behaviour" it is also true that behaviour reveals a lot about mind. The Buddha says that we can only know a person's virtue by associating with him or her for a long time. And I feel that habits of behaviour in body and speech indicate the kind of behaviour that is happening in the mind, even though one doesn't have direct awareness of it. I have been told (very nicely, when skyping with sarah) that I place excessive interest in the way people behave, and perhaps this is becuase of being a teacher or whatever, but I would disagree that it is not valid to do so.The Buddha places great importance on choosing Dhamma friends, and how are we to choose friends unless we observe their behaviour in body and speech and make necessary assumptions about their mental behaviour as well? Is this a kind of elitism? I guess so. These days I am aware of feeling very superiour and smug with respect to bad behaviour, because I am aware of substantial progress in that area. That is a necessary stage as well. OK, take off your verbal splatter glasses. The verbal spewing is done for the next couple of weeks, at least. :) Metta, Phil #93208 From: "szmicio" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 9:09 pm Subject: hetupaccaya from patthana szmicio Dear Dhamma friends, The first condition described in Patthana is Hetupaccaya. There are 6 hetus: lobha, dosa, moha - akusala dhammas alobha, adosa, amoha - kusala dhammas. I've got some difficulties reading Patthanapali, Pucchavaro section. I quote what is unclear: "(1.) Kusalapada.m 25. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca abyaakato dhammo uppajjeyya hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo ca abyaakato ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca akusalo ca abyaakato ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo ca akusalo ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa. Siyaa kusala.m dhamma.m pa.ticca kusalo ca akusalo ca abyaakato ca dhammaa uppajjeyyu.m hetupaccayaa." I am quite sure that means: "Kusala dhamma arises because of kusala dhamma by the way of hetupaccaya. Kusala dhamma arises because of akusala dhamma by the way of hetupaccaya. Kusala dhamma arises because of indeterminate dhamma by the way of hetupaccaya. Kusala dhamma arises because of kusala dhamma or indeterminate dhamma by the way of hetupaccaya..... " What kusala dhamma refers to? I think it refers to hetus. So kusala hetu arises because of(related to) akusala hetu or akusala dhamma. But how? It's not possible that kusala hetu is a paccaya for akusala dhamma. If there is lobha, there is always akusala citta. There is no chance that lobha condition kusala dhamma. Can hetu condition another hetu? Best wishes Lukas #93209 From: "Phil" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 10:41 pm Subject: Re: Wonderful Paritta chanting philofillet Hi again A correction is necessary here, for correctness and Image Polishing. >The > Buddha places great importance on choosing Dhamma friends, and how > are we to choose friends unless we observe their behaviour in body > and speech and make necessary assumptions about their mental > behaviour as well? Is this a kind of elitism? I guess so. I think I was getting confused about a Dhamma friend and that special friend that qualifies when it comes to "associating with the wise", the kalyamitta, or something like that. The latter must be a person of strong moral behaviour in my view, but of course there are many fellows who are struggling with gross defilements like myself (and most of us in my opinion) but who are working hard on them, being diligent. They are good friends. But as for the special "wise" mentor- like friend, the kalyamitta (?) a person who behaves badly cannot qualify for that, no matter how brilliant he or she is at explaining anattaness, Abhidhamma etc. Right the ship, Captain oh Captain, and *then* talk about the non-self nature of momentary perceptions of prevailing winds etc!!!! (Oooh good sentence that!) Metta, Phil #93210 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 11:08 pm Subject: Re: hetupaccaya from patthana sprlrt Dear Lukas, I hope this helps - Alberto From: Summary of the 24 Paccaya by Sujin Boriharnwanaket translated by Amara-Varee http://www.abhidhamma.com/frameset.html?http://www.abhidhamma.com/abhidhamma_tex\ ts.html 11. Hetu-paccaya This revision will nor proceed according to the order of paccaya but in alternation, in reality hetu is the first paccaya. The first lobha-mula-citta has two realities that are hetu-paccaya arising with it, namely: Moha-cetasika as moha-hetu Lobha-cetasika as lobha-hetu Any citta and cetasika arises with hetu-cetasika is sahetuka. Lobha-mula-citta has 2 hetu arising with it, thus it is sahetuka that is dvi-hetuka. The lobha-mula-citta is not a hetu-paccaya. But the moha-cetasika and lobha-cetasika that accompany it are hetu-paccaya and the paccayuppanna-dhamma of the moha-cetasika and lobha-cetasika is the lobha-mula-citta and other cetasika (that are not hetu) that arise concurrently as hetu-paccayuppanna. Is the moha-cetasika that arise with the lobha-mula-citta sahetuka or ahetuka? Sahetuka, since the moha-cetasika arise together with the lobha-cetasika. Is it eka-hetu or dvi-hetuka? Eka-hetuka, since there is only the lobha-cetasika as hetu arising with it. Is the lobha-cetasika that arises with the lobha-mula-citta sahetuka or ahetuka? Sahetuka, since there is moha-cetasika arising together with it. Is it eka-hetu or dvi-hetuka? Eka-hetuka, since there is only the moha-cetasika as hetu arising with it. Is the phassa-cetasika that arises with the lobha-mula-citta sahetuka or ahetuka? Sahetuka. Is it eka-hetu or dvi-hetuka? Phassa-cetasika is dvi-hetuka, since it arises with moha-cetasika and lobha-cetasika, which are 2 hetu. Thus the phassa-cetasika would be dvi-hetuka. Is the vedana-cetasika that arises with the lobha-mula-citta ahetuka or sahetuka? Sahetuka. Is it eka-hetu or dvi-hetuka? Dvi-hetuka, just like the lobha-mula-citta. When the first lobha-mula-citta arises, it is paccaya for cetasika to arise with it and paccaya for rupa to arise also. But from the perspective of hetu-paccaya, the moha-cetasika and lobha-cetasika are paccaya for citta and other cetasika that arise concurrently with that lobha-mula-citta as well as hetu-paccaya for cittaja-rupa. To speak of cittaja-rupa, this does not mean that the rupa arises uniquely from the citta. It must arise from the citta and cetasika together as paccaya. The lobha-mula-citta is akusala. The first lobha-mula-citta is somanassa-sahagatam ditthigata-sampayuttam asankharikam. The actions of those who have wrong view, who praise or worship what they are attached to with the cittaja-rupa that arise with akusala-citta, might be hard to discern from the worship that arises from the kusala-citta, pure with panna and right view. Therefore one should be mindful and examine oneself to see from which kinds of citta one's physical and verbal deeds arise: kusala or akusala-citta? Audience: Say a relative thinks that a tree is sacred and everyone goes to worship it except you. I would like to know what kind of citta it is when you do not worship or do without having faith in it? Sujin: One must be mindful of the characteristics of the citta then. Audience: You do not have faith but they all do it, parents, brothers and sisters, so we cannot be alone not to worship it. We must follow them and worship it also, without faith. Sujin: Would anyone say anything if we did not, would they? Audience: They would say that you were stubborn. Sujin: What if we don't and paid respect to the Ratanattaya (the Triple Gem) instead? If we must all follow others no matter where they lead us, we can't be ourselves. Audience: I do not think that we must follow others, but as the saying goes, when in Rome do as the Romans do. Sujin: Have you ever worshiped a spirit house, to move a little from the tree. If you have, what kind of citta was that? Audience: It was the kusala-citta while paying respect. I used to believe that the spirit house could grant your wish but having since studied the dhamma I believe in paccaya more. Sujin: Do you still do it? Audience: Not any more. Sujin: Why not? Audience: Every time I did I would ask for something, but now I don't want to ask anything having known that we should wish for only possible things. Since the spirit houses are there for us to worship and ask for things we want, which is impossible since things must evolve with paccaya, I no longer pay respect. Sujin: So why do you worship trees or spirit houses or whatever? Audience: Firstly, we do as our predecessors did. Sujin: Were you taught to worship the deva who guards and live there? Audience: I rather was. Sujin: Could you think of the beneficence of the deva? Audience: Yes, what you said has never crossed my mind. Sujin: Could we pay respect with reason because each would do things differently according to their knowledge, way of thinking, and understanding. While others worship we might respectfully think of the deva's beneficence or present causes for the deva who might be there or not, to have empathetic joy. Whether they are there or not, whether it is a tree or a spirit house, one might remember that to be born a deva must be because of kusala. For someone to be born in heaven is the result of good deeds. To think of the good of deva is with kusala-citta. Even though the apparent action is like everyone else's but those who are mindful of the beneficence of deva could be done with understanding. Audience: Yes, I have never thought of that before. Sujin: If one worships in order to ask for something such as blessings, one should know correctly that whatever blessings we ask for, we must also perform kusala in order to get them ourselves too. If anyone asks for blessings one should tell them to make lots of merit in order to get the said blessings. Would they ask for them then? Since they must do good to merit the blessings they wish to receive, otherwise they would not get them. Audience: I have this problem: on Asal?hapuja Day they had 'merit-making' ceremonies at the school. I was at the altar and a professor brought me the rice to be offered to the statue of the Buddha. I did not know what to do, so I took it and offered it, and paid my respect. I did not speak of the matter to make him understand, which might be my fault. This professor was also ordained for several years. Sujin: Traditions, if studied and understood from the logic of Buddhism, could render the citta kusala at that instant. In the days when the Buddha had not attained parinibbana, there were dana offered to the Bhikkhu with the Buddha presiding, and even after his parinibbana there were worship with flowers, incense and candles, and other scents. That there are amisapuja (material offering) although he had attained the absolute parinibbana shows the respect, honor and worship in his honor, and no matter the offering of food to the bhikkhu in any era they are still considered bhikkhu who still have the Sammasambuddha the arahanta presiding. Audience: The problem is that the others do not know this, they do not have the panna to. Is it harmful that others misunderstand? Sujin: For others, it is their affair to gradually understand. It is impossible for the individual to take responsibility for the whole world. We must first understand ourselves correctly for others to slowly increase their consideration of the logic. There are some things that are done following traditions, some without understanding, and after studying there could be kusala instead of akusala citta at the instants we perform the specific actions. Have you ever paid respect to the deva in a forest? Could we not honor them with some respect? Could we not dedicate some kusala to them (for them to anumodana) without any disrespect? Of course we could, but with kusala-citta. In order to dedicate kusala to the deva who might be in the home, could we? Yes, because it depends on the understanding and the kusala citta that arise at that instant. But without understanding, the instant would be lobha-mula-citta ditthigata-sampayuttam depending whether there were upekkha-vedana or somanassa-vedana, asankharikam of sasankharikam as hetu- or other paccaya. #93211 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Dec 3, 2008 9:24 pm Subject: Sweet Signless Sameness... bhikkhu0 Friends: Real & Absolute, yet not to be Seen, Heard or Sensed! The Buddha once said about The Signless Nibbāna=Nirvana: There is that, which is unborn, uncreated, unformed & unconstructed! If, Bhikkhus, there was not this unborn, uncreated, unformed and unconstructed, no escape from what is born, created, formed & constructed could ever be realized... But since there indeed exists that, which is utterly unborn, uncreated, unformed and unconstructed, the escape from this born, created, formed & constructed state can therefore indeed be realized, explained and made known! An unconditioned, unborn, & uncreated ultimate Absolute: That which is born, that which is become, that which is conditioned, that which is dependent, that which is co-arisen, that which is created, that which is unstable, unsafe & prone to decay, that which is the bridge between birth and death this seat of disease, with nutriment & birth as its cause, will all perish...! It is not worth clinging to or rejoice in... The escape from this is calm, beyond the sphere of logic, being that which is solid & stable, that which is unborn, that which is not dependent, but sorrow-free, & stainless, this realm is the final ceasing of all states involving any pain, the stilling of all construction, absolute Bliss, ultimate Peace ... Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 3 The Signless Sameness of Nibbāna: There is that state, where there is neither earth, water, fire nor any air, where there is neither trace of solidity, nor fluidity, nor heat, nor motion, where there is neither infinity of space, nor consciousness, nor nothingness, where no subtle state of neither-perception-nor-non-perception remains, where there is neither any ‘here’, nor any ‘there’ of this or any other world, where there is neither any sun, nor moon, nor planet, nor any universe at all, There, Bhikkhus, one cannot designate neither any coming, nor any going, nor any remaining, nor duration, nor any beginning, & much less any ending... Neither is there any activity, nor any movement, nor any fixed stability, nor any ground, basis or source for a conditioning medium whatsoever... This unity, this singularity - just this sameness– is the End of Suffering. Udana – Inspiration: VIII - 1 Non-Spatial, Non-Temporal, Non-Change & Non-Active is Nibbāna: Where neither solidity, fluidity, heat nor motion find any footing, there no sun, moon nor star ever shines. There is neither any light yet nor is there any darkness. When the Noble, through stilling of all construction, through quieting of all mental formation, directly experiences this, then is he freed from both form & formlessness, then is he released from both pleasure & pain & gone all beyond… Udana – Inspiration: I – 10 Comments: It seems that there might be 2 kinds of consciousness: Mundane & Supramundane : 1: Sense Consciousness, that always has an object (a form, sound, smell, taste, touch, or an idea) This is a discrete moment of awareness, that arise & cease momentarily with its object: Like this: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2: Signless Consciousness (animitta viññana), which is continuous and may very well be that which ‘experiences’ the bliss of Nibbāna as an unbroken signless sameness. Like this: ___________________ It has no (sensed or felt) object or sign, except or apart from that stilled same peace in itself… .... Nibbâna is an immutable sameness of Absolute Bliss! Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net Sweet Signless Sameness... #93212 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 12:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, yes, such an example is always useful as a reminder. Do not think too soon that it is not for publicizing. Thank you, Nina. Op 4-dec-2008, om 2:59 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > TG: I just posted it to Sarah. I wasn't looking to publicize it, > but maybe > its useful. I'll repeat it here for you... #93213 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 12:22 am Subject: Sri Lanka Revisited, Ch 8, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, Continuation of Lakkhaasutta (Dgha Nikya, Dialogues of the Buddha III, no. 30): ... Whereas in whatsoever former birth... the Tathgata, then being human, reunited long-lost with long-bereaved relatives, friends and comrades, reunited mother with child and child with mother, father with child and child with father, brother with brother, brother with sister and sister with brother, making them as one, causing them to rejoice.... (161) ... Whereas in whatsoever former birth... the Tathgata, then being human, grew desirous for the good of the many, for their welfare, their comfort, their safety, considering how they might increase in confidence, in morality, in education, in charity, in righteousness and in wisdom, might increase in money and corn, in land, in animals twofooted and fourfooted, in wife and children, in servants and slaves, in kinsfolk and friends and connections.... (164) ... Whereas in whatsoever former birth... the Tathgata, then being human, put away abusive speech, what he heard here not repeating elsewhere, to raise a quarrel against people here; and what he heard elsewhere not repeating here, to raise a quarrel against people there:-- thus becoming a binder together of those who are divided, or fostering those who are friends, a peacemaker, lover of concord, impassioned for peace, a speaker of words that make for peace.... (171, 172) This sutta encourages us to develop satipatthna with a sincere inclination. All kinds of kusala such as generosity, sla, mett, should be developed along with satipatthana. Right understanding of nma and rpa will lead to being less self-seeking and being more intent on the happiness of others. This was an important lesson we learnt during this journey. We can now reflect on the Buddhas excellent qualities with more respect and with more gratitude. He accumulated all kinds of virtues and attained Buddhahood out of compassion for us. Out of compassion he taught us satipatthna so that defilements can be eradicated. He taught us satipatthna for our welfare and happiness. Namo tassa Bhagavato Arahato Samm Sambudhassa-- Homage to the Lord, the Perfected One, the Fully Enlightened One. ******* The End. Nina. #93214 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 12:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] hetupaccaya from patthana nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 4-dec-2008, om 6:09 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > It's not possible that kusala hetu is a paccaya for akusala > dhamma. If there is lobha, there is always akusala citta. There is no > chance that lobha condition kusala dhamma. ------ N: Yes. But not at the same time. You may reflect wisely on lobha, realizing that it is not yours. In the natural decisive support- condition, pakatupanissaya paccaya, are among others included: kusala that condiitons akusala, akusala that condiitons kusala. For your other questions, see Alberto's quote. Indeterminate dhamma also includes rupa. Lobha-mulacitta can motivate speech. Nina. #93215 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 12:42 am Subject: Series Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, Sati is anatt and it depends on conditions whether it will arise and be aware of a characteristic of nma or rpa. It can be aware of any characteristic of nma or rpa which arises and appears naturally, just as it is. The pa which eradicates wrong view knows clearly the characteristics of nma and rpa as they appear through the six doors and it realizes them as non-self. We read in the Kindred Sayings( IV, Sayatana vagga, Kindred Sayings on Sense, Fourth Fifty, Ch III, 193, Udyin): Once the venerable nanda and the venerable Udyin were staying at Kosamb in Ghosita Park. Then the venerable Udyin, rising at eventide from his solitude, went to visit the Venerable nanda, and on coming to him... after the exchange of courtesies, sat down at one side. So seated the venerable Udyin said to the venerable nanda: Is it possible, friend nanda, just as this body has in divers ways been defined, explained, set forth by the Exalted One, as being without the self,-- is it possible in the same way to describe the consciousness, to show it, make it plain, set it forth, make it clear, analyze and expound it as being also without the self? Just as this body has in divers ways been defined, explained, set forth by the Exalted One, as being without the self, friend Udyin, so also is it possible to describe this consciousness, to show it, make it plain, set it forth, make it clear, analyze and expound it as being also without the self. Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness, does it not, friend? Yes, friend. Well, friend, it is by this method that the Exalted One has explained, opened up, and shown that this consciousness also is without the self. (The same is said with regard to the other doorways.) ------------------------------------- Nina. #93216 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:06 am Subject: Re: Funeral of Peter. jonoabb Hi Lucas I agree with Nina's comments, and would just add a word or two. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear Jon > First I want to thank you(and Sarah also) for your wonderful > recordings with Ajahn Sujin. It helps me so much, so much. Befor I > join dsg, i was blind, full of doubts. I relly misundersood the > meaning of Dhamma. Now I feel i am on good path. Thanks. We are very glad that you find the recorded discussions useful. But the credit actually goes to you, or, more correctly, to the developed understanding known in this lifetime as 'Lucas'. Without accumulated listening and understanding from previous lifetimes, there would be no appreciation when hearing (again) in this lifetime. As we often remind each other, the greatest factor in the arising of kusala of any kind is the previously accumulated kusala of the same kind. > L: My observations are the same. But sometimes doubts arises and there > are regrets and thinking. > > I think right understanding is magga and magga is right understanding. when we trying to develop silla and there is no understanding, the > PATH cant arise. Just conditions, no self which 'doing any practise'. > But still a lot of doubts in this matter. Doubts are inevitable, for us all. However, what you say above is how I see it too. The development of the path is the development of right understanding/insight, so the idea of developing sila first (in order to become a "better person") misses the essence of the teachings. In any event, when considering the teachings with the understanding that it is insight that is the essence of the Buddha's message, there will be the development of sila also, because awareness is the best guardian of the sense-doors. > Jon, how do you consider saddha, confidence? > I always thought that saddha is confidence in Buddha teachings, in > Dhamma. But it can be also saddha cetasika, which has it's own > function, itnt it? Thus I am not sure of the first meaning. The two meanings are actually the same. The expression "confidence in the Buddha's teaching" uses conventional language to describe a form of kusala. In terms of paramattha dhammas, that kusala is saddha cetasika, but in particular it is the saddha cetasikas that arises (and accumulates) on the occasion of moments of awareness and understanding of the teachings. Confidence in the Buddha's teachings, as a kusala quality, is accumulated only to the extent that the teachings have been understood and verified for oneself. Otherwise it is not the true kusala that is saddha. > Sometimes I consider myself as a real bastard, which is bad and cant > do anything good. That's very unpleasant, but as Nina said I cant do > anything with it, no matter how hard i will try. Yes, this is the way things are. We all 'disappoint' ourselves, but it is mana that makes us upset about that situation ;-)). With more understanding of the value of kusala of all kinds, however, there is less likelihood that this mana will be a condition for ideas such as the wish to be a better person (discussed above) which in turn can easily lead to wrong practice. But I think you appreciate this already. Jon #93217 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:07 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. jonoabb Hi James > James: Okay, this gets to the heart of the matter and where we reach an > impasse. I don't see that sutta as addressing satipatthana at all; > after all, it is called "The All", meaning everything, all that there > is. If we can't reach agreement on the intended meaning of this > crucial sutta then further discussion would be fruitless. There are in fact a number of suttas dealing with the All, found in the Samyutta Nikaya. They constitute a small sub-grouping of the section on the ayatanas (see pages 1140 to 1146 of CDB). These suttas include teachings on the All as: - things to be abandoned through direct knowledge and understanding - things to be directly known and understood in order for suffering to be destroyed; - things that are burning with the fires of lust, hatred and delusion, and towards which revulsion is to be developed; - things that are weighed down by birth, aging and death; - things the subject of conceivings that are to be uprooted. So I would say they are very much bound up with satipatthaana. Jon #93218 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear TG, Regarding: TG: "Can anyone seriously think the Buddha could have said that 'concepts are similar to Nibbana'... under any kind of comparative circumstance? Is this what its come to?" Scott: This is a good start, TG. You are beginning to see the difference between concepts and realities. How are apples and oranges alike? They are both fruit. How are pa~n~natti and Nibbaana alike? They are both dhammaaramma.na. They can both only be known through the mind-door. As you correctly suggest, pa~n~natti and Nibbaana differ in the most significant of ways. Pa~n~natti do not exist in the ultimate sense since their mode is conceptual - they are not paramattha dhammas, while Nibbaana is, since it is not conceptual and has an existence in an ultimate sense. Sincerely, Scott. Sincerely, Scott. #93219 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:23 am Subject: Re: Suttas in which the Buddha held back the deep teaching? jonoabb Hi Alex > It is a prerequisite for any and every attainments. Period. The > length, strenth and duration may vary. Shorter Jhana may do for > lesser achievments and for some people Well your position on this question seems to change with each post ;-)) Perhaps I'll leave the aspect of level of attainment there, and move on to discuss another aspect of the "jhana as prerequisite" issue. If jhana is a prerequisite for enlightenment, but not for the development of insight, does this mean the development of insight by a person who has not yet attained jhana can proceed only so far but no further, unless and until jhana is then attained? Is there textual support for such an idea? Jon #93220 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: 7.47. Sa"nkhatalakkha.nasutta.m "There are, O monks, three conditioned marks of the conditioned. What three? Its origination is discerned, its vanishing is discerned, its change while persisting is discerned. These are the three conditioned marks of the conditioned." Tii.nimaani, bhikkhave, sa"nkhatassa sa"nkhatalakkha.naani. Katamaani tii.ni? Uppaado pa~n~naayati, vayo pa~n~naayati, .thitassa a~n~nathatta.m pa~n~naayati. Imaani kho, bhikkhave, tii.ni sa"nkhatassa sa"nkhatalakkha.naanii''ti. Sattama.m. 8.48. Asa"nkhatalakkha.nasutta.m "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." Tii.nimaani, bhikkhave, asa"nkhatassa asa"nkhatalakkha.naani. Katamaani tii.ni? Na uppaado pa~n~naayati, na vayo pa~n~naayati, na .thitassa a~n~nathatta.m pa~n~naayati. Imaani kho, bhikkhave, tii.ni asa"nkhatassa asa"nkhatalakkha.naanii''ti. A.t.thama.m. A: "Scott, that sutta says that Nibbana is unconditioned and samsara is conditioned. Please tell me a sutta where the Buddha says that concepts are eternal, not subject to change!" Scott: I don't play the 'tell me a sutta game'. In the above suttas, are the answers to your doubts. A: "A person with right view cannot hold anything as permanent. Concepts are fully conditioned and thus not self, like the rest of things in Samsara." Scott: Pa~n~natti are not 'fully conditioned' because they do not have an arising, a change while persisting, nor a vanishing. In this sense they are timeless. This is why pa~n~natti are not real in the ultimate sense. They do not bear these marks of conditioned dhammas the Buddha describes in the sutta. Nibbaana is the Unconditioned because its sabhaava is to be without arising, changing while persisting, and vanishing. Nibbaana is real in the ultimate sense. Unlike pa~n~natti, Nibbaana is a paramattha dhamma. (As I mentioned to TG, Nibbaana and pa~n~natti are alike in that both are dhammaarama.na; as oranges and apples are alike in both being fruit.) Speaking of fruit, Kh. Sujin made what I thought was a very clear, concise and pithy statement regarding the difference between pa~n~natti and paramattha dhammas (A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, p. 275): "...The idea of a grape has no flavour at all..." Scott: She has encapsulated it in a very brief way. Can you unpack the phrase and demonstrate how 'idea of a grape' and 'flavour' differ? If you can, you are seeing the difference between pa~n~natti and paramattha dhamma. Sincerely, Scott. #93221 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Regarding: H: "...I think there is an error in there, however. I assume that you actually meant "There are, O monks, three conditioned marks of the conditioned." Am I right?" Scott: Yep, a typo. Thanks for the correction. Don't try to reply to posts in the middle of making breakfasts and lunches and get off to school and work. H: "...I do not think that there is anything straightforward or self-evident about the unconditioned / unfabricated, though. I would very much like to further discuss that with you, if you are inclined...No, no need to go over old ground again. But if you wish, I would very much like to discuss the unconditioned / unfabricated with you (I don't think we have discussed that previously, do you?)" Scott: I'd sure like to give it a try. As you say, nothing straightforward, and I don't recall that we've discussed Nibbaana. H: "What is not my cup of tea is the false notion that old kamma in some way determines new kamma..." Scott: Okay, you mean like anusaya and whatnot? H: "...I agree with you that the past is very relevant to whatever arises, which is why I questioned your statement that dhammas come from nowhere. They clearly do come from somewhere, which you now seem to be in agreement with." Scott: Although I might be thinking of the apparent paradox of kamma carrying forward latently from moment to moment (to arise as result in a future) within a given continuity while nothing of the moment that has ceased carries over into the present but... H: "That is the difference I wanted to point out, the difference between the temporal present, as the vacuum between past and future, and the present as what is present to consciousness (in a manner of speaking). And what is relevant there is the distinction between presence and absence, in relation to the unconditioned / unfabricated. Because the unconditioned is know by the absence of origination, vanishing and change, as opposed to their presence." Scott: Yes. The past is gone, the future hasn't yet occurred and the present is what is arising now and. Would you like to say more about 'presence' and 'absence' in relation to the Unconditioned? (Or, over to you to continue the discussion.) Sincerely, Scott. #93222 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 7:55 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Hi James, Op 3-dec-2008, om 3:33 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > James: I don't believe that the sutta about "The All" has anything > to do with satipatthana. It is one of the rare ontological suttas > the Buddha gave (and he didn't have much to say- as the commentary > to the sutta is about three times as long as the sutta itself! :-). -------- N: Jon answered and I myself find that very clear, nearly all suttas point to satipatthana, the Buddha's teaching nobody else taught. We talked about person, and this is convenient for communication in conventional language. But what is really there? Ever changing mental phenomena and physical phenomena. When you have a cold rupas change; then you feel hot, then cold, and these are elements. In case of sickness these elements are out of balance. Also namas: you do not think of the same thing for a moment, thinking and feelings change all the time. Before we learnt the Dhamma we just thought of a person or self who stays, but now we learn that all these rupas and namas arise because of conditions and have no owner. Nina. #93223 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 8:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, Op 3-dec-2008, om 19:01 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Concepts are formulated due to conditions. If they were not, then we > wouldn't need education. Education is a condition. These posts are > conditions, the Suttas and Abhidhamma are conditions. You wouldn't > have any "concept" > about what a "non-reality" is without conditions to formulate it. -------- N: Let me choose just one point from your post: conditions. I get the impression that you see them in a conventional way, not according to the Patthanaa, the classes of twentyfour conditions the Buddha taught. In a conventional sense anybody can talk about them, but that is quite different from the Patthanaa. When you studied the Visuddhimagga you must have come across these twentyfour conditions, in Ch XVII. Without understanding these you will not understand the Dependent Origination. All these links are related to each other by one or several conditions, some conascent, some prenascent or postnascent. Just out of curiosity, what moved you to read the Vis. three times? Were you looking for something special you did not find? I have in my files the post you wrote just before I left and I was glad, because I had some subjects to discuss with Lodewijk while in the Hotel. Nina. #93224 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/4/2008 9:08:27 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: N: Let me choose just one point from your post: conditions. I get the impression that you see them in a conventional way, not according to the Patthanaa, the classes of twentyfour conditions the Buddha taught. In a conventional sense anybody can talk about them, but that is quite different from the Patthanaa. ...................................................... TG: Number one ... I try to see phenomena in the "real world" for what they are really doing. The teachings are just guides to help us do that. I consider the Suttas teachings to be right on the mark. However, to take any teaching and copy it to say...see that sentence, that states a reality exactly as stated, see that other sentence, that states another reality exactly as stated. yup, yup, yup. That's called be a dogmatist. That may or may not be a bad thing depending on the dogma. But I think we must see it for ourselves and not dogmatically follow a conceptual blueprint. .................................................................. When you studied the Visuddhimagga you must have come across these twentyfour conditions, in Ch XVII. Without understanding these you will not understand the Dependent Origination. All these links are related to each other by one or several conditions, some conascent, some prenascent or postnascent. Just out of curiosity, what moved you to read the Vis. three times? .............................................. TG: Try 10 times, cover to cover. Its was your book I read 3 times. And the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 6 times, etc. I'm sort of stupid and it requires multiple readings to get it right...(and I'm rusty now...so rusty and stupid.) There is still much content in all of that, that I appreciate. But I "digest it" differently than you. I don't see the words as literally pointing to realities, but as indicators of what it happening in a deep common sense way. The words are just trying to point things out. I realize the commentaries have taken that to a different level. When the commentaries do try to make the words indicators of ultimate realities, that's when I reject it and consider the commentators to have gone astray. ........................................................... Were you looking for something special you did not find? I have in my files the post you wrote just before I left and I was glad, because I had some subjects to discuss with Lodewijk while in the Hotel. ................................................................ TG: I was well established in Suttas before embarking upon Abhidhamma Studies thank God. ;-) I was looking to supplement and strengthen my understanding of Suttas and phenomena processes. There was much in these materials that achieved that purpose so it was well worthwhile. Much of the Visiddhimagga is invaluable, especially the later chapters...but also "peppered" throughout with good stuff. And your book was the first one that made it understandable for me what Abhidhamma materials were taking about regarding consciousness processes. There was also material that was borderline going against what I felt the Buddha was presenting or off the mark from what the Buddha was saying in the Suttas. However, when it gets to the point of pronouncing that namas and rupas are ultimate realities with their own characteristics, and that to know this is the crux of the Buddha's teaching, then I flatly reject it and do not consider it what the Suttas are trying to convey. I consider it a misunderstanding of what 'dependent arising' entails. Its a very subtle thing, but a crucial thing. In fact, the Buddha's teachings are extremely subtle, and though Abhidhamma is very complicated, I don't find it subtle at all. TG OUT #93225 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 11:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Q. On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, Op 4-dec-2008, om 18:42 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Try 10 times, cover to cover. Its was your book I read 3 times. And > the Abhidhammattha Sangaha 6 times, etc. I'm sort of stupid and it > requires > multiple readings to get it right...(and I'm rusty now...so rusty > and stupid.) > There is still much content in all of that, that I appreciate. But I > "digest it" differently than you. I don't see the words as > literally pointing to > realities, but as indicators of what it happening in a deep common > sense way. > The words are just trying to point things out. ------- N:But I do agree with your last words. I appreciate it that you gave your personal views about your studies. You are tripping over some words like characteristics, ultimate realities, wondering if all this is not dogmatic. I try to be very careful when speaking about these things, but I just try the best I can. I find it not easy to explain lest people misunderstand. Nina. #93226 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 11:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 3-dec-2008, om 13:41 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > N: Bhavangacittas are vipaakacittas and they are of the same type as > > the rebirth-consciousness, thus, when this is kusala vipaka > > accompanied by sobhana hetus, it is accompanied by sati. But this is > > not aware of a reality. Bhavangacittas are not javanacittas, > > javanacittas occur when dreaming. > > ------- > > L: So how can we know bhavangacittas? There is no sati-sampajana in > that moment. ------- N: Just now we do not know bhavangacittas, but when insight is more developed it can be known that there are bhavangacittas before a new sense-door process begins. But the object of bhavangacittas cannot be known. No sati-sampaja~n~na at the moment of bhavanga, but when insight is developed there can be awareness of bhavangacitta. This is what I understood from Kh Sujin. Nina. #93227 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:21 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. buddhatrue Hi Nina (and Jon), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 3-dec-2008, om 3:33 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > > > James: I don't believe that the sutta about "The All" has anything > > to do with satipatthana. It is one of the rare ontological suttas > > the Buddha gave (and he didn't have much to say- as the commentary > > to the sutta is about three times as long as the sutta itself! :- ). > -------- > N: Jon answered and I myself find that very clear, nearly all suttas > point to satipatthana, the Buddha's teaching nobody else taught. James: Nearly all?? Or all?? You and Jon are being very vague about this and not giving any support. According to the commentary to that sutta, included in "The All" is also the Buddha's omniscience. If that sutta is about satipatthana, then that would mean that satipatthana would require all followers of the path to attain a Buddha's omniscience. Does that make any sense to you? That sutta is not concerned with the four foundations of mindfulness, it is about "The All". Well, like I told Jon, there is no reason to argue this to death. If you are going to look at every sutta through "satipatthana glasses" then reasonable and intelligent discussion is impossible. Metta, James #93228 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:25 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi James > > > James: Okay, this gets to the heart of the matter and where we > reach an > > impasse. I don't see that sutta as addressing satipatthana at all; > > after all, it is called "The All", meaning everything, all that > there > > is. If we can't reach agreement on the intended meaning of this > > crucial sutta then further discussion would be fruitless. > > There are in fact a number of suttas dealing with the All, found in > the Samyutta Nikaya. They constitute a small sub-grouping of the > section on the ayatanas (see pages 1140 to 1146 of CDB). James: I don't have copies of my Nikayas any longer. After reading them all, I left them in Egypt (Maybe they will do some good there!) > > These suttas include teachings on the All as: > - things to be abandoned through direct knowledge and understanding > - things to be directly known and understood in order for suffering > to be destroyed; > - things that are burning with the fires of lust, hatred and > delusion, and towards which revulsion is to be developed; > - things that are weighed down by birth, aging and death; > - things the subject of conceivings that are to be uprooted. > > So I would say they are very much bound up with satipatthaana. James: This is completely unrelated to the sutta we have been discussing. > > Jon > Metta, James #93229 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 4:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 9:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts Hi Howard, thanks for some corrections on your views and TG's. Have a happy time with your family. Nina. ======================= Thank you, Nina! :-) With metta, Howard P.S. I'm not sure whether I also thanked Sarah. If not, thany you, Sarah. :-) #93230 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 5:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts upasaka_howard :-) With phenomenal metta ;-), Howard -----Original Message----- From: TGrand458@... To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 12:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts Hi Ya'll In a message dated 12/3/2008 7:04:54 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@a ol.com writes: Howard: TG is NOT a phenomenalist. ................................................................. Dern Tooten. I ain't no sissy phenomenologist. I smoke my phenomena unfiltered internally and externally. Tay Jay #93231 From: "Phil" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 5:08 pm Subject: Avoiding wrong speech - let's help each other. philofillet Hi Ken (and Nina) and all Yesterday Nina quoted Ken saying "there is only the present moment" and asked me if that wasn't enough to rid me of my concerns over what people go through when dying. I said hearing Ken H say that sort of thing over and over is meangingless to me unless I know about the way he behaves in body, speech and mind, which is to me the clearest way in which the Buddha's teaching helps us. Afterwards, I recalled what he had said below: > Don't worry about any angry words directed at me, I seem to have that > effect on people. Not just on you, on people in general - in all > walks of life. As my brother-in-law once suggested, I need to > learn 'a nicer way of saying things.' In the meantime, it's a cross > I shall have to bear. :-) And I thought that it would be good to encourage you, Ken, to avoid speech that so often causes anger in others. That indicates there is something wrong in your speech, that it is causing harm to others and to yourself (being akusala kamma patha.) I was saying to Sarah on skype that I think the huge, huge, HUGE danger in the A.S approach is that in one's keen interest in studying Abhidhamma and seizing understanding of anatta, there can be a comfort with bad behaviour, the kind of comfort indicated abovea, I think. "What use is it to know kusala from akusala if it is not known that all dhammas are not-self" is something A.S said. I think this is HUGELY dangerous. I don't know how her students really behave in body, speech and mind, there is not a tendency to confessional posts, even in conventional Dhamma forums, confessing seems uncool in our culture. But the Buddha urges us to do it in his Discourse to Rahula: "WHen you reflect, if you know:'This action that I did with the body led to my own affliction, or to the affliction of others, or to the affliction of both; it was an unwholesome action with painful consequences, iwth painful results,' then you should confess such a bodiily action, reveal it, and lay it open to the Teacher or to your wise companions in the holy life. Having confessed it, revealed it and lalid it open, you should undertake restraint for the future."(MN 61:11) This is repeated for action in speech, but not for mental action, since confessing to all our unwholesome thoughts would be impossible. Now Ken will find this terribly Christian, but tough crucifice. It is the Buddha's teaching, and utterly clear no matter what kind of paramattha interpretion the commentators choose to lay on it. (The paramatta interpretationos are interesting to reflect on, but do NOT rid he crystal clear sutta of its primary purpose.) So thanks for the small confession, Ken, although unintended. I urge you to reflect on the ways you may be accumulating akusala kamma patha through the way you speak and cause anger in others. It is very important. Accumulated akusala kamma makes it far more likely that we will be born in realms in which there is no panna accompanying the rebirth citta, thus no opportunity to understand the Dhamma. Being able to say "there is only the present moment" again and again is very tiny in importance compared to the way we are or are not accumulating akusala kamma patha, I think. I heard in a Dhamma talk that trying to help others to avoid bad behaviour in body, speech and mind is a kind of Dana, so I offer it to you and anyone else who is often prey to speech that causes anger. How to avoid it? That is another matter. I won't go into it here. But we can rid ourselves of that habit. I am working on ridding myself of the habit of speaking harshly to Naomi when I am tired at the end of a long day or when she is scolding me about something, and am making very encouraging progress. Of course there is no perfect control over it, and there will be slip-ups. I expect them. And when they occur it is very interesting to note the context, to note how they are arising in habits of behaviour that have become so far less harmful. Metta, Phil #93232 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 5:17 pm Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Sarah) - -----Original Message----- From: Herman Hofman To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 5:40 pm Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) Hi Sarah, 2008/12/4 sarah abbott : > Hi Howard & all, > S: Perhaps we should stick to the Pali term 'pa~n~natti' then? Clearly any terms (even those in Pali) are merely used as representations to help us understand the truths a little better. > > The main point in the context of this discussion is that that it is very important to differentiate between the namas which think and the pa~n~natti or 'concepts' which are thought about. If we just refer to a 'mental event', there is a lack of clarity of what is real and can be known now. > It would not lead to any clarity or discovery of truths if we refer to "namas which think" using any language whatsoever, IMO. If we start of with a "reality" which isn't real, we are just going to go round in circles. Wouldn't it be clearer to say upfront that there is nothing that thinks, but there is thinking? ------------------------ Howard: I would far prefer saying that! ------------------------ There is no thinking apart from the thought, just like there is no seeing apart from the seen, hearing apart from the heard. ------------------------ Howard: I'm not sure that there are thoughts other than the thinking iself. ------------------------ Referring to namas as existing independently is referring to something that isn't real. Me, myself, I ------------------------------------ ============================ With metta, Howard #93233 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 7:17 pm Subject: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi all, Here are some thoughts on how to view the self. Or to put it more correctly: here are some thoughts on how to view 'that which we call the self.' To begin with I think there is wisdom in seeing ourselves as having only this one life. Sure, there have been countless lives before this and there will be more in the future, but still, there are benefits in identifying with just one life. I helps us avoid the attachments and aversions that would otherwise result from identifying with past and future lives. For similar reasons, there is wisdom in seeing our present existence as separate from childhood. Just as, on the stage, one actor may play the protagonist in childhood while another actor will play the same protagonist in adulthood, so too we can see ourselves as actors playing the adult role. This will enable us to detach from childhood cares and woes. What is there to lose? There is no limit to the application of this method. Following the Vissudhimagga we can see ourselves as existing for only the present year, or season of the year, or month . . day . . hour . . . It is very beneficial. If we can see ourselves as existing only in the chosen timeframe we will be sure to live more *for* that timeframe. We won't waste precious opportunities in the belief that there will be other opportunities next lifetime, next year, or tomorrow . . etc. The benefits come from *understanding* the method, not from consciously acting it out. So I don't envisage anyone thinking, "Hey, I'm an actor playing a day the life of . . ." If we did that we would be too absorbed in acting to actually seize opportunities for doing good as they arose. The way I recall it being explained on DSG, the Visuddhimagga breaks chosen timeframes down to briefer and briefer periods. At one stage it talks about 'walking' and explains that a person who is moving one foot forward is not the same person who lifted a foot, or the person who will put it down. Progressively decreasing the timeframe the Visuddhimagga eventually comes to the point where the person is seen as just the present, fleeting, five khandhas. The khandhas can quite properly be called the 'self' or 'person' or 'sentient being.' There is no harm in those designations - the Buddha used them. So that's the method. Good luck with it! :-) All this would be impossible, however, if we were to follow Nagarjuna's lead. If we were to reject the teaching of absolute realities none of the above exercises could be practised. If the Buddha had taken Nagarjuna's approach he could not have designated the present, momentary, five khandhas as the self. He would not have been able to show that 'that which we called self ' was actually nothing more (or less) than the presently arisen five khandhas. When those present five khandhas have fallen away, that which we knew as the self will have gone forever. A new self (a new five khandhas) will have arisen in its place. Therefore, I say we should not be fooled into thinking anatta means "no ultimate, momentary, experiencer" or "no ultimately real performer of ultimately real functions." If do that - if we follow Nagarjuna's lead - we will end up back where we were before we ever heard of the Dhamma. In the Dhamma, the Buddha revealed the self for what it really was, and he convincingly debunked all myths of an atta - a *continuing* or permanent self. Ken H #93234 From: TGrand458@... Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 2:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina Little follow up... In a message dated 12/4/2008 9:08:27 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: N: Let me choose just one point from your post: conditions. I get the impression that you see them in a conventional way, not according to the Patthanaa, the classes of twentyfour conditions the Buddha taught. In a conventional sense anybody can talk about them, but that is quite different from the Patthanaa. ......................................................... TG: My understanding of conditions is far from conventional. I won't get into that, but can add that my understanding of conditions was advanced by Abhidhamma studies IMO. This is not to say I bought into all their schemata, but that thinking about what they presented helped me formulate a deeper understanding of "conditions in real life." ............................................................ When you studied the Visuddhimagga you must have come across these twentyfour conditions, in Ch XVII. Without understanding these you will not understand the Dependent Origination. All these links are related to each other by one or several conditions, some conascent, some prenascent or postnascent. ............................................................. TG: These 24 (22) are just ways of "thinking about" conditional relations. No condition has a label on it. There isn't in actuality any such thing as a "prenascent condition," or any of the others; we just THINK of it that way...with mixed results perhaps. Phenomena certainly alter and change in accordance to conditions. I believe the fundamental driving force is the Four Great Elements. But I don't see them exactly like Abhidhamma either...though not completely dissimilar. I wouldn't mind rote-ly following Abhidhamma and commentaries if I thought they presented the best "road map" to enlightenment. I don't think they do. I find the Suttas far more effective and impacting. (I do not find the Abhidhamma commentaries to accurately represent the Suttas.) And yet I'll use whatever information I can to suppliment the Suttas with outlooks that will help realize conditionality-in-action and the factors of impermanence, affliction, and nonself...and to try to end craving. TG OUT #93235 From: "connie" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 8:46 pm Subject: how to view the self nichiconn hi, Ken, just a short Path of Purity quote by way of saying i enjoyed your post: < The elements of earth, of fire, of air, are the tangible element. The elements of water and of space are elements of state. The element of consciousness is an abstract of the seven consciousness-elements beginning with the eye-consciousness. The seventeen elements and a portion of the state-element are the conditioned element. A portion of the state-element is the unconditioned element. The world of various elements and of diverse elements is just the different kinds of the eighteen elements. Thus only the eighteen are mentioned since all elements existing in their instrinsic nature are included therein. The eighteen are also stated for the purpose of removing the error of those people who imagine a soul in consciousness which has the intrinsic nature of cognizing the object. For there are people who imagine a soul in such consciousness. To them has the Blessed One pointed out its variety through the divisions of the mind-element and mind-consciousness-element of the eye, ear, nose, tongue and body, and its impermanence on account of its dependence on the cause of the eye and visible form and so on, and desirous of eradicating the long-latent idea of the soul he has declared the eighteen elements. Furthermore, he has declared them in accordance with the wishes of beings who are ready to receive instruction. And the eighteen have been declared in accordance with the wishes of those beings who are ready to receive instruction as a result of this discourse, which is neither too abridged nor too detailed. For he has taught the Law by methods short And long, so that the darkness in the hearts Of creatures tamable is in a trice Destroyed, when struck by the Good Dhamma heat. > sorry no page number, but the lights are off... g'night, connie every day is halloween #93236 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 10:15 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > Hi all, > > Here are some thoughts on how to view the self. Or to put it more > correctly: here are some thoughts on how to view 'that which we call > the self.' > > To begin with I think there is wisdom in seeing ourselves as having > only this one life. Sure, there have been countless lives before this > and there will be more in the future, but still, there are benefits > in identifying with just one life. I helps us avoid the attachments > and aversions that would otherwise result from identifying with past > and future lives. > > For similar reasons, there is wisdom in seeing our present existence > as separate from childhood. Just as, on the stage, one actor may play > the protagonist in childhood while another actor will play the same > protagonist in adulthood, so too we can see ourselves as actors > playing the adult role. This will enable us to detach from childhood > cares and woes. What is there to lose? > > There is no limit to the application of this method. Following the > Vissudhimagga we can see ourselves as existing for only the present > year, or season of the year, or month . . day . . hour . . . > > It is very beneficial. If we can see ourselves as existing only in > the chosen timeframe we will be sure to live more *for* that > timeframe. We won't waste precious opportunities in the belief that > there will be other opportunities next lifetime, next year, or > tomorrow . . etc. James: I really like this part of your post. Very nicely written, presented, and wise. (But I didn't so much like the rest so I will just cut it off. ;-)). Metta, James #93237 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Dec 4, 2008 8:54 pm Subject: Being is Burning! bhikkhu0 Friends: Feverish Fire of Lust, Hate & Ignorance! The Blessed Buddha once said: On this occasion the Blessed One was staying at Gaya's Head, together with a thousand bhikkhus. There the Blessed One told these bhikkhus this: Bhikkhus, All this is burning! And what, bhikkhus, is that All that is burning? The eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & mind is burning. Forms, sounds, smells, flavours, touches, and mental states are also burning! Any eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & mental consciousness is also burning! Any eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & mental contact is also burning! Any feeling arised caused by eye, ear, nose, tongue, body or mental contact, whether pleasant, painful or neutral, that too is indeed also burning... Burning with what? I say: Burning with the fire of lust, hate and confusion, birth, ageing, death, sadness, weeping, pain, frustration, & with desperation! Seeing this, bhikkhus, the instructed Noble disciple is disgusted with any eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & mind, he is disgusted with any form, sound, smell, flavour, touch, and any mental state, he is disgusted with any eye, ear, nose, tongue, body & mental consciousness & contact, and with whatever feeling, whether pleasant, painful or neutral, caused by whatever sensed contact, with that too is he dismayed, disgusted, sickened, revolted, and horrified!!! Understanding this, the intelligent Noble disciple is disgusted with this All ... Being disgusted creates disillusion... Disillusion evaporates clinging and this relinquishment of all forms of sensing and feeling induces mental release!!! When detached the mind is unagitated! Being fully imperturbable one attains Awakening right there & instantly understands: This mind is forever freed !!! Rebirth is ended, the Noble Life is completed, done is what should be done, there is no state beyond or surpassing this... This is what the Blessed One said. Elated, those bhikkhus was pleased with the Blessed One's speech. While this teaching was being spoken, the minds of the thousand bhikkhus were released from fermentation by non-clinging... Comments: The Fire Sermon! These bhikkhus were all prior fire-worshippers, who in blinded superstition sacrificed to the fire morning and evening! This fact made Buddha realize: If I teach them, that the 12 sense-sources are blazing & burning with pain, they will awaken right there in their seats by relinquishing all clinging... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV 19-20 The 6 senses section 35. Thread on Burning: Ādittam Sutta (28) http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net Being is Burning on Lust, Hate & Ignorance! #93238 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 1:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Avoiding wrong speech - let's help each other. nilovg Dear Phil and Ken, Op 5-dec-2008, om 2:08 heeft Phil het volgende geschreven: > Ken: Don't worry about any angry words directed at me, I seem to > have that > > effect on people. Not just on you, on people in general - in all > > walks of life. As my brother-in-law once suggested, I need to > > learn 'a nicer way of saying things.' In the meantime, it's a cross > > I shall have to bear. :-) -------- N: I did not intend to react about personal things, after all we are discussing Dhamma, but now I want to say something. Ken H is very soft spoken when you meet him in person. Very kind, very polite and pleasant to associate with. Lodewijk and I were surprised about the above quoted remarks he made. Phil, perhaps you should skype with him. A life conversation makes all the difference. ------ > > Ph: And I thought that it would be good to encourage you, Ken, to > avoid > speech that so often causes anger in others. That indicates there is > something wrong in your speech, that it is causing harm to others and > to yourself (being akusala kamma patha.) I was saying to Sarah on > skype > that I think the huge, huge, HUGE danger in the A.S approach is > that in > one's keen interest in studying Abhidhamma and seizing > understanding of > anatta, there can be a comfort with bad behaviour, the kind of comfort > indicated abovea, I think. "What use is it to know kusala from akusala > if it is not known that all dhammas are not-self" is something A.S > said. I think this is HUGELY dangerous. ------- N: If you read Sri Lanka Revisited you would have noticed that Kh Sujin all the time asks: is it kusala or akusala? In her Perfections, Phil, she encourages all kinds of kusala through body, speech and mind. One should take care not to take her remarks out of context, that gives rise to many misunderstanding. Nina. #93239 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 1:40 am Subject: Re: Bodhgaya gazita2002 Hello Connie, you will have to print it in yourself and you will find it. I just tried it and it workks. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > dear azita, > couldn't get your kusalaproject.org link to work, but right on! all the same. #93240 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 1:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bodhgaya gazita2002 hello Herman, not sure what you mean by 'unapologetically human' but I take it to mean something OK. I travelled with a mobile clinic yesterday to visit and treat poor villagers. These people live hard, tough lives and live in conditions that are unbelieveably difficult. I need to remind myself that I too may one day live like this. One never knows until sotapattimagga has been attained, where ones next existence will be. When the kamma that bought about the current existence runs out, .... who knows! Patience, courage and good cheer, azita In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Herman Hofman" wrote: > > Hello Azita, > > For as long as I have been reading your posts at dsg, you have been > unapologetically human. Thank you for that. > > #93241 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 5:26 am Subject: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear friends, Before someone can understand that this body is anatt and that evenso this consciousness is anatt, the characteristics of nma and rpa appearing at this moment must be described, showed, made plain, set forth, made clear, analysed and expounded, as we read in the Sutta. Characteristics of nma and rpa appear at this moment, while we see, hear, smell, taste, experience tangible object or think. It is not easy to be able to penetrate the meaning of anatt, to understand the true nature of all realities, to realize them as anatt. If nanda had not been a sotpanna, he would not have known thoroughly the realities which are nma and rpa. Only pa of that degree can eradicate wrong view which takes nma and rpa for self, being or person. If nanda had not been a sotpanna he could not have said to Udyin that it is also possible to describe consciousness, to show it, make it plain, set it forth, make it clear, analyze it and expound it as being anatt. Therefore, the characteristics of nma and rpa are manifest to the extent that pa has realized the true nature of dhammas. At this moment realities arise and then fall away very rapidly. If a person has not realized the true nature of realities, they do not appear to him as they are, even if he says that, while there is seeing or hearing, nma is the element which experiences an object. Whereas, when realities have appeared to him as they are, it is evident that he clearly knows their true characteristics. ******** Nina. #93242 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 5:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self nilovg Dear Connie and Ken, I join Connie in her appreciation of Ken's post. Connie, is this Vis. Ch XV? I would like to look it up in my copy. See below. Op 5-dec-2008, om 5:46 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > To them has the Blessed One pointed out its variety through the > divisions of the mind-element and mind-consciousness-element of the > eye, ear, nose, tongue and body, and its impermanence on account of > its dependence on the cause of the eye and visible form and so on, > and desirous of eradicating the long-latent idea of the soul he has > declared the eighteen elements. Furthermore, he has declared them > in accordance with the wishes of beings who are ready to receive > instruction. And the eighteen have been declared in accordance with > the wishes of those beings who are ready to receive instruction as > a result of this discourse, which is neither too abridged nor too > detailed. ------- N: he has declared them in accordance with the wishes of beings who are ready to receive instruction. This is often repeated and strikes me, he adapted his discourses to the listeners. Some were ready for enlightenment. People have diverse accumulations, and some think that the elements are just for intellectual analysing, and some can be aware right away, without having to think about them. Nina. #93243 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 5:45 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Hi James, Op 5-dec-2008, om 1:21 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > N: Jon answered and I myself find that very clear, nearly all > suttas > > point to satipatthana, the Buddha's teaching nobody else taught. > > James: Nearly all?? Or all?? You and Jon are being very vague > about this and not giving any support. According to the commentary > to that sutta, included in "The All" is also the Buddha's > omniscience. If that sutta is about satipatthana, then that would > mean that satipatthana would require all followers of the path to > attain a Buddha's omniscience. Does that make any sense to you? > That sutta is not concerned with the four foundations of > mindfulness, it is about "The All". ------- N: with the all each person can understand for himself, at his level. I am not only thinking of this sutta but of so many where the experiences through the six doorways are dealt with. Take this one, I recently quoted: Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness. Seeing is dependent on eyesense and visible object. By thoroughly knowing these dhammas clinging to "I see" can be eliminated. That is what I call satipatthaana. But I know different people see satipatthaana differently. -------- > > J: Well, like I told Jon, there is no reason to argue this to death. > If you are going to look at every sutta through "satipatthana > glasses" then reasonable and intelligent discussion is impossible. ------- N: I can't help seeing it this way, but there may be lack of communication as to satipatthaana and the objects of sati and pa~n~naa of satipatthaana. Nina. #93244 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 6:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Avoiding wrong speech - let's help each other. philofillet Hi Nina (and Ken) and all > N: I did not intend to react about personal things, after all we are > discussing Dhamma, but now I want to say something. Ken H is very > soft spoken when you meet him in person. Very kind, very polite and > pleasant to associate with. Lodewijk and I were surprised about the > above quoted remarks he made. Phil, perhaps you should skype with > him. A life conversation makes all the difference. I don't dislike Ken at all, Nina. He seems like a friendly blowhard, an eccentric uncle type, which I am as well. I think we are both zealots about the Dhamma, both of us speak out a lot without applying ourselves to diligent text-based discussion the way people like Scott do. I was just writing in response to what he said about making people angry. If people (not Ken, anyone) are aware that their speech makes often makes people angry, they should strive to change their way of speaking. It is possible. We are not doomed to live out our lives with harmful behaviour habits. I think it's a shame if (and only if) one believes that there is something contrary to the Buddha's teaching when one aspires to rid oneself of bad behaviour habits. Well, I'll drop it now. Thanks Nina. Metta, Phil #93245 From: "connie" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 7:05 am Subject: Re: how to view the self nichiconn Dear Ken, Nina, The Path of Purity quote from #93235 is on pages 576-7, corresponding to Path of Purification, xv 32-3: < 32. Furthermore they are stated as eighteen for the purpose of eliminating the kind of perception to be found in those who perceive a soul in consciousness, the individual essence of which is cognizing; for there are beings who perceive a soul in consciousness, the individual essence of which is cognizing. And so the Blessed One, who was desirous of eliminating the long-inherent perception of a soul, has expounded the eighteen elements thus making evident to them not only consciousness' multiplicity when classed as eye, ear, nose, tongue, and body, consciousness elements, and mind, and mind-consciousness, elements, but also its impermanence, which is due to its existing in dependence on eye- 33. cum-visible-data, etc., as conditions. What is more, the inclinations of those who are teachable in this way [have to be considered]; and in order to suit the inclinations of beings who are teachable by a teaching that is neither too brief nor too long eighteen are expounded. For By methods terse and long as need may be He taught the Law, so that from beings' hearts, If they have wit to learn, the dark departs Melting in the Good Dhamma's brilliancy. > peace, connie #93246 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 8:18 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Threes (28-30) and Commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta (Walshe) :Three things a Tathaagata has no need to guard against: A Tathaagata is perfectly pure in bodily conduct, in speech and in thought. There is no misdeed of body, speech or thought which he must conceal lest anyone should get to hear about it. (Tii.ni tathaagatassa arakkheyyaani , parisuddhakaayasamaacaaro aavuso tathaagato, natthi tathaagatassa kaayaduccarita.m..., parisuddhavaciisamaacaaro aavuso, tathaagato, natthi tathaagatassa vaciiduccarita.m... parisuddhavaciisamaacaaro aavuso, tathaagato, natthi tathaagatassa vaciiduccarita.m, parisuddhamanosamaacaaro, aavuso, tathaagato, natthi tathaagatassa manoduccarita.m ya.m tathaagato rakkheyya ti.) -------- N: The Co explains: the akusala committed through body, speech and mind that someone may conceal lest another would know about it, does not apply to the Buddha. How is this with the other arahats, are they not pure? They are pure but not to the same extent as the Buddha. An arahat will not incur blame from the world, but he may inadvertently commit transgressions (aapatti) of the rules of the Vinaya: through the body with regard to keeping his dwelling, the common living quarters and the sleeping quarter; through speech as to transferring messages word by word, in adding five or six more words; through the mind-door with regard to the giving up of accepting money. Also the General of the Dhamma (Saariputta) who had become an arahat, had a transgression through the mind-door and with regard to this he was censured by the Buddha. The Co refers to the Caatumasutta (M. II, no 67). Five hundred monks with Saariputta and Moggallaana at their head had arrived at Caatuma to see the Lord. But these monks made a loud noise while lodgings were being prepared, so much so that the Buddha dismissed them. Later on they were reconciled to the Buddha through the intervention of the Sakyans of Caatuma and the Brahmaa Sahampati. The Buddha asked Saariputta what he was thinking when the monks were dismissed and Saariputta answered that the Lord would dwell in abiding in ease here and now (N: phala-samaapatti, fruition attainment, experiencing nibbaana). He himself would do the same. For this he was censured by the Buddha, since his duty was leading the monks. The Co. adds that the Buddha was full of great compassion and always intent on the wellbeing of the world with humans and devas. The Co states that the Buddha who had attained omniscience never did any wrong through body, speech or mind, and that this is not surprising. When he was the Bodhisatta he strove for six rainy seasons and he ate so little that his backbone seemed to stuck to his stomach, and that devas thought that he would die. Sakka prepared some food, and Maara tempted him to eat, but not even a thought about this arose. The Co. refers to the Sutta Nipaata vs. 441, where Maara said: < For seven years I have followed the Blessed One step by step. I have not obtained an opportunity against the fully-enlightened one who possesses mindfulness.> With his unobstructed knowledge as to the past, the future and the present, he never committed anything wrong through body, speech or mind. He did not decline in chanda, wish-to-do, energy, sati. He never had any entertainment, he had no agitation, he never was without careful consideration, he had no worry, no akusala citta. ------- The subco. emphasizes the Buddhas unobstructed omniscience as to past , future and present, and states that all his conduct through body, speech and mind proceeded with wisdom. There never was any decline in his preaching of Dhamma, in samaadhi, in pa~n~naa, in emancipation (vimutti). -------------- N: This whole passage invites to reflect on the Buddhas excellent qualities. Those who have eradicated all defilements are not equal to the Buddha but they have shown that it is possible to develop the Way leading to the end of defilements. The best way of paying respect to the Buddha is following the Path he taught. ---------- Arakkheyyaaniiti na rakkhitabbaani. Tiisu dvaaresu pacceka.m rakkha.nakicca.m natthi, sabbaani satiyaa eva rakkhitaaniiti diipeti. Natthi tathaagatassaati. Ida.m naama me sahasaa uppanna.m kaayaduccarita.m, imaaha.m yathaa me paro na jaanaati , tathaa rakkhaami, pa.ticchaademiiti eva.m rakkhitabba.m natthi tathaagatassa kaayaduccarita.m. Sesesupi eseva nayo..... ********** Nina. #93247 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 2:14 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi Connie, Thanks for the compliment and for the Vism quote. I wonder if you would help me out with this part: ------------- "The eighteen are also stated for the purpose of removing the error of those people who imagine a soul in consciousness which has the intrinsic nature of cognizing the object." ------------- I am assuming that this "soul" is something that is imagined to persist. Or at least, something that is imagined to be separate from the consciousness in which it is imagined to exist. Otherwise, would there be any harm in regarding nama as a "momentary soul?" Some people say that I see nama as a "little agent" but I have no qualms with that. If "little agent" is just another word for "experiencer" or "performer of a function" or "that which experiences an object" etc., then I don't see any harm in such terminology. So long as we know it falls away immediately after it has arisen what harm could there be in saying that it existed? There is no way - with that kind of understanding - that it could be seen as worth clinging to or worth identifying with. Is there some subtle-but-important difference between the way I see this and the way you and other DSG-no-controllers see it? If there is please tell me, and I will mend my ways immediately. :-) Ken H #93248 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 2:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/12/4 Scott : > Dear Herman, > > H: "That is the difference I wanted to point out, the difference > between the temporal present, as the vacuum between past and future, > and the present as what is present to consciousness (in a manner of > speaking). And what is relevant there is the distinction between > presence and absence, in relation to the unconditioned / unfabricated. > Because the unconditioned is know by the absence of origination, > vanishing and change, as opposed to their presence." > > Scott: Yes. The past is gone, the future hasn't yet occurred and the > present is what is arising now and. Would you like to say more about > 'presence' and 'absence' in relation to the Unconditioned? (Or, over > to you to continue the discussion.) > "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." The above implies to me that the unconditioned cannot be present or absent, either somewhere in the sequence between past and future, nor can it be present or absent to consciousness. The unconditioned cannot be known, because all knowing arises, changes and ceases. The quest to know the unconditioned is self-refuting. Me, myself, I #93249 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 5:00 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N: with the all each person can understand for himself, at his level. > I am not only thinking of this sutta but of so many where the > experiences through the six doorways are dealt with. Take this one, I > recently quoted: > Sayings on Sense, Fourth Fifty, Ch III, 193, Udyin): James: I think that we make a mistake if we assume that everytime the Buddha mentions the six doorways that he is talking about satipatthana. In the following sutta you quote, Ananda is clearly talking about satipatthana: using the six doorways to see the three characteristics. But, this does not translate into the same thing in the sutta "The All" because there is no lesson there about the three characteristics. Therefore that sutta isn't about satipatthana. Now, here is a sutta where the Buddha combines an ontological view of "The All" but also has a sub-meaning of satipatthana: "Monks, the All is aflame. What All is aflame? The eye is aflame. Forms are aflame. Consciousness at the eye is aflame. Contact at the eye is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the eye experienced as pleasure, pain or neither- pleasure-nor-pain that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I tell you, with birth, aging & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. "The ear is aflame. Sounds are aflame... "The nose is aflame. Aromas are aflame... "The tongue is aflame. Flavors are aflame... "The body is aflame. Tactile sensations are aflame... "The intellect is aflame. Ideas are aflame. Consciousness at the intellect is aflame. Contact at the intellect is aflame. And whatever there is that arises in dependence on contact at the intellect experienced as pleasure, pain or neither-pleasure-nor- pain that too is aflame. Aflame with what? Aflame with the fire of passion, the fire of aversion, the fire of delusion. Aflame, I say, with birth, aging & death, with sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.028.than.html Here the Buddha again describes 'The All', and what is "The All"? The six doorways and their objects. It is so clear as to be irrefutable. The Buddha also combines satipattha with his teaching on the all when he describes the inherent dukkha in the all. He did this because he was speaking to a group of fire ascetics. So, he combined what they knew already- the all is the six doorways and their objects- with something they didn't know, that the all is suffering and burning. > (The same is said with regard to the other doorways.)> > Owing to the eye and visible object arises seeing-consciousness. > Seeing is dependent on eyesense and visible object. By thoroughly > knowing these dhammas clinging to "I see" can be eliminated. That is > what I call satipatthaana. But I know different people see > satipatthaana differently. James: That is also how I view satipatthana. I don't believe that you and I have ever disagreed on the meaning of satipatthan. However, the sutta "The All", just because it mentions the six doorways, isn't about satipatthana. > ------- > N: I can't help seeing it this way, James: You can help seeing it this way. You just have to open your mind and try to abandon your conditioning. but there may be lack of > communication as to satipatthaana and the objects of sati and > pa~n~naa of satipatthaana. James: Again, I don't disagree with you as to the meaning and purpose of satipatthana. > Nina. > Metta, James #93250 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 5:01 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi James, -------- KH: > > > > It is very beneficial. If we can see ourselves as existing only in > the chosen timeframe we will be sure to live more *for* that > timeframe. We won't waste precious opportunities in the belief that > there will be other opportunities next lifetime, next year, or > tomorrow . . etc. James: > I really like this part of your post. Very nicely written, > presented, and wise. (But I didn't so much like the rest so I will > just cut it off. ;-)). -------- Thanks James, I suppose it was like the curate's egg - good in parts. :-) I was flirting with the notion of self while trying to avoid the perils of atta-sanna. I think it can be done provided we are not talking about anything other than the five khandhas. Ken H #93251 From: "connie" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 6:44 pm Subject: how to view the self nichiconn dear soul man, re: "Is there some subtle-but-important difference between the way I see this and the way you and other DSG-no-controllers see it? If there is please tell me, and I will mend my ways immediately. :-)" guffaw! actor, puppet, five khandhas, so many elements, functions - all ways to see 'that which we call the self' & still as nagasena said, "there's no soul in the breath". action, but no actor? fine. puppet but no one to pull the strings? ok. it's still the (missing) cord of understanding that brings down the curtains on this same old storied house. << but there is no such thing as a house in the ultimate sense; in the ultimate sense there just is name-and-form. The discernment of him who sees thus is called the discernment of reality. And how, monks, do those possessed of the eye see? Here, monks, a monk sees the five aggregates as such. Seeing the five aggregates as such he practises, in order that he may be disgusted with them, have no passion for them, that they may cease. Thus, monks, does one who has the eye see. >> Path of Purity, ch.18 i really need to call my agent. KH: I am assuming that this "soul" is something that is imagined to persist. c: and direct. peace, connie #93252 From: TGrand458@... Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 1:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self TGrand458@... Hi Connie, All In a message dated 12/5/2008 7:44:35 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, nichicon@... writes: actor, puppet, five khandhas, so many elements, functions - all ways to see 'that which we call the self' & still as nagasena said, "there's no soul in the breath". action, but no actor? fine. puppet but no one to pull the strings? ok. it's still the (missing) cord of understanding that brings down the curtains on this same old storied house. .............................................................. TG: The "cord of understanding" the five aggregates is, in fact, what leads to the insights of seeing them as a -- puppet, as no-actor, no one to pull the strings, and as the Buddha said -- empty, void, insubstantial, coreless, like a mirage, like a trick, etc. These insights are the result of understanding the five aggregates for what they really are, not the precursors. To go from these insights, to seeing nama and rupa as realities with their own characteristics, is a giant step backwards. TG OUT #93253 From: "connie" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 7:21 pm Subject: how to view the self nichiconn TG: The "cord of understanding" the five aggregates is, in fact, what leads to the insights of seeing them as a -- puppet, as no-actor, no one to pull the strings, and as the Buddha said -- empty, void, insubstantial, coreless, like a mirage, like a trick, etc. These insights are the result of understanding the five aggregates for what they really are, not the precursors. To go from these insights, to seeing nama and rupa as realities with their own characteristics, is a giant step backwards. connie: in that case, mother may I, take one giant step backwards? #93254 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 9:38 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. jonoabb Hi James > > These suttas include teachings on the All as: > > - things to be abandoned through direct knowledge and > understanding > > - things to be directly known and understood in order for > suffering > > to be destroyed; > > - things that are burning with the fires of lust, hatred and > > delusion, and towards which revulsion is to be developed; > > - things that are weighed down by birth, aging and death; > > - things the subject of conceivings that are to be uprooted. > > > > So I would say they are very much bound up with satipatthaana. > > James: This is completely unrelated to the sutta we have been > discussing. I don't think you've specified any particular sutta yet (apart from mentioning that it concerns the All). What is the reference for the sutta you have in mind? Jon #93255 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 10:24 pm Subject: Re: Avoiding wrong speech - let's help each other. kenhowardau Hi Nina and Phil, ------- Ph: > I don't dislike Ken at all, Nina. He seems like a friendly blowhard, > an eccentric uncle type, which I am as well. I think we are both > zealots about the Dhamma, both of us speak out a lot without applying > ourselves to diligent text-based discussion the way people like Scott > do. -------- Yes, that about sums me up. I sometimes like to play the role of curmudgeon - the way they do in the television series Grumpy Old Men. It's nothing serious. In real life I don't get much worse than I am here at DSG - not always as tactful as some, but basically harmless. :-) Ken H #93256 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 11:42 pm Subject: Series Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, We read further on in the Sutta which was quoted above, about a simile nanda used. He said to Udyin: Suppose, friend, that a man should roam about in need of heart of wood, searching for heart of wood, looking for heart of wood, and, taking a sharp axe, should enter a forest. There he sees a mighty plaintain-trunk, straight up, new-grown, of towering height. He cuts it down at the root. Having cut it down at the root, he chops it off at the top. Having done so he peels off the outer skin. But he would find no pith inside, much less would he find heart of wood. Even so, friend, a monk beholds no trace of the self nor of what pertains to the self in the sixfold sense-sphere. So beholding, he is not attached to anything in the world. Unattached he is not troubled. Untroubled, he is of himself utterly set free. So that he realizes, Destroyed is rebirth. Lived is the righteous life. Done is the task. For life in these conditions there is no hereafter. We just read that nanda said that a man in search for heart of wood enters a forest and sees a mighty plaintain-trunk, straight up, new- grown, of towering height. So long as it is a plaintain-trunk it still has the appearance of a whole. Then we read, Having cut it down at the root, he chops it off as the top. Having done so, he peels off the outer skin. We should eliminate clinging to what we are used to taking for a whole, for a thing, for self. We then read, But he would find no pith inside, much less would he find heart of wood. Thus he becomes detached from the idea of plaintain-trunk. It is the same as in the case of a cow which is still not cut up by a cattle butcher, as we read in the Papacasdn, the Commentary to the Satipatthnasutta. If the cattle butcher does not skin it and cut it up in different parts he is bound to see it as a cow, he does not see it as different elements. So long as rpas are still seen as joined together, one perceives them as a whole, or as a whole posture such as the sitting rpa. People are bound to consider realities as a thing, a self, a being or person who is there. Only if someone knows nma and rpa as they are he does not take them for beings or people anymore. It is just as after peeling off the skin of the plaintain, any pith in it is not to be found, much less heart of wood. As we have read, nanda said: Even so, friend, a monk beholds no trace of self nor what pertains to the self in the sixfold sense-sphere. ********** Nina #93257 From: "Phil" Date: Fri Dec 5, 2008 11:56 pm Subject: Re: Avoiding wrong speech - let's help each other. philofillet Hi Ken > Yes, that about sums me up. I sometimes like to play the role of > curmudgeon - the way they do in the television series Grumpy Old Men. > It's nothing serious. In real life I don't get much worse than I am > here at DSG - not always as tactful as some, but basically harmless. :-) Yes, I have no doubt - as we've agreed before - that we would have a perfectly jolly time if we got together for a coffee. No doubt about that. Differences about the things we discuss so heatedly sometimes at DSG dissolve when one is breathing the same air. For now though I am becoming such a zealot about morality that there is no way for me to discuss in a reasonable way at DSG. I seem to have lost all interest even in suttas that are Abhidhamma-ish, "insight" related suttas. For example, yesterday I tried to listen to the BB talk (from his Majhimma Nikaya series) on the Six Sixes sutta, which is very paramattha, and I just resisted and turned it off. It's all about people doing things in a wholesome or unwholesome way now for me - that's all. But I am confident that will change. I know the MN sutta that warns us not to stop with the handfull of leaves or twigs or whatever that represent morality as compared to the heartwood of true liberation. The interest in "momentary dhammas" and so on will come back some day, I'm sure of it. But now I am amazing focussed and motivated and successful about developing morality (largely thanks to lsitening to a lot of U Pandita, who is like a drill sergeant when it comes to sila) so I will carry on in my practices and come back when the interest in DSG-ish satipatthana returns. Who knows how long that will be? No telling. Until then another sayonara from Phil the Blowhard, and affection and gratitude to you all. (The impulse to rejoin just in order to provide that links to the parittas was pure, but so obvious that I am unable to discourse in a proper way...gradually that is becoming clearer... :) Metta, Phil #93258 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 12:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, Op 5-dec-2008, om 4:19 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > > N: When you studied the Visuddhimagga you must have come across these > twentyfour conditions, in Ch XVII. Without understanding these you > will not understand the Dependent Origination. All these links are > related to each other by one or several conditions, some conascent, > some prenascent or postnascent. > > ............................................................. > > > TG: These 24 (22) are just ways of "thinking about" conditional > relations. > No condition has a label on it. There isn't in actuality any such > thing as > a "prenascent condition," or any of the others; we just THINK of it > that > way...with mixed results perhaps. -------- N: No, the purpose of teaching conditions is not just thinking or using labels. When we study details, the intricate way the phenomena of life are conditioned, it can lead to detachment from self. Take contiguity-condition, anantara paccaya, this teaches us that no self travels from this life to the next one. When the dying-consciousness falls away, it is immediately succeeded by the rebirth-consciousness, and this is just like now. Also now there is no moment without citta, each citta is succeeded by a following one. In that way kamma from the past and also good and bad tendencies are carried on from moment to moment. So, this condition helps you to understand many events of your daily life. Prenascence-condition, the eyesense must arise before the seeing that is dependent on it. > Remember Vis. XIV, 37: 1. Herein, the eye's characteristic is > sensitivity of primary > elements that is ready for the impact of visible data.. It is ready for impact. ------ > TG: Phenomena certainly alter and change in accordance to > conditions. I believe > the fundamental driving force is the Four Great Elements. But I > don't see > them exactly like Abhidhamma either...though not completely > dissimilar. ------- N: Yes, they are foundation-condition, nissaya-paccaya, for the other rupas arising together with them. The derived rupas cannot arise without the four Great Elements. ------- > > TG: I wouldn't mind rote-ly following Abhidhamma and commentaries > if I thought > they presented the best "road map" to enlightenment. I don't think > they do. > I find the Suttas far more effective and impacting. (I do not find the > Abhidhamma commentaries to accurately represent the Suttas.) -------- N: You often express doubts about the Co. It is best to specify then. Take the Sangiitisutta study corner, I render the Co, but not word by word. Often the Pali is more helpful, and misunderstandings may arise because of the translation. if you like, please shout each time you find the Co. incorrect. We like to hear you shout. It is a challenge to clear up misunderstandings. -------- > > TG: And yet I'll use whatever information I can to suppliment the > Suttas with > outlooks that will help realize conditionality-in-action and the > factors of > impermanence, affliction, and nonself...and to try to end craving. ------- N: There is Abhidhamma in the suttas, for example the Suttas about the elements. You are interested in the elements, so let us discuss these. It is really amazing that the rupas of eyesense and visible object condition seeing now. These rupas have not fallen away yet, and it is the right time that seeing can arise. Just one extremely short moment of seeing, like a flash. Produced by past kamma. When you learn details of the Abhidhamma you will appreciate the suttas even more. ------- Nina. > #93259 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/12/5 kenhowardau : > Hi all, > > Here are some thoughts on how to view the self. Or to put it more > correctly: here are some thoughts on how to view 'that which we call > the self.' > I really liked your piece. The points I am about to write are about discussion, not about disagreement. Firstly you acknowledge that there are different ways of viewing things, and of doing things. You had my ear the moment I read it. > To begin with I think there is wisdom in seeing ourselves as having > only this one life. Sure, there have been countless lives before this > and there will be more in the future, but still, there are benefits > in identifying with just one life. I helps us avoid the attachments > and aversions that would otherwise result from identifying with past > and future lives. You are in pursuit of what is beneficial, and you identify wisdom as being beneficial. > > For similar reasons, there is wisdom in seeing our present existence > as separate from childhood. Just as, on the stage, one actor may play > the protagonist in childhood while another actor will play the same > protagonist in adulthood, so too we can see ourselves as actors > playing the adult role. This will enable us to detach from childhood > cares and woes. What is there to lose? You see detachment from the past as beneficial. > > There is no limit to the application of this method. Following the > Vissudhimagga we can see ourselves as existing for only the present > year, or season of the year, or month . . day . . hour . . . > > It is very beneficial. If we can see ourselves as existing only in > the chosen timeframe we will be sure to live more *for* that > timeframe. We won't waste precious opportunities in the belief that > there will be other opportunities next lifetime, next year, or > tomorrow . . etc. More benefits. But now I need to ask, beneficial for what? You have not yet identified what your method will achieve for it's practitioner. > > The benefits come from *understanding* the method, not from > consciously acting it out. So I don't envisage anyone thinking, "Hey, > I'm an actor playing a day the life of . . ." If we did that we would > be too absorbed in acting to actually seize opportunities for doing > good as they arose. > > The way I recall it being explained on DSG, the Visuddhimagga breaks > chosen timeframes down to briefer and briefer periods. At one stage > it talks about 'walking' and explains that a person who is moving one > foot forward is not the same person who lifted a foot, or the person > who will put it down. > > Progressively decreasing the timeframe the Visuddhimagga eventually > comes to the point where the person is seen as just the present, > fleeting, five khandhas. The khandhas can quite properly be called > the 'self' or 'person' or 'sentient being.' There is no harm in those > designations - the Buddha used them. > > So that's the method. Good luck with it! :-) I just want to re-iterate that I really liked what you wrote. And for the purpose of discussion only, not for disagreement, what would you or others see as the benefits of being as closely as is possible to the present? Just so that you know my motivation in writing, I see the ascending ladder of jhanas as being the practical steps of the method you are talking about. But if someone were to ask me what are jhanas good for, I could only say that they are a pleasant, but temporary diversion. Me. myself, I #93260 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 2:22 am Subject: The doors, its objects and processes sprlrt Hi, a few more pieces of the very large, very complex, very intricate and, last but not least, very real Abhidhamma jigsaw, which composes and decomposes itself again and again, right now, and that can be noticed only by satipatthana... In SoPD, ch.12, explaining the 15 cittas that make up a full sense door process/vithi, KS quotes a simile from the Atthasalini in which each character personify the functions/kikka on each stage of that process. There is a peasant (object/arammana, rupa), bringing a tribute to the king (javana/impulsion, kusala or akusala), an attendant at his feet (avajjana/adverting, kiriya), a deaf keeper (dvi-panca-vinnana/5 sense consciousness, vipaka) at the door (pasada rupa/5 senses), and a row of three soldiers guarding the king (sampaticchana/receiving, vipaka; santirana/investigating, vipaka; votthapana/determining, kiriya) The peasant/arammana, visible rupa for instance, knocks at the door (impinges on cakkhu-pasada/eye base), but seeing consciousness (the deaf door keeper), which can be either kusala or akusala vipaka (the result of previous kusala or akusala kamma) doesn't realize this until the king's attendant/avajjana signals him. Seeing citta is the only one in the process to arise at the door/pasada rupa, i.e. its door is also its vatthu/place of origin, while all other citta of that process arise at a different place, which in the plane of 5 khandhas is hadaya rupa/heart base. Citta arises one at the time, unlike rupas arising all together as in the case of pasada, hadaya and vanno/visible object, and a visible object impinging on the eye sense doesn't condition the arising of seeing consciousness but, after the bhavanga citta/life continuoum takes notice of the knocking, twice, it conditions (by anantara paccaya) the arising of the 5 sense avajjana/adverting kiriya/functional citta (only one for all 5 door processes), our king's attendant, which arises at hadaya rupa, like bhavanga/life continuoum, and which in its turn is one of the several conditions required for the arising of the citta that opens the door and actually sees the peasant/arammana. The peasant/arammana can only knock at the door, it isn't allowed in, and the deaf doorman/seeing citta can't move from its place/vatthu, it is the only citta that actually sees the peasant/arammana and then falls away with the tribute, conditioning the arising of the sampaticchana citta, again a (different) type vipaka citta, result of the same kamma that was the main conditions for the arising of the previous vipaka, seeing, which receives the tribute. Next citta conditioned to arise is santirana, yet another result of the same kamma, which has the function of investigating the peasant's tribute, when santirana falls away it conditions the arising of the votthapana citta which is of kiriya/functional jati/type and has the function to determine the tribute. This second kiriya/functional citta, determining, differs slightly but significantly in its composition from the first, avajjana/adverting, in that it is composed by 11 cetasikas, one more that avajjana, the extra one being viriya cetasika, which is also included in the magga factors as samma-viriya/right effort. and, when falling away, conditions and determines the arise of kusala or akusala javana citta, the king, that will partake of the tribute passed on for seven times in succession, the falling of each javana citta being condition (as asevana instead of anantara as in the previous stages) for the arising of the next until the counter shows 7. The citta counter of this vithi/process has reached 13, plus the two moments (or more) of bhavanga required to switch from the non-vithi, not fixed succession of bhavanga citta/life continuoum to the fixed/niyata vithi/process of citta through one of the 5 sense-door, means that 15 cittas have elapsed since the peasant/arammana started knocking/impinging at the cakkhupasada/eye-sense. The tribute may still have two citta-moments of lifespan before falling away (rupa lasts 17 instants of citta). In this case, when the seventh javana citta falls away, it condition (again by anantara paccaya) the arising of tadalambana/registering, a vipaka citta. Alberto #93261 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 12:17 am Subject: Vanishing by very Nature! bhikkhu0 Friends: By very Nature - inherently & inevitably - Decaying & Vanishing! At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said: Bhikkhus, All is by nature subject to birth... All is by nature subject to ageing... All is by nature subject to decay & sickness... All is by nature subject to death... All is by nature subject to trouble... All is by nature subject to corruption... All is by nature subject to destruction... All is by nature subject to vanishing... All that is by nature subject to emergence is also by nature subject to ceasing... And what, bhikkhus, is this All, that is by nature subject to birth, ageing, decay, sickness, death, trouble, corruption, destruction, vanishing, ever arising & ceasing ? The Eye ... Forms ... Eye-consciousness ... Eye-contact... Whatever feeling arised caused by eye-contact, that is by nature subject to ever arising and ceasing... The Ear ... Sounds ... Auditory-consciousness ... Ear-contact... The Nose ... Smells ... Olfactory-consciousness ... Nose-contact... The Tongue ... Tastes ... Gustatory-consciousness ... Tongue-contact... The Body ... Touches ... Tactile-consciousness ... Body-contact... The Mind ... Thoughts ... Mental-consciousness ... Mind-contact... & whatever feeling arised caused any contact, that is by nature subject to ever arising and ceasing... Understanding this, the intelligent noble disciple becomes disgusted with this All ... Being thus disgusted produces disillusion... This disillusion induces a mental release!!! When detached, the mind remains unagitated! Being utterly imperturbable one attains Awakening right there & instantly understands: This mind is irreversibly freed ...!!! Repeated rebirth is ended, this Noble Life is completed, done is what should be done, there is no state ever beyond, after or surpassing this ... More on impermanence, inconstancy, & transience (Anicca) Anicca (Impermanence) According to Theravada (Bhikkhu Ñanamoli) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel186.html .... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book IV 27-28 The 6 senses section 35. Thread on Birth: Jāti Sutta (33-4) http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net Vanishing by very Nature! #93262 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self sarahprocter... Hi All, --- On Fri, 5/12/08, kenhowardau wrote: >If the Buddha had taken Nagarjuna's approach he could not have designated the present, momentary, five khandhas as the self. He would not have been able to show that 'that which we called self ' was actually nothing more (or less) than the presently arisen five khandhas. When those present five khandhas have fallen away, that which we knew as the self will have gone forever. A new self (a new five khandhas) will have arisen in its place. .... S: I liked this part of Ken H's post because I think the Nagarjuna influence has been so very influential in the understanding (or rather mis-understanding) of the Buddha's teachings. The rest of this message is re-quoting what I wrote 5 years ago on this topic after reading the article, Larry gave us a link to. [if anyone wishes to read on at the end, pls turn to 'Nagarjuna' in U.P. for more....] Metta, Sarah ***** http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/27999 > Larry: > Here is a link for several Nagarjunian views. Read the first two > sections at least: http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol3/madhyamaka.html > Michael: > Thanks for the excellent link. Reading only the first two sections you will miss the best. Go through the end. The author's argument of 'Emptiness as an Epistemological Doctrine' brought to my mind the Madhupindika Sutta - MN18. ..... S: I think the following points should be appreciated by those reading the Tipitaka (including Abhidhamma) and ancient Pali commentaries, especially if they are familiar with Nagarjuna and his writings: 1. In the Theravada commentaries and Abhidhamma, sabhava does not refer to self or 'independent or autonomous being'.* It refers to a particular or differentiating characteristic or nature of a reality. Read in context, this is apparent. Howard gave these quotes from the Visuddhimagga on su~n~nattaa and anattaa: H:> (1) In XXI, 56, there is the following: Having discerned voidness in the six modes in this way , he discerns it again in eight modes, that is to say: 'Materiality has no core, is coreless, without core, as far as concerns (i) any core of permanence, or (ii) core of lastingness, or (iii) core of pleasure, or (iv)core of self, or as far as concerns (v) what is permanent, or (vi) what is lasting,or (vii) what is eternal, or (viii) what is not subject to change. Just as a reed has no core, is coreless, without core; just as a castor-oil plant, an udumbara (fig) tree, a setavaccha tree, a palibhaddaka tree, a lump of froth, a bubble on water, a mirage, a plantain trunk, a conjuring trick, has no core is coreless, without core, so too materiality etc.' (2) In XI, 104, there is the following, with the capitalization for emphasis being mine: ... They are states (dhamma) owing to bearing (dharana) for the length of the moment appropriate to them. They are impermanent in the sense of [liability to] destruction; they are painful in the sense of [causing] terror; THEY ARE NOT SELF IN THE SENSE OF HAVING NO CORE [OF PERMANENCE AND SO ON]. ... (Howard's caps). ***** 2. There is a clear distinction between concepts (pannatti) and realities (paramattha dhammas). In the Tipitaka, paramattha dhammas which can be directly known and which have characteristics are clearly differentiated from pannatti (concepts). Indeed this is the 'essence' of the Teachings,without which a path would not be possible.* ***** 3. The Buddha's teachings are not about transforming 'unskilful mental events into skilful mental events'. Many Theravada teachers say this, but it is contradictory to what we read in the Tipitaka. Either attachment arises or it doesn't. Attachment doesn't change to detachment.For example: MN18 (~Na.namoli/Bodhi transl): " Dependent on the eye and forms,eye-consciousness arises.....contact...feeling......perceives. What one perceives,that one thinks about. What one thinks about,that one mentally proliferates. With what one has mentally proliferated as the source, perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a man with respect to past,future,and present forms cognizable through the eye." <...> "'Bhikkhus, as to the source through which perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a man: if nothing is found there to delight in, welcome, and hold to, this is the end of the underlying tendency to lust,of the underlying tendency to aversion,... to views.....to doubt.......to conceit....to desire of being..... to ignorance.....' " ***** 4. An understanding of conditions is very important. Only realities (paramattha dhammas) are dependent on other factors. MN 18: "Dependent on the eye and forms,eye-consciousness arises............contact....feeling. What one feels, that one percieves.....' If we talk about trees and rocks now, they are concepts. However, the rupas which make up the tree or rocks depend on temperature and not the mind to rise and fall and so exist momentarily. This is regardless of whether the rupas are directly experienced at any given time. Concepts do not arise and fall. In suttas, such as SN 22.95, Kaccayanagotta Sutta, when the imagery of foam, bubbles, mirages, a plantain trunk and illusions are used, it is referring to the nature of realities, to the khandhas as empty of self, insubstantial and fleeting. These are usually grasped at and taken for being substantial and lasting. The imagery is not referring to concepts in the mind. ***** 5. Conditioned dhammas or realities do originate. 'Dependently originating entities' are not a ' mental creation'. Concepts, on the other hand, are not conditioned and there is no suggestion of them originating or being referred to in suttas on Dependent Origination. That which is conceived does not exist and does not originate. MN 18: " 'When there is the eye, a form,and eye-consciousness, it is possible to point out the manifestation of contact........feeling...perception....thinking. When there is the manifestation of thinking, it is possible to point out the manifestation of being beset by perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation." The eye, form, consciousness, contact, feeling, perception and thinking do not have 'merely conceptual existence.' The objects of thinking -- the proliferations -- have 'merely conceptual existence', but are not dependently orginating. ***** 6. The ultimate realities (paramattha dhammas) are cittas, cetasikas, rupas and nibbana. Nibbana is the only reality which does not depend on causes. It can also be said to have sabhava or its particular features. But it is also anatta with no 'true being' or self of any kind relating to it.* Udaana Comy, 392 (Masefield transl): " 'Wherein there is neither earth....nor both un and moon', whereby there is elucidated the fact that that which is the unconditioned element, which has as its own nature (sabhava) that which is the antithesis of all conditioned things,such as earth and so forth....." Furthermore, it should be stressed that nibbana, "the ultra-profound, extremely hard to see, abstruse and subtle.....", is not samsara or insight in any aspect. It is the unconditioned dhamma directly realised by supramundane consciousness accompanied by the supramundane mental factors including samma ditthi (right understanding). By contrast, the conventional nature of things can only ever be the object of thinking, not of insight. ***** 7. As we know, in the Theravada teachings, bhavanga cittas (life continuum consciousness) arise and fall between sense and mind door processes. These are not a substratum and there is no substratum.* ***** 8. Finally and most importantly, if realties were really inaccessible to sati and panna, the Buddha would not have taught the Satipatthana sutta, the Madhupindika sutta and the rest. Realities have characteristics which can be directly known 'as they are'. This is the path which leads to the eradication of defilements and the realisation of nibbana. Conventions, it is true, cannot be known and merely hide true elements or paramattha dhammas when there is ignorance of the latter or concepts are taken for realities. Furthermore, when panna knows a reality, such as seeing consciousness, visible object or feeling, there is no 'negotiation between the known entity and the knower'. There is no 'knower' other than panna. The reason that it seems that 'the apprehension of these things is always from a particular vantage point' is because no distinction is made between sammuti sacca and paramattha sacca (conventional and ultimate truths). Without this knowledge, panna will not develop and ideas of emptiness will be thinking about concepts. Indeed this is the very reason the teachings are inspiring and a path is possible. MN18; "'Bhikkhus,as to the source through which perceptions and notions tinged by mental proliferation beset a man: if nothing is found there to delight in, welcome, and hold to, this is the end of the underlying tendency to lust,of the underlying tendency to aversion,... to views.....to doubt.......to conceit....to desire of being..... to ignorance.....' " Udana comy 395 : " 'Monks, if there were not' that unconditioned element having as its own nature that which is unborn and so on, 'there could not be made known', there could not be discovered,there could not be witnessed, 'here', in this world, 'the escape', allayment without remainder, 'for that which is conditioned' reckoned as the khandha-pentad of form and so on that has as its own nature (sabhava) being born and so on, as they proceed making nibbana their object, extirpate the defilements without remainder. In this way, there is made known in this connection the non-occurrence of, the disappearance of, the escape from, the entire dukkha belonging to the cycle..." Comments very welcome! Metta, Sarah *see: sabhava, concepts and realities, concepts, bhavanga, nibbana, sunnatta, anatta etc under this link for more references: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/Useful_Posts =================================================== #93263 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:15 am Subject: Re: Bodhgaya jonoabb Connie (and Azita) Try: http://www.kusalaprojects.org/ (with an 's' ;-)) Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "gazita2002" wrote: > > Hello Connie, > you will have to print it in yourself and you will find it. I > just tried it and it workks. > > Patience, courage and good cheer, > azita > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > > > dear azita, > > couldn't get your kusalaproject.org link to work, but right on! all > the same. > > peace, > > connie > > #93264 From: "Phil" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:39 am Subject: Re: how to view the self philofillet Hi Ken As others have said, nicely written. > To begin with I think there is wisdom in seeing ourselves as having > only this one life. Sure, there have been countless lives before this > and there will be more in the future, but still, there are benefits > in identifying with just one life. I helps us avoid the attachments > and aversions that would otherwise result from identifying with past > and future lives. > This is an important point. I think we have no choice but to identify strongly with this one life no matter what we say about aeons and so forth. I think it happens. But I suspect *advocating* identifying with this one life rather than acknowledging that the identifying happens might be a kind of wrong view, I forget which one. And there are many suttas in which the Buddha encourages us (householders, in AN, so the "too difficult to understand" label should not be applied to these suttas unless you want to toss out the whole suttanta) to reflect on "favourable destinations" and "unfavourable destinations" in order to condition samvega, so I wouldn't say it would be wise to not consider future lives. The Buddha tells us to do so many times, so perhaps Ken should reconsider telling his friends not to! ;) The Buddha wouldn't have taught about the Hell realms (which I assume you do not deny the existence of) for example, unless there was a good reason for it. Right, if reflecting on it only conditioins aversion, best not to, but we can know when it conditions more favourable responses, such as samvega, saddha about progress, gratitude to the Buddha for providing teachings that lead to refuge etc. But I like a lot of your post, the parts about seeing ourselves as adult actors distinct from the childhood actors is very wise and very refreshing to hear from monsieur juste le moment. OK, this is a good tone on which to depart for my next attempt at a sejourn away. I just get too distracted by DSG! Metta, Phil #93265 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:45 am Subject: Analysis of Concepts (in brief!) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, There have been some suggestions recently that concepts(pa~n~natti) are somehow included amongst the conditioned dhammas which make up the 5 khandhas. There is a misunderstanding that the khandhas refer to anything other than namas and rupas, or to cittas, cetasikas and rupas. In the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (C.M.A., ed. by B.Bodhi), Ch VIII, "Analysis of Concepts" (Pa~n~nattibheda), it says: "Tattha ruupadhammaa ruupakkhandho va; cittacetasikasankhaataa cattaaro aruupino khandhaa nibbaana~n caa ti pa~ncavidham pi aruupan ti ca naamana ti ca pavuccati. "Tato avasesa pa~n~natti pana pa~n~naapiyattaa pa~n~natti, pa~n~napanato pa~n~natti ti ca duvidhaa hoti." "Therein, the material phenomena are just the aggregate of matter. Consciousness and mental factors, which comprise the four immaterial aggregates, and Nibbaana, are the five kinds that are immaterial. They are also called "name." [S: naama]. What remains are concepts, which are twofold: concept as that which is made known, and concept as that which makes known." **** From the Guide to this section: " 'What remains are concepts': There are two kinds of concepts, attapa~n~natti or concepts-as-meanings, and naamapa~n~natti or concepts-as-names. The former are the meanings conveyed by concepts, the latter the names or designations which convey that meaning. For example, the notion of a four-legged-furry domestic animal with certain physical features and traits is the concept-as-meaning of the term "dog"; the designation and idea "dog" is the corresponding concept-as-name. The meaning-concept is the concept as that which is made known; the name-concept is the concept as that which makes known." **** S: The point here is just to emphasise that concepts are not included in the khandhas which are to be known as anicca, dukkha and anatta. It was the khandhas which the Buddha compassionately helped us to understand, not the concepts (pa~n~natti), which the Ab. Sangaha summarises (with regard to the first kind): "All such different things, though they do not exist in the ultimate sense, become objects of consciousness in the form of shadows of (ultimate) things. "They are called concepts because they are thought of, reckoned, understood, expressed, and made known on account of, in consideration of, with respect to, this or that mode. This kind of concepts is so called because it is made known." S: Whether we are referring to useful or useless concepts, concepts about realities, such as seeing or visible object, concepts of things that don't exist in an ultimate sense, such as mountains and pens, or concepts of a combination of these, such as 'the sound of a woman', concepts can only ever be 'thought of'. Any knowing of such concepts can never by itself lead to any kind of true liberation because the dhammas as included in the khandhas, have to themselves be directly known. This is why the practice, the development of satipatthana, is that of knowing seeing, visible object, hearing, sound and other realities, when they appear at the present moment. Metta, Sarah ======== #93266 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:48 am Subject: Re: Wonderful Paritta chanting jonoabb Hi Phil > >The > > Buddha places great importance on choosing Dhamma friends, and how > > are we to choose friends unless we observe their behaviour in body > > and speech and make necessary assumptions about their mental > > behaviour as well? Is this a kind of elitism? I guess so. > > > I think I was getting confused about a Dhamma friend and that > special friend that qualifies when it comes to "associating with the > wise", the kalyamitta, or something like that. The latter must be a > person of strong moral behaviour in my view, but of course there are > many fellows who are struggling with gross defilements like myself (and > most of us in my opinion) but who are working hard on them, being > diligent. They are good friends. But as for the special "wise" mentor- > like friend, the kalyamitta (?) a person who behaves badly cannot > qualify for that, no matter how brilliant he or she is at explaining > anattaness, Abhidhamma etc. To my understanding, the kalyana-mitta ('kalyaa.na-mitta') is any person who is a Dhamma friend for the moment. That is to say, it refers to an instance of being helped with some aspect of the Dhamma by another. Of course, there may be a person who is regarded as a special friend, and whose conduct is exemplary, but it is not only such a person that is a kalyana-mitta. Right the ship, Captain oh Captain, and > *then* talk about the non-self nature of momentary perceptions of > prevailing winds etc!!!! (Oooh good sentence that!) Literary-wise, a good sentence ;-)) But if we demand perfection of conduct from a person before we're prepared to consider what's being said, then we may miss much that is useful. Jon PS I realise I have Nyanatiloka against me on this one. He says: ********************************* kalyāna-mitta 'noble (or good) friend', is called a senior monk who is the mentor and friend of his pupil, "wishing for his welfare and concerned with his progress", guiding his meditation; in particular, the meditation teacher (kammatthānācariya) is so called. For details see Vis.M. III, 28,57ff. The Buddha said that "noble friendship is the entire holy life" (S.III.18; S.XLV.2), and he himself is the good friend par excellence: "Ananda, it is owing to my being a good friend to them that living beings subject to birth are freed from birth" (S.III.18). ********************************* http://www.palikanon.com/english/wtb/g_m/kalyaana_mitta.htm #93267 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 5:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts jonoabb Hi TG > TG: My understanding of conditions is far from conventional. I won't get > into that, but can add that my understanding of conditions was advanced by > Abhidhamma studies IMO. This is not to say I bought into all their schemata, > but that thinking about what they presented helped me formulate a deeper > understanding of "conditions in real life." Ahh, but by what criteria do you judge there to have been a "deeper understanding" of the way things truly are resulting from your 'unconventional' approach? > And yet I'll use whatever information I can to suppliment the Suttas with > outlooks that will help realize conditionality-in-action and the factors of > impermanence, affliction, and nonself...and to try to end craving. Again, by what yardstick would you measure the understanding being developed? Jon #93268 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 5:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wonderful Paritta chanting sarahprocter... Hi Phil (& all), Thanks for calling by and kindly sharing the links. I'm going to try and listen to some sometime this weekend, thank you. I'd like to listen to Ven Silananda as you've highly praised the audio. We have a copy of Ven Piyadassi's 'Book of Protection' given by him in 1977 when he joined some of our talks in Sri Lanka. The 'paritta' ceremonies have always been very popular there - I remember attending many (when I stayed in the temple) when the monks would chant all night on occasion, as I recall. I like the parittas on loving kindness and friendship. They are a reminder to me that no matter where we are, no matter what company we're in, there can be friendliness and kindness. This is the 'protection'. The understanding and appreciation of all that is kusala (wholesome) is the 'association with the wise' in the highest sense, I believe. When we're friendly, we're not concerned at such times about how others are behaving or about what kind of person they are. We're in such company by conditions anyway and the vipaka (result of kamma) is just the moment of seeing, hearing or other sense-experiencing at such a time. We can know whether our thoughts about the other person are wise or unwise. Usually, they're the latter and then there's no protection, no loving-kindness at all. Certainly I find that when there's any comparing or dwelling on someone's akusala, the mana (conceit) is very common. What's the use of judging others, whether the judgments are correct or not? Anyway, I appreciate your kind and friendly sharing and as usual, enjoy your good humour when you call by:-). This is a quality I really appreciated in our friend Peter who recently passed away - he always made me smile as you do. Even though he was in his own way very serious about the Dhamma and its great value, he never took himself or the transitory conditions of life too seriously. He appreciated that whether one is a beggar in India or a wealthy tourist, there was no knowing what result kamma might bring at any moment. The truths are just the same for us all. We're fortunate that we have an opportunity to be friendly to anyone we associate with now. I just opened Ven Piyadassi's book at "The Advantages of Friendship" (Mittaanisa"msa) and this is the last one, a great protection: "He who maintains genuine friendship cannot be overthrown by enemies even as the deep-rooted banyan tree cannot be overthrown by the wind." We have wonderful large and old banyan trees in Hong Kong, so I like the simile. Of course, we have many so many examples in the suttas of the Buddha and arahats who associated with every kind of wretched being with the friendship of the banyan tree which could not be overthrown by the wind. Thanks again for all your friendly thoughts, Phil. Metta, Sarah --- On Thu, 4/12/08, Phil wrote: Phil: >The Buddha places great importance on choosing Dhamma friends, and how are we to choose friends unless we observe their behaviour in body and speech and make necessary assumptions about their mental behaviour as well? Is this a kind of elitism? I guess so. These days I am aware of feeling very superiour and smug with respect to bad behaviour, because I am aware of substantial progress in that area. ... #93269 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 5:51 am Subject: Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Regarding: "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." H: "The above implies to me that the unconditioned cannot be present or absent, either somewhere in the sequence between past and future,..." Scott: Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana does not exist. Nibbaana is said to be eternal - timeless. No origination would imply has never arisen; no vanishing would imply will not fall away; and no change while persisting would imply no change. H: "...nor can it be present or absent to consciousness..." Scott: Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be experienced. Nibbaana can only be experienced through the mind-door. A view that subordinates consciousness to the realm of the epiphenomemal in relation to matter wouldn't be able to conceive of consciousness having a central role in relation to an object such as Nibbaana. I do, with a sinking feeling, recall that we have discussed all this before. H: "...The unconditioned cannot be known, because all knowing arises, changes and ceases. The quest to know the unconditioned is self-refuting." Scott: While the 'quest to know the unconditioned' *is* self-refuting in the sense that it cannot be made to occur and, that, in the 'knowing' of Nibbaana, all notions of 'self' are eradicated, I don't think this is what the thesis is saying. The thesis here seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be known. Nibbaana becomes an object of supramundane consciousness. Supramundane consciousness consists of conditioned dhammas arising together, experiencing the same object, Nibbaana in this case, and then falling away. There is a difference between 'subject' and 'object' that the view doesn't accept, perhaps. The view regarding Nibbaana, then, seems to be that: (a) Nibbaana does not exist; (b) Nibbaana cannot be experienced; and, (c) Nibbaana cannot be known. AN III, 55 Nibbutasutta.m "...It is said, Master Gotama, 'Nibbaana is directly visible.' In what way, Master Gotama, is Nibbaana directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, worthy of application, to be personally experienced by the wise? "When, brahmin, a person is impassioned with lust...depraved through hatred...bewildered through delusion, overwhelmed and infatuated by delusion, then he plans for his own harm, for the harm of others, for the harm of both; and he experiences in his mind suffering and grief. But when lust, hatred, and delusion have been abandoned, he neither plans for his own harm, nor for the harm of others, nor for the harm of both; and he does not experience in his mind suffering and grief. In this way, brahmin, Nibbaana is directly visible, immediate, inviting one to come and see, worthy of application, to be personally experienced by the wise. "Since he experiences the complete destruction of lust, hatred, and delusion, in this way, brahmin, Nibbaana is directly visible (sandi.t.thika.m), immediate (akaalika.m), inviting one to come and see (ehipassika.m), worthy of application (opaneyyika.m), to be personally experienced by the wise (paccatta.m veditabba.m vi~n~nuuhi)." [...Yato kho aya,m, braahma.na, anavasesa.m raagakkhaya.m pa.tisa.mvedeti, anavasesa.m dosakkhaya.m pa.tisa.mvedeti, anavasesa.m mohakkhaya.m pa.tisa.mvedeti; eva.m kho, braahma.na, sandi.t.thika.m nibbaana.m hoti akaalika.m ehipassika.m opaneyyika.m paccatta.m veditabba.m vi~n~nuuhi''ti.] Scott: This is said to refer to the sa-upaadisesanibbaana-dhaatu - the 'Nibbaana element with residue left'. In this sutta, the living arahat with sense faculties intact - following the arising of the Path and Fruit (with Nibbaana as object) - finds that lust, hatred and delusion are not experienced. Is this not one sense in which Nibbaana is experienced? Perhaps not a good example. Here's another: MN 83, 21 Maghadevasutta.m "...But there is a kind of good practice that has been instituted by me now, which leads to complete disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbaana. And what is this good practice? It is the Noble Eightfold Path, that is right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. This is the good practice instituted by me now, which leads to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbaana." [Katama~ncaananda, etarahi mayaa kalyaa.na.m vatta.m nihita.m ekantanibbidaaya viraagaaya nirodhaaya upasamaaya abhi~n~naaya sambodhaaya nibbaanaaya sa.mvattati? Ayameva ariyo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo, seyyathida.m " sammaadi.t.thi, sammaasa"nkappo, sammaavaacaa, sammaakammanto, sammaaaajiivo, sammaavaayaamo , sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi. Ida.m kho, aananda, etarahi mayaa kalyaa.na.m vatta.m nihita.m ekantanibbidaaya viraagaaya nirodhaaya upasamaaya abhi~n~naaya sambodhaaya nibbaanaaya sa.mvattati.] Scott: The Buddha was reported to have not wished to teach the Dhamma - especially Nibbaana and everything to do with it: SN 6 1 (1) Brahmaayaacanasutta.m "...Enough now with trying to teach What I found with so much hardship; This Dhamma is not easily understood By those oppressed by lust and hate. Kicchena me adhigata.m, hala.m daani pakaasitu.m; Raagadosaparetehi, naaya.m dhammo susambudho. "Those fired by lust, obscured by darkness, Will never see this abstruse Dhamma, Deep, hard to see, subtle, Going against the stream." Pa.tisotagaami.m nipu.na.m, gambhiira.m duddasa.m a.nu.m; Raagarattaa na dakkhanti, tamokhandhena aavu.taa''ti Scott: Over to you... Sincerely, Scott. #93270 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 6:26 am Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) sarahprocter... Hi Herman (& Howard), I had an idea when I wrote my response, that you might take a bite at this one, Herman:-) --- On Thu, 4/12/08, Herman Hofman wrote: > S: Perhaps we should stick to the Pali term 'pa~n~natti' then? Clearly any terms (even those in Pali) are merely used as representations to help us understand the truths a little better. > >S: The main point in the context of this discussion is that that it is very important to differentiate between the namas which think and the pa~n~natti or 'concepts' which are thought about. If we just refer to a 'mental event', there is a lack of clarity of what is real and can be known now. .... Herman: >It would not lead to any clarity or discovery of truths if we refer to "namas which think" using any language whatsoever, IMO. If we start of with a "reality" which isn't real, we are just going to go round in circles. Wouldn't it be clearer to say upfront that there is nothing that thinks, but there is thinking? .... S: I'd say it is citta (and associated cetasikas) which thinks. "By 'consciousness (citta) is meant that which 'thinks' of its object, is aware variously." (Atth., 'Analysis of Terms'). The Pali for this is: "Cittan ti aarmamma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m vijaanaatii ti attho." ... Herman: >There is no thinking apart from the thought, just like there is no seeing apart from the seen, hearing apart from the heard. Referring to namas as existing independently is referring to something that isn't real. .... S: No one is referring to 'seeing apart from the seen' or 'thinking apart from the thought'. However, the characteristic of seeing is different from the characteristic of 'the seen' and can be known as such. Likewise the characteristic of thinking can be known. Even at such moments when any of these realities are experienced or known, there is still a citta accompanied by cetasikas experiencing the object. Metta, Sarah ======= #93271 From: "connie" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 8:22 am Subject: Re: Bodhgaya nichiconn Thanks, Jon & Azita. connie J: Try: http://www.kusalaprojects.org/ (with an 's' ;-)) #93272 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:35 am Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) TGrand458@... Hi Sarah (and Herman and All) In a message dated 12/6/2008 7:26:42 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: I'd say it is citta (and associated cetasikas) which thinks. "By 'consciousness (citta) is meant that which 'thinks' of its object, is aware variously." (Atth., 'Analysis of Terms'). The Pali for this is: "Cittan ti aarmamma.na.S: I'd say it is citta (and associated cet ...................................................... TG: To say that it is "citta which thinks" is to interject an entity "citta" into a process that has no such entity. It it no better from a "delusion perspective" than saying it is a "person that thinks." In this latter case, it is an entity "person" that is interjected into a process that has no such entity. All this namas, rupas, cittas talk, is just subtle grasping after entities in most cases. The reason, Sarah, you can't just say "consciousness, etc.," is because it would deny you the "entities" and "substance" that you construct this "dhammas view" upon. As you point out below Sarah, there ARE differences in phenomena. But these differences are not "their own differences," they are merely the difference in the phenomenal form, shape, and outgrowth of conditions...whether mental or physical. And these conditions are constantly changing so there is nothing that can correctly identified as "its own thing" at all. Not in REALITY. Yet we use these conditional differences as fodder for analysis, in order to examine those very conditions and to realize as the Buddha said...that after inspecting them, pondering them, and carefully investigating them...that they are empty, coreless, void, insubstantial, like a mirage, like a conjurer's trick, etc. Herman's comments in this post were correctly on target IMO. TG OUT ... Herman: >There is no thinking apart from the thought, just like there is no seeing apart from the seen, hearing apart from the heard. Referring to namas as existing independently is referring to something that isn't real. .... S: No one is referring to 'seeing apart from the seen' or 'thinking apart from the thought'. However, the characteristic of seeing is different from the characteristic of 'the seen' and can be known as such. Likewise the characteristic of thinking can be known. Even at such moments when any of these realities are experienced or known, there is still a citta accompanied by cetasikas experiencing the object. #93273 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/6/2008 1:25:05 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Also now there is no moment without citta, each citta is succeeded by a following one. ............................................................ TG: Suffice it for me to respond to just this comment as it represents one core departure between your views and mine. I cannot abide with a viewpoint that sees namas or rupas as separate distinct "arisings." These is no way to correctly say "each citta" or to talk about what "each citta does." Ain't no such thing as "each citta." I do not see or believe in corporeal units of "cittas" or "namas" or "rupas" at all. And to say that the ceasing of one citta is the cause for the arising of the next is just flat out a violation of the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising. It highlights that this view is "seeing it wrongly." TG OUT #93274 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self TGrand458@... Hi Connie In a message dated 12/5/2008 8:21:48 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, nichicon@... writes: To go from these insights, to seeing nama and rupa as realities with their own characteristics, is a giant step backwards. connie: in that case, mother may I, take one giant step backwards? ...................................................... TG: "Your conditions" will do whatever the conditions driving "your" conditional-actions dictate. If those conditions involve a viewpoint of realities, then "those conditions" will take a giant step backwards, irregardless of anything else. Oh, yes you may. ;-) TG OUT #93275 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Ho Jon In a message dated 12/6/2008 6:06:40 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi TG > TG: My understanding of conditions is far from conventional. I won't get > into that, but can add that my understanding of conditions was advanced by > Abhidhamma studies IMO. This is not to say I bought into all their schemata, > but that thinking about what they presented helped me formulate a deeper > understanding of "conditions in real life." Ahh, but by what criteria do you judge there to have been a "deeper understanding" of the way things truly are resulting from your 'unconventional' approach? ......................................................... TG: My "unconventional approach" is to study Suttas and apply the teachings to experiences of "my own" and observations of the external world as well. I study supplimental material and compare it to Suttas to see if it holds up to Suttas. If it does, then I may find it useful as well. Then the crux is, do these studies, teachings, practices, lead to detachment or not? If they do, then they are confirmed to whatever degree they lead to detachment. ............................................................ > And yet I'll use whatever information I can to suppliment the Suttas with > outlooks that will help realize conditionality- outlooks that wil factors of > impermanence, affliction, and nonself...and to try to end craving. Again, by what yardstick would you measure the understanding being developed? ........................................... TG: Explained above. TG OUT #93276 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 5:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/6/2008 10:50:49 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, TGrand458@... writes: And to say that the ceasing of one citta is the cause for the arising of the next is just flat out a violation of the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising. It highlights that this view is "seeing it wrongly." ........................................... TG: Just to add to this statement. What this means is that I do not believe in "absence condition" and consider it a flaw in Abhidhamma outlook. Since Abhidhamma seems to base its view of consciousness processes on "absence condition," I consider it sunk before even getting a chance to sail. ;-) TG OUT #93277 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 11:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, Op 6-dec-2008, om 19:14 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Just to add to this statement. What this means is that I do not > believe in "absence condition" and consider it a flaw in Abhidhamma > outlook. ------- N: Even only talking conventionally, how would you see it that two consciousnesses each experiencing one thing, occur at the same time? You do not believe in citta, so I am figuring out how to convey this to you. Can you think of table and tree at the same time? Rather odd, isn't it? Can there be seeing and painful feeling at the same time? It can be most helpful for our life to understand this. Someone may suffer violent pains, but these are interspersed with seeing and hearing and at those moments there cannot be pain. It helps to cling less to the idea of 'I have a pain.' Can really help in times of great distress. I tried to console someone with the loss of her mother, she was so sad. We were at a party and we talked about recepies, and then she laughed. One cannot laugh and cry at the same time. Perhaps these moments arise closely one after the other but not exactly at the same time. See, do consider citta/consciousness, and do not reject the Abhidhamma straight away. As you know the term absence-condition stands for the fact that one citta must have fallen away before the next one can arise, but do not fall over terms like that. Nina. #93278 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 2:54 pm Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) egberdina Hi Sarah (and TG and all), 2008/12/7 sarah abbott : > Hi Herman (& Howard), > > I had an idea when I wrote my response, that you might take a bite at this one, Herman:-) > Well, you were quite right about that :-) > > Herman: >It would not lead to any clarity or discovery of truths if we refer to "namas which think" using any language whatsoever, IMO. If we start of with a "reality" which isn't real, we are just going to go round in circles. Wouldn't it be clearer to say upfront that there is nothing > that thinks, but there is thinking? > .... > S: I'd say it is citta (and associated cetasikas) which thinks. "By 'consciousness (citta) is meant that which 'thinks' of its object, is aware variously." (Atth., 'Analysis of Terms'). The Pali for this is: "Cittan ti aarmamma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m vijaanaatii ti attho." I agree with TG, there really is no difference between a citta that thinks, a person that thinks or a being that thinks. > ... > Herman: >There is no thinking apart from the thought, just like there is no seeing apart from the seen, hearing apart from the heard. Referring to namas as existing independently is referring to something that isn't real. > .... > S: No one is referring to 'seeing apart from the seen' or 'thinking apart from the thought'. However, the characteristic of seeing is different from the characteristic of 'the seen' and can be known as such. Likewise the characteristic of thinking can be known. Even at such moments when any of these realities are experienced or known, there is still a citta accompanied by >cetasikas experiencing the object. Yes, I agree, the characteristic of seeing is different from the characteristic of the seen. And we can make very clear what that difference is. Let's use a simple example. "Red". That is a word we use to refer to an experience common to most of us. "Consciousness of red" is a phrase we use to make known an experience common to most of us. But it does not refer to the same experience as "Red". Red is unmediated by thought, it is direct awareness. Consciousness of red is mediated by an awareness that the red IS NOT the awareness of it. In other words, the characteristic of seeing (anything) is reflective (or thinking) ie not itself, while the characteristic of the seen is the seen (ie itself). Me, myself, I #93279 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/12/7 Scott : > Dear Herman, > > Regarding: > > "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. > What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, > no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three > unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." > > H: "The above implies to me that the unconditioned cannot be present > or absent, either somewhere in the sequence between past and future,..." > > Scott: Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana does not exist. > No, not quite. The thesis is that the existence of nibbana is not anything like the existence of the past, present, future. Your assessment is possibly based on a view that the present is aptly described as existing, and in that case, we should not then use the same word existing to apply to nibbana. The being of nibbana is not anything like the being of the present, and we should not confuse the matter by using the same word "exist" for both of them. For the being of the present is anicca, and nibbana simply is. > Nibbaana is said to be eternal - timeless. No origination would imply > has never arisen; no vanishing would imply will not fall away; and no > change while persisting would imply no change. > > H: "...nor can it be present or absent to consciousness..." > > Scott: Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be experienced. > > Nibbaana can only be experienced through the mind-door. A view that > subordinates consciousness to the realm of the epiphenomemal in > relation to matter wouldn't be able to conceive of consciousness > having a central role in relation to an object such as Nibbaana. I > do, with a sinking feeling, recall that we have discussed all this before. > It seems to me that "experience through the mind" is identical with thought. If so, you are saying that the existence of nibbana is mind dependent. The view that being is mind dependent is called idealism, and I am happy for you to have that view. But I don't think that Buddhism is idealist in nature. DO is quite unequivocal that nama and rupa mutually condition each other. > H: "...The unconditioned cannot be known, because all knowing arises, > changes and ceases. The quest to know the unconditioned is self-refuting." > > Scott: While the 'quest to know the unconditioned' *is* self-refuting > in the sense that it cannot be made to occur and, that, in the > 'knowing' of Nibbaana, all notions of 'self' are eradicated, I don't > think this is what the thesis is saying. > > The thesis here seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be known. Yes, as in directly known, like red, or soft, or ouch, any experience unmediated by thought. Absence can only be known in the context of presence. So absence is known indirectly, or as you say, through the mind door. But not as the presence of a characteristic, or as a present thought, but as the after-the-fact realisation that there were no characteristics ie there was no knowing. > > Scott: The Buddha was reported to have not wished to teach the Dhamma > - especially Nibbaana and everything to do with it: > I can well understand that. > SN 6 1 (1) Brahmaayaacanasutta.m > > "...Enough now with trying to teach > What I found with so much hardship; > This Dhamma is not easily understood > By those oppressed by lust and hate. > > Kicchena me adhigata.m, hala.m daani pakaasitu.m; > Raagadosaparetehi, naaya.m dhammo susambudho. > > "Those fired by lust, obscured by darkness, > Will never see this abstruse Dhamma, > Deep, hard to see, subtle, > Going against the stream." > > Pa.tisotagaami.m nipu.na.m, gambhiira.m duddasa.m a.nu.m; > Raagarattaa na dakkhanti, tamokhandhena aavu.taa''ti > > Scott: Over to you... Imagine trying to teach cessation to those who cling to the idea of cessation with residue. A bit like the idea of being half-pregnant or half-dead, or a citta :-) Me, myself, I #93280 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 11:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Herman (and Scott) In a message dated 12/6/2008 4:32:15 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Scott: While the 'quest to know the unconditioned' *is* self-refuting > in the sense that it cannot be made to occur and, that, in the > 'knowing' of Nibbaana, all notions of 'self' are eradicated, I don't > think this is what the thesis is saying. > > The thesis here seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be known. Yes, as in directly known, like red, or soft, or ouch, any experience unmediated by thought. Absence can only be known in the context of presence. So absence is known indirectly, or as you say, through the mind door. But not as the presence of a characteristic, or as a present thought, but as the after-the-fact realisation that there were no characteristics ie there was no knowing. ................................................................ TG: Its great to be out of the loop and watch you guys. :-) This last paragraph was very helpful Herman. Thanks. TG OUT #93281 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 11:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/6/2008 5:02:09 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, Op 6-dec-2008, om 19:14 heeft _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) het volgende geschreven: > Just to add to this statement. What this means is that I do not > believe in "absence condition" and consider it a flaw in Abhidhamma > outlook. ------- N: Even only talking conventionally, how would you see it that two consciousnesses each experiencing one thing, occur at the same time? ................................................ TG: I don't understand the relevancy of this question. It doesn't express a view of mine. ............................................................. You do not believe in citta, so I am figuring out how to convey this to you. Can you think of table and tree at the same time? Rather odd, isn't it? ............................................................. TG: Interesting statement you make that I don't believe in citta. This seems to confirm that you see "citta" as something other than "mere" consciousness... Since its got to be clear I deal with "consciousness" in here all the time. Again, the question is strange. I guess you're trying to make a case that the absence of one experience is the cause that allows the other experience to manifest??? Is that the case? I don't want to assume that and comment on it and find out I misunderstood it. .............................................................. Can there be seeing and painful feeling at the same time? It can be most helpful for our life to understand this. Someone may suffer violent pains, but these are interspersed with seeing and hearing and at those moments there cannot be pain. It helps to cling less to the idea of 'I have a pain.' Can really help in times of great distress. I tried to console someone with the loss of her mother, she was so sad. We were at a party and we talked about recepies, and then she laughed. One cannot laugh and cry at the same time. Perhaps these moments arise closely one after the other but not exactly at the same time. See, do consider citta/consciousnessSee, do consider cit Abhidhamma straight away. As you know the term absence-condition stands for the fact that one citta must have fallen away before the next one can arise, but do not fall over terms like that. ................................................................. TG: I'm lost. I don't understand your point in this entire post. Sorry. TG OUT Nina. #93282 From: "connie" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 5:36 pm Subject: how to view the self nichiconn dear kenhoward, speaking of samsaric theatre, i like remembering "the primaries are like female yakkhas" & now appearing at the sense doors - brought to you ("live!") by a/kusala productions, limited. and all this is fun and possibly not too harmful, but it's still thinking, thinking... at what point does perception change? peace, connie And all activities are crumbling down Like dew-drops at the rising of the sun. -buddhaghosa #93283 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 12:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self TGrand458@... Hi Connie, All In a message dated 12/6/2008 6:37:09 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, nichicon@... writes: And all activities are crumbling down Like dew-drops at the rising of the sun. -buddhaghosa ................................................ TG: I didn't notice your Buddhaghosa quote before. Very nice quote and it indicates that "change" or "impermanence" is the result of "conditional interaction." I think this is extremely important to be aware of. TG OUT #93284 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 1:09 pm Subject: "Absence Condition" is Absent and Not a Condition TGrand458@... Hi Ya'll There is no such thing as "absence condition." Unless perhaps, it refers strictly to Nibbana. A "condition" is only something that is actively affecting "another condition." The "absence" of something does not qualify. TG #93285 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 6:15 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: "There are, O monks, three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned. What three? No origination is discerned, no vanishing is discerned, no change while persisting is discerned. These are the three unconditioned marks of the Unconditioned." Me: "Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana does not exist." H: "No, not quite. The thesis is that the existence of nibbana is not anything like the existence of the past, present, future..." Scott: Okay. Nibbaana is timeless. I think that the sutta excerpt says this clearly - 'no origination is discerned;' 'no vanishing is discerned;' 'no change while persisting is discerned.' H: "...Your assessment is possibly based on a view that the present is aptly described as existing, and in that case, we should not then use the same word existing to apply to nibbana. The being of nibbana is not anything like the being of the present, and we should not confuse the matter by using the same word 'exist' for both of them. For the being of the present is anicca, and nibbana simply is." Scott: Okay. Nibbaana is timeless. Do you accept that Nibbaana 'is'/'is real'/'has reality'/'is a reality'/'is not a nothing'/'is a something'? Me: "Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be experienced..." H: "It seems to me that 'experience through the mind' is identical with thought..." Scott: No, this is not the way I see it. Mundane psychology would suggest that 'thought' is the property of 'mind' but 'mind' according to Abhidhamma is conditioned, momentary, and made up of impermanent citta and cetasikas with various characteristics and functions. 'Thoughts' (the object of 'thinking') is concept; the thinking is naama. Nibbaana is 'experienced' by specialized sorts of consciousness only in a series in the mind (as in not related to the five senses - you can't literaly see Nibbaana). Nibbaana cannot be an object of experience simply due to thinking about it. H: "...If so, you are saying that the existence of nibbana is mind dependent. The view that being is mind dependent is called idealism, and I am happy for you to have that view..." Scott: No, Nibbaana is not 'mind-dependent'. Nibbaana is the Unconditioned. If we've established that it is a reality (pick your own term) and that it is timeless, then we've established that Nibbaana exists independent of 'mind.' ('Mind', in this sense, referring generically to conditioned realities - naama.) This does not alter the fact that Nibbaana serves as object for certain types of consciousness. It causes 'mind', under proper conditions, to bend towards it. H: "...But I don't think that Buddhism is idealist in nature. DO is quite unequivocal that nama and rupa mutually condition each other." Scott: There are different ways in which naama and ruupa are mutually conditioned/conditioning. And an object is condition for the consciousness experiencing it. Me: "The thesis here seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be known." H: "Yes, as in directly known, like red, or soft, or ouch, any experience unmediated by thought. Absence can only be known in the context of presence." Scott: Is Nibbaana then equated with 'absence'? As in 'nothing'? The phrase 'unmediated by thought' is hard for me to understand. Can you please elaborate? 'Red' is ruupa, so not comparable to Nibbaana; 'soft' is ruupa, so, again, not comparable to Nibbaana; 'ouch' is post 'hardness' thinking and conceptual, I'd guess, if I'm following you. So Nibbaana is not experienced as these things are. Is that it? How is it 'experienced'? As far as I know, naama *is* experience. We are dealing with a 'mental' process here - not a material one (generally speaking and leaving out the whole thing about 'mind-base'). How can you say that thought 'mediates' experience? This is psychology but is it Dhamma - one never knows with you ;-) - ? Also, can you be clearer regarding whether or not the view allows for the experience of Nibbaana - cessation (or whatever synonym you wish) - in a significant way, like that it ends further becoming? H: "...So absence is known indirectly, or as you say, through the mind door. But not as the presence of a characteristic, or as a present thought, but as the after-the-fact realisation that there were no characteristics i.e. there was no knowing." Scott: Is this the living arahat who thinks about Nibbaana 'after the fact' (you don't seem to dig that whole idea)? Is this the moment of reviewing consciousness which arises after the arising and falling away of the Path and the Fruit? 'Known indirectly' in what way? By what? At any rate, over to you, and yeah, if we keep going on this topic you know we'll both go insane too, right? Sincerely, Scott. #93286 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 6:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts egberdina Thanks, TG, for your encouragement :-) Cheers Herman 2008/12/7 : > > So absence is known indirectly, or as you say, through the mind door. > But not as the presence of a characteristic, or as a present thought, > but as the after-the-fact realisation that there were no > characteristics ie there was no knowing. > > ................................................................ > > > TG: Its great to be out of the loop and watch you guys. :-) This last > paragraph was very helpful Herman. Thanks. > > #93287 From: "connie" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 6:33 pm Subject: how to view the self nichiconn hey, TG, And all activities are crumbling down Like dew-drops at the rising of the sun. -buddhaghosa ................................................ TG: Very nice quote and it indicates that "change" or "impermanence" is the result of "conditional interaction." I think this is extremely important to be aware of. c: just re-reading Path of Purity, Tay; can't tell you how many times this makes & i still still don't get most of it - doh. "conditional interaction." ok. but isn't appearance / birth alone enough to account for old age and death? not sure which conditions you accept. just that I was thinking earlier that the absence of the past life might be required for the appearance of this one. peace, connie #93288 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 6:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Absence Condition" is Absent and Not a Condition egberdina Hi TG, 2008/12/7 : > Hi Ya'll > > > There is no such thing as "absence condition." Unless perhaps, it refers > strictly to Nibbana. > > > A "condition" is only something that is actively affecting "another > condition." The "absence" of something does not qualify. > I agree. The absence condition is a straigh-out denial of DO, the principle of which is unambigious: When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that. When this isn't, that isn't. From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that. Absence is not a condition for a new arising - if anything it is a condition for further cessation. The absence condition, like the delightful disappearance condition and the equally sumptuous non-disappearance condition reek of the most musty scholasticism. Not an ounce of reality amongst that lot :-) Cheers Herman #93289 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 7:12 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. buddhatrue Hi Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > I don't think you've specified any particular sutta yet (apart from > mentioning that it concerns the All). What is the reference for the > sutta you have in mind? Are you kidding me? You don't know what sutta I am talking about that refers to "The All"? It is, of course, the sutta titled "The All" (Sabba Sutta): "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak." "As you say, lord," the monks responded. The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. 1 Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html > > Jon > Metta, James ps. Anyone following this thread must be throughly bored to death by now. ;-)) #93290 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 8:22 pm Subject: What Causes Mental Purity? bhikkhu0 Friends: What is the Cause of mental Defilement & Purification? Venerable Mahali once asked the Buddha: But, Venerable Sir, what is the causing condition of mental defilement? By what reason, do beings become mentally defiled & degraded? If, Mahali, this form, this feeling, this perception, this construction & this consciousness were exclusively suffering, immersed only in frustration, soaked solely in trouble & if it were not also sometimes soaked in pleasure, beings would not become enamoured with it. But since this form, this feeling, perception, construction & this consciousness is also occasionally pleasurable, immersed now & then in pleasure, soaked momentarily in delight & it is not soaked only & always in pain, beings become enamoured & enthralled with it! By being enamoured with it, they are captivated by it & obsessed with it... By being captivated by it & obsessed with it, they are defiled & degraded! This, Mahali, is the causing condition for the mental defilement of beings... By this reason, do beings become mentally defiled & detrimentally degraded! Mental Defilement veils the mental ‘light’ by blocking & obscuring it! But, Venerable Sir, what is the causing condition of mental purification? By what reason, do beings become mentally purified & released? If, Mahali, this form, this feeling, this perception, this construction & this consciousness were exclusively pleasurable, immersed only in pleasure, soaked solely in satisfaction, and if it were not also quite soaked in suffering, beings would not become disgusted with it. But because form, feeling, perception, construction & consciousness is also pain, immersed in distress, soaked in agony, and it is not soaked only in pleasure, beings are disgusted with it. Being disgusted, they experience disillusion & through this disillusion, they are mentally purified! This, Mahali, is the causing condition for the mental purification of beings... By this reason, do beings become mentally purified & happily released! Naturally the mind is pure and luminous all around! ... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya III 69-71 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net What is the Cause of Mental Purity? #93291 From: "connie" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 8:54 pm Subject: On Concepts nichiconn Scott, Herman, Christine, management asks that you keep clear the exits and entrances during this brief commercial interruption: Path of Purity, ch21 p803 [Discourse of Deliverance]: << knowledge of indifference to complexes. And if this knowledge views the tranquil path, nibbaana as calm, it forsakes the whole procedure of the complexes and rushes into nibbaana. If it does not view nibbaana as calm, it proceeds again and again [657] having the complexes for object like the mariners' crow {cf. Dialogues i, 282-3} which knows the quarters of the globe. It is said that mariners who are merchants embarking on a boat take a crow which knows the quarters. When the boat is tossed by the wind and rushes out into unknown places and the shore does not appear, they let go the crow. It stands on the mast-top and rises into the sky and going to all quarters, main and intermediate, goes away in a certain direction if it sees the shore there. If it did not see it, it would return again and again and alight on the mast-top. Even so if this knowledge of indifference to complexes views the tranquil path, nibbaana as calm, it forsakes the whole procedure of complexes and rushes into nibbaana. If it does not view it (so), it proceeds again and again having the complexes for object. It grasps the complexes under various aspects {read naanappakaarato} as (clearly as) flour ground on a plate or as carded cotton with seeds taken out, and rejecting fear and delight and being impartial in the investigation of the complexes, is established by virtue of the threefold reviewing. Being so established it becomes the entrance to the threefold deliverance and the cause of the differentiation of the seven Ariya persons. Then because of its proceeding by way of the threefold reviewing, it is said to become the entrance to the threefold deliverance by way of the dominant influence of the three controlling faculties. For the three reviewings are said to be three entrances to deliverance. As has been said: "Indeed these three deliverance-entrances lead to exit from the world, to the thorough reviewing of all complexes as regards their limitation and course, to the conscious rushing into the signless element, to the mental agitation in all complexes, to the conscious rushing into the unhankered element, to the thorough reviewing of all states as foreign, to the conscious rushing into the element of emptiness. These three deliverance-entrances lead to exit from the world." {Pa.tisambhidaa ii, 48.} >> S: At any rate, over to you, and yeah, if we keep going on this topic you know we'll both go insane too, right? peace, connie #93292 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 4:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self TGrand458@... Hi Connie In a message dated 12/6/2008 7:33:57 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, nichicon@... writes: hey, TG, And all activities are crumbling down Like dew-drops at the rising of the sun. -buddhaghosa ................................................ TG: Very nice quote and it indicates that "change" or "impermanence" is the result of "conditional interaction.TG: Very nice quote and it indicates that "change" or c: just re-reading Path of Purity, Tay; can't tell you how many times this makes & i still still don't get most of it - doh. "conditional interaction."conditional interaction." ok. but isn't appearance / birth alone enough to a ........................................................ TG: It is ... due to conditional interaction. If something has appeared, it is part of the interaction. "Birth alone" does not account for the reason why we age. It alone is not the cause for change. Though it is a fact that what is born will die, what arises will cease. The Buddhaghosa quote gives us a nice 'causal' insight. :-) ............................................................. not sure which conditions you accept. just that I was thinking earlier that the absence of the past life might be required for the appearance of this one. ............................................................ TG: How about the 'presence' of kamma as the condition required for a "new" appearance. The absence of an arahats last life would not condition another because no "active" kamma. So 'absence' of one life causing the next not sufficient to explain the rebirth. BTW, I consider kamma to be a type of momentum. (Just to keep it controversial.) ;-) Buddha -- "Kamma is their womb from which they are born." M. 135 TG OUT peace, connie #93293 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 10:27 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi Phil, I might have missed you again, but, if you're reading this, thanks for the reply and the compliments. ----------- <. . .> Ph: > This is an important point. I think we have no choice but to identify strongly with this one life no matter what we say about aeons and so forth. I think it happens. But I suspect *advocating* identifying with this one life rather than acknowledging that the identifying happens might be a kind of wrong view, I forget which one. ------------- Yes, it is sure to be one of them. But if we understand the "present lifetime" point the way it is taught in the Visuddhimagga that trap will be avoided. Some people, as you know, fail to see how an understanding of namas and rupas could possibly be relevant in their lives. They can't see how it could help them. But when they hear this point about living for the present lifetime - as opposed to living for all our lifetimes (present, past and future) - they can see how that could help. When it is properly explained they can see how living for shorter and shorter periods could help even more. Eventually when the subject returns to the presently arisen namas and rupas they say, "Ah, now I get it!" :-) Ken H (monsieur juste le moment) #93294 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Dec 6, 2008 11:20 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi Herman, ---------- H: > I really liked your piece. The points I am about to write are about discussion, not about disagreement. ----------- I'm glad you liked it, thanks for saying so. More discussion to follow: ---------------- H: > You are in pursuit of what is beneficial, and you identify wisdom as being beneficial. <. . .> You see detachment from the past as beneficial. ------------ It's all about understanding, isn't it? - understanding the advantages of detachment and other kusala states, and understanding the disadvantages of attachment (etc). Right understanding is the greatest form of kusala. ------------------- <. . .> H: > More benefits. But now I need to ask, beneficial for what? You have not yet identified what your method will achieve for it's practitioner. -------------------- In its own right it is a handy piece of conventional wisdom: "I should not delay paying respect to the Buddha: I should not delay showing kindness to my friends. Life is too short for delaying!" But it is also found in the Pali texts, and so it is not just conventional wisdom; it is also a way of understanding paramattha dhammas - now. ------------------------------ <. . .> H: > Just so that you know my motivation in writing, I see the ascending ladder of jhanas as being the practical steps of the method you are talking about. But if someone were to ask me what are jhanas good for, I could only say that they are a pleasant, but temporary diversion. ------------------------------- Yes, without right understanding of paramattha dhammas everything (even jhana) is, at best, a temporary diversion. Is that what you meant? :-) Ken H #93295 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 12:41 am Subject: Series Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, In the sixfold sense-sphere (phassyatana) there is no posture. Eyesense is an internal yatana, and visible object is rpyatana, an external yatana, it is only what appears through the eyes. Someone may see a person who is sitting and cling to the idea of person or self, although he says that there is no self. If he has only theoretical understanding he may not realize that the truth of anatt can be understood only by awareness of seeing and other realities which appear. Pa should know that seeing only sees what appears through the eyes. After having seen visible object one thinks of and remembers the shape and form of what appears and knows what it is. Also at that moment there is a type of nma which knows and remembers something, it is not a being, person or self who does so. When hearing arises which experiences sound through the ears, no remembrance remains of what was experienced through the eye-door, no remembrance of a perception of people sitting and talking to each other. When hearing presents itself, sati can be aware of the reality which hears, an element which experiences only sound. After that, citta thinks of words or conceptions, on account of different sounds, low and high, which have been heard. Pa can know, when words are understood, that only a type of nma understands the meaning of words. If different types of realities are known, one characteristic at a time, as nma and rpa, the wrong view which takes realities for self is eliminated. One will let go of the idea of realities as a whole or a posture. Then it can be understood what it means to have inward peace, because citta does not become involved in outward matters, such as self, people or beings. There is no longer the world one used to cling to, the world outside, which is full of people and different things. There is no longer what one used to take for a particular person, for a thing, for self, all permanent and lasting. Whenever sati arises pa can at that moment understand realities clearly, and then there is inward peace, because there are no people, beings or things. Whereas, when there are many people, many conceptions in ones life, there is no peace. --------- Nina. #93296 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 1:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, Op 7-dec-2008, om 1:12 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Just to add to this statement. What this means is that I do not > > believe in "absence condition" and consider it a flaw in Abhidhamma > > outlook. -------- I wrote in my Conditions: As regards absence-condition, natthi- paccaya, this condition is similar to proximity-condition, anantara- paccaya, and contiguity-condition, samanantara-condition. The citta which falls away conditions the arising of the next one by way of proximity-condition and contiguity-condition. However, the next citta can only arise when the preceding one has fallen away, when it is absent. Absence does not mean that the citta was never there; it means that the citta that has just fallen away assists by its absence the citta arising next to it; after it has fallen away it gives the next citta the opportunity to arise without any interval. The Pahna (Analytical Exposition, II, 23) refers to the arising and falling away of cittas in contiguity; the citta with its accompanying cetasikas that has just fallen away conditions the following citta with its accompanying cetasikas by way of absence- condition: States, citta and cetasikas, which have just disappeared in contiguity, are related to present states, citta and cetasikas, by absence-condition. Only one citta at a time arises and then falls away, but cittas succeed one another from birth to death, and death is followed by rebirth. The cycle of birth and death continues until all defilements have been eradicated and one finally passes away.... Disappearance-condition is similar to absence-condition but the word disappearance helps us to understand that the absence of the conditioning dhamma does not mean that it never was. Disappearance- condition also refers to the condition whereby the citta that has fallen away conditions the arising of the next citta. The word disappearance helps us to understand that the preceding citta, which is the conditioning dhamma, after it has reached its cessation moment, gives the opportunity for the arising of the subsequent citta, the conditioned dhamma, without any interval. ------- You sure do not deny past, present and future? I gave some examples to you from daily life, but O.K. if you do not find them relevant. You fall too soon over Abhidhamma terms. This is a quote from the Sutta: And remember the Sutta trext where the Buddha says that it is not possible to describe how fast citta changes. Nina. #93297 From: "connie" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 1:17 am Subject: Re: how to view the self nichiconn Hey, TG, I was going to let it rest, but since I got up anyway ... TG: "Birth alone" does not account for the reason why we age. It alone is not the cause for change. Though it is a fact that what is born will die, what arises will cease. The Buddhaghosa quote gives us a nice 'causal' insight. :-) c: Here's another of his: << 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. 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. >> ............................................................. c: not sure which conditions you accept. just that I was thinking earlier that the absence of the past life might be required for the appearance of this one. ............... TG: How about the 'presence' of kamma as the condition required for a "new" appearance. The absence of an arahats last life would not condition another because no "active" kamma. So 'absence' of one life causing the next not sufficient to explain the rebirth. BTW, I consider kamma to be a type of momentum. (Just to keep it controversial.) ;-) c: It's a good point, the arahat's dying consciousness... I'll take it as the exception that proves the rule. And I can see talking about kamma as momentum, so I'd rather pick your combining kamma and presence conditions and denying absence and non-presence as controversial. Just so we know what they might be, here's what Buddhaghosa writes about those last two in The Path of Purity: << Non-material states which have ceased quite immediately and which render service by giving an opportunity for the proceeding of immaterial states which arise immediately after themselves are the non-presence-cause. As it has been said: "States of mind and mental properties which have ceased quite immediately are in the non-presence causal relation to the present states of mind and mental properties." Those which render service through absence are the absence-causes. As it has been said: "States of mind and mental properties which are absent quite immediately are the absence-cause of the present states of mind and mental properties." >> back to bed I go, connie #93298 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 1:32 am Subject: Re: The doors, its objects and processes sprlrt Hi, a couple of corrections to my previous post: when an object starts inpinging on a sense door, it takes at least three bhavanga/life-continuum cittas, atita, calana, upaccheda before the process/vithi of cittas at that door can start, and also the right effort factor of the path is samma vayama, which refers to viriya cetasika. The single patisandhi/birth consciousness and the uncountable bhavanga/life-continuum cittas that follow are vipaka/resultant cittas, and its composition differ according to the one kamma of a previous lifetime that condition its arising, also the (decads of) 5 pasada rupas of the senses and the hadaya rupas originates because of that one kamma done in a distant past, not in this life. Worth considering when assuming one's self controlling one's body. Alberto #93299 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 7:07 am Subject: Alan's new web nilovg Dear friends, Alan Weller has new website and this is the link:< http:// www.scribd.com/people/documents/1746908-alanweller?page=1 > He also has Zolag, but this is a new one. Nina. #93300 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 7:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The doors, its objects and processes nilovg Dear Alberto. I appreciate your post, especially the last sentence. Nina. Op 7-dec-2008, om 10:32 heeft sprlrt het volgende geschreven: > The single patisandhi/birth consciousness and the uncountable > bhavanga/life-continuum cittas that follow are vipaka/resultant > cittas, and its composition differ according to the one kamma of a > previous lifetime that condition its arising, also the (decads of) 5 > pasada rupas of the senses and the hadaya rupas originates because of > that one kamma done in a distant past, not in this life. Worth > considering when assuming one's self controlling one's body. > > Alberto #93301 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 7:59 am Subject: link to Alan's new website. nilovg Dear friends, not sure the link worked. here it is again: >> >> >> Alan: I have posted these on my scribd account. This is what I >> intend to use >> for everything now. It has a greater readership plus some powerful >> tools. Lovingkindness has already had 1000 views in 4 months. You can >> view at the address below. >> >> http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/1746908-alanweller?page=1 >> > #93302 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 8:41 am Subject: Re: link to Alan's new website. scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N: "not sure the link worked..." Scott: Thanks, Nina. I'm reading 'Conditions' which I found on the site. Sincerely, Scott. #93303 From: "connie" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 8:47 am Subject: link to Alan's new website nichiconn Thanks, Nina, Alan, the link worked just fine. peace, connie www.scribd.com/people/documents/1746908-alanweller?page=1 #93304 From: "connie" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 9:42 am Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Threes (31-33) nichiconn dear friends, continuing on from the last set [#92924 Threes (28-30) (cy: #93168, #93246)]: CSCD < Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 11:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. revisited. was: how to view the self nilovg Dear Connie and TG, While we are at it, I would say... Op 7-dec-2008, om 10:17 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > TG: "Birth alone" does not account for the reason why we age. It > alone is not the cause for change. Though it is a fact that what is > born will die, what arises will cease. The Buddhaghosa quote gives > us a nice 'causal' insight. :-) > > c: Here's another of his: << 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. ------- N: I would say, TG, do not forget the sorrow that comes with birth, not only the ageing, although ageing is an aspect of dukkha. Connie, these revisitings are most welcome and Larry likes it too. You bring me in the mood, and I add something: < Text Vis. 273: [(i) The Wheel] Now here at the end sorrow, etc., are stated. Consequently, the ignorance stated at the beginning of the Wheel of Becoming thus, 'With ignorance as condition there are formations', is established by the sorrow and so on. -------- N: The Tiika explains that not only birth is the condition for sorrow etc. but that also ignorance is a condition for sorrow etc. As to the word here. the Tiika adds: in the teaching of the Dependent Origination. ------- Text Vis.: So it should accordingly be understood that: Becoming's Wheel reveals no known beginning; No maker, no experiencer there; Void with a twelvefold voidness, and nowhere It ever halts; forever it is spinning. ------ N: The Tiika explains that it turns around constantly, all the time, without interruption, until the highest attainment. Until arahatship has been attained. For him there is no rebirth, he is freed from the cycle. ---------- Text Vis. 274: But (1) how is ignorance established by sorrow, etc.? (2) How has this Wheel of Becoming no known beginning? (3) How is there no maker or experiencer there? (4) How is it void with twelvefold voidness? Text Vis. 275: 1. Sorrow, grief and despair are inseparable from ignorance; and lamentation is found in one who is deluded. So, firstly, when these are established, ignorance is established. Furthermore, 'With the arising of cankers there is the arising of ignorance' (M.i,54) is said, and with the arising of cankers these things beginning with sorrow come into being. How? -------- N: Aasava is translated as canker, or intoxicant. Four kinds of defilements are classified as aasava: the canker of sense-desire, kaamaasava, the canker of clinging to rebirth, bhaavaasava, the canker of wrong view, di.t.thaasava and the canker of ignorance, avijjaasava. --------- Text Vis. 276: Firstly, sorrow about separation from sense desires as object has its arising in the canker of sense desire, according as it is said: 'If, desiring and lusting, his desires elude him, He suffers as though an arrow had pierced him' (Sn.767), and according as it is said: 'Sorrow springs from sense desires' (Dh. 215). ------- N: The Tiika explains the Pali term kaamayaanassa, meaning: for the person who desires. Yaana means vehicle. He has desire as his vehicle and keeps going because of it. As to the text, separation from sense desires as object, the Pali uses the term vatthukaamaviyoga, separation from vatthukaama, from all that is the foundation of clinging. As to if...his desires elude him, the Tiika explains, if his sense desires dwindle away, disappear. As to he suffers, he is agitated (kuppati) by sorrow etc. ------------ Conclusion: Sorrow is conditioned by ignorance, including ignorance of cause and effect, ignorance of realities. As we read: Sorrow, grief and despair are inseparable from ignorance. Whenever sorrow arises, the citta is akusala citta and each akusala citta is accompanied by ignorance. The canker of sense desire leads to sorrow and since sorrow is accompanied by ignorance, ignorance is established, it is accumulated. Gain and loss are among the vicissitudes of life. Kusala kamma is the cause of the experience of pleasant objects through the senses and akusala kamma is the cause of the experience of unpleasant objects through the senses. When pleasant objects disappear we are agitated, we suffer. This can also be applied to the loss of dear people. Their company gives us pleasure and when they have passed away we lament our lack of this pleasure. Ignorance is the first link of the Wheel of Becoming, and conditioned by ignorance there are kamma-formations which condition rebirth, and thus the cycle goes on. We read that there is no maker of the Wheel, no experiencer. Through the Dhamma we can learn that whatever is experienced is a conditioned dhamma, not a person. ******** Nina. #93306 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 11:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Hi TG, Op 6-dec-2008, om 18:50 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > These is no way to correctly say "each citta" or to talk about what > "each > citta does." Ain't no such thing as "each citta." I do not see or > believe in > corporeal units of "cittas" or "namas" or "rupas" at all. > > > And to say that the ceasing of one citta is the cause for the > arising of the > next is just flat out a violation of the Buddha's principles of > Dependent > Arising. It highlights that this view is "seeing it wrongly." ----------- N: We read in the Vis. XIX, 23: Just as eye consciousness comes next Following on mind element [eyedoor adverting consciousness] Which, though it does not come from that, Yet fails not next to be produced, So too, in rebirth-linking, conscious Continuity takes place: The prior consciousness breaks up, The subsequent is born from that, They have no interval between, Nor gap [that separates the two]; while naught whatever passes over, Still rebirth-linking comes about. ****** Nina. #93307 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/7/2008 2:15:34 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, Op 7-dec-2008, om 1:12 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Just to add to this statement. What this means is that I do not > > believe in "absence condition" and consider it a flaw in Abhidhamma > > outlook. -------- I wrote in my Conditions: As regards absence-condition, natthi- paccaya, this condition is similar to proximity-condition, anantara- paccaya, and contiguity-condition, samanantara-condition. The citta which falls away conditions the arising of the next one by way of proximity-condition and contiguity-condition. However, the next citta can only arise when the preceding one has fallen away, when it is absent. ....................................................... TG: As you posted last week or so, the gist of which was -- it is 'attention' that get "interrupted" by a "new" more dominant condition. -- We basically agreed on that outlook...as far as it goes. This means it is the "active sense contact experience" that propagates consciousness. The consciousness that is falling away would have to accord with this following principle -- "With the ceasing of this, that ceases." Something "falling away" can only lead to the falling away of something else. Not to the arising of something else. The "old consciousness" and its associations have provided momentum for the new conditions, including consciousness, to form as they have. But they only "led on" to the next "active condition" and their passing had no 'conditioning impetus' IMO. It is only the "present active conditions" that have power to do conditioning. The "present active conditions" are the result of "past active conditions" but those "past active conditions" are done conditioning and are Absent. I think "absent condition" is a misnomer and by trying to tie it into "contiguity condition" it seems that those who hold this view are almost simultaneously running away from it. I think it is important to see conditions for what they really are. The idea of "absence condition" leads the mind in the wrong direction and actually obscures vision into conditionality IMO. .............................................................................. . Absence does not mean that the citta was never there; it means that the citta that has just fallen away assists by its absence the citta arising next to it; after it has fallen away it gives the next citta the opportunity to arise without any interval. ............................................................ TG: This last part to me sounds like a fictional fantasy of what someone thinks is happening. This is just a way of "thinking about" phenomena and not at all a representation of the "actuality" of phenomena IMO. For those claiming to teach "realities," this sounds pretty fishy to me. ;-) ......................................................................... The “Paììhåna” (Analytical Exposition, II, 23) refers to the arising and falling away of cittas in contiguity; the citta with its accompanying cetasikas that has just fallen away conditions the following citta with its accompanying cetasikas by way of absence- condition: ....................................................... TG: Yes, this is the position I am disagreeing with. .................................................................... “States, citta and cetasikas, which have just disappeared in contiguity, are related to present states, citta and cetasikas, by absence-condition.” .................................................................... TG: They are "related" I agree. I disagree most strongly that having "just disappeared," they are NOW doing any conditioning. ..................................................................... Only one citta at a time arises and then falls away, but cittas succeed one another from birth to death, and death is followed by rebirth. ....................................................................... TG: I don't see consciousness as composed of "individual cittas"...one popping up after the other ceases. I don't believe in this "staccato" view of phenomena. And I think it amounts to a type of "entity view." ........................................................................... The cycle of birth and death continues until all defilements have been eradicated and one finally passes away.... Disappearance-condition is similar to absence-condition but the word disappearance helps us to understand that the absence of the conditioning dhamma does not mean that it never was. Disappearance- condition also refers to the condition whereby the citta that has fallen away conditions the arising of the next citta. The word disappearance helps us to understand that the preceding citta, which is the conditioning dhamma, after it has reached its cessation moment, gives the opportunity for the arising of the subsequent citta, the conditioned dhamma, without any interval. ..................................................................... TG: The above just reinforces the problems of this view. It ignores that ACTUAL conditions that are occurring and has more to do with "hiding" conditional insight, than revealing it. The compilers of this view went overboard in "looking" for ways to think about conditions. These aren't actual conditions, just ways of thinking about conditionality...and not very good ways IMO. ......................................................................... ------- You sure do not deny past, present and future? I gave some examples to you from daily life, but O.K. if you do not find them relevant. You fall too soon over Abhidhamma terms. ............................................................................. TG: I think it is the "Abhidhamma terms" that have led to a failed view of phenomena. And an over-estimation of those terms bearing on "reality." I don't deny past, present, and future. .............................................................................. ........ This is a quote from the Sutta: ................................................................ TG: BB translates the end of the above thus -- "...that which is called 'mind,' and 'mentality,' and 'consciousness' arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night." This gives a far different impression that your translation (or should I say interpretation?) This statement would appear in no way to back up your "individual citta" outlook. ....................................................................... And remember the Sutta trext where the Buddha says that it is not possible to describe how fast citta changes. ......................................................................... TG: Consciousness responds very quickly, I don't dispute that at all. Thanks for the interesting points. TG OUT #93308 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 7:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: how to view the self TGrand458@... Hi Connie I think your post was very good! Good stuff to think about. I'm glad you gave it one more shot. Just a couple of comments here. Regarding "birth" being a condition for aging and death. The Buddha goes on to explain "how" that is to be understood. He simply asks -- if there was no birth, would aging and death arise? Ananda answers no. --- Here the Buddha isn't explaining the "processes" that cause aging and death, but merely the principle that if there was no birth, there would be no aging and death. I would concede that the Buddha probably felt it was more important for people to understand this principle, in view of ending suffering and the 12 fold chain, then the "mechanical processes" that "do the aging." Second point...I just flat disagree that "ended states" can "give an opportunity" to anything. They're done "giving anything." They already gave at the office. ;-) Also, it violates the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising: -- This being, that is, etc. I'll take the Buddha's teachings over Buddhaghosa's reiterations of his contemporaries, any day. I suspect Buddhaghosa would have too ;-) I'll flag myself for too much speculation here. TG OUT In a message dated 12/7/2008 2:17:55 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, nichicon@... writes: #93297 #93309 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 9:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/7/2008 12:36:05 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: The prior consciousness breaks up, The subsequent is born from that, They have no interval between, Nor gap [that separates the two]; while naught whatever passes over, Still rebirth-linking comes about.” ................................................................... TG: Changing conditions form "new" conditions. As conditions change, the "change" becomes the "new condition." Its not that 'something ceasing' has caused 'something else' to arise. Its just a seamless process of continual change. The words in your quote above are 'isolated concepts' trying to express a flowing analogical situation IMO. They do it in an awkward enough manner to get some people to believe that -- the ceasing of something is a condition for the arising of something else. Although they do appear to say that, I'm dubious if that was really their intent. I think these words are just trying to explain change and "over digitizing" their presentation of the way "change" really occurs. Thanks for conversation. TG #93310 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 2:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear TG, (and Nina), Regarding: TG: "As you posted last week or so, the gist of which was -- it is 'attention' that get 'interrupted' by a 'new' more dominant condition. -- We basically agreed on that outlook...as far as it goes." Scott: Agreement 'as far as it goes', hmmm. As I understand it, it is the succession of bhavanga cittas which are interrupted by an object, that object then serving as condition for the arising of other consciousness. Are you showing here that you've expropriated this Abhidhamma analysis of the process of perception and converted it into something you call 'attention' (bhavanga=attention; or the interruption of bhavanga=attention)? I suspect you'll disavow the whole notion of bhavanga citta suggesting it isn't in the suttas, while your reformulation, somehow, is. TG: "...This means it is the 'active sense contact experience' that propagates consciousness..." Scott: This is a created term - 'active sense contact experience' - and one I've not read in the suttas or anywhere. What does it mean? How does it improve on what is already in place? TG: "...The consciousness that is falling away would have to accord with this following principle -- 'With the ceasing of this, that ceases.' Something 'falling away' can only lead to the falling away of something else. Not to the arising of something else." Scott: You've concretely misunderstood this principle, as I've suggested before, seeing it as only unidirectional, which is simply not correct. How do you account for any arising then? Can there be two or more 'consciousnesses' at a time? If so, how many objects of these multiple, simultaneous consciousnesses at a time? TG: "...The 'old consciousness' and its associations have provided momentum for the new conditions, including consciousness, to form as they have. But they only 'led on' to the next 'active condition' and their passing had no 'conditioning impetus' IMO. It is only the 'present active conditions' that have power to do conditioning. The 'present active conditions' are the result of 'past active conditions' but those 'past active conditions' are done conditioning and are Absent." Scott: How does this 'momentum' function? Is it 'energy'? You imply that it has an effect 'over time' - from past to present. You've not done away with absence condition here, you've simply reworded it. Please explain how 'the present active conditions are the result of the past' without using absence condition. You can't eat your cake and have it too. Sincerely, Scott. #93311 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 9:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Nina Follow up.... I should have added in last post that the expressions in the quote below -- "have no interval in between" and "no gap" I think well reinforce my comments in last post about this quote. TG In a message dated 12/7/2008 12:36:05 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: The prior consciousness breaks up, The subsequent is born from that, They have no interval between, Nor gap [that separates the two]; while naught whatever passes over, Still rebirth-linking comes about.” #93312 From: TGrand458@... Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 11:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Scott In a message dated 12/7/2008 3:53:06 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear TG, (and Nina), Regarding: TG: "As you posted last week or so, the gist of which was -- it is 'attention' that get 'interrupted' by a 'new' more dominant condition. -- We basically agreed on that outlook...as far as it goes." Scott: Agreement 'as far as it goes', hmmm. As I understand it, it is the succession of bhavanga cittas which are interrupted by an object, that object then serving as condition for the arising of other consciousness. Are you showing here that you've expropriated this Abhidhamma analysis of the process of perception and converted it into something you call 'attention' (bhavanga=attentionsomething yo interruption of bhavanga=attention)interruption of bhavanga=attention whole notion of bhavanga citta suggesting it isn't in the suttas, while your reformulation, somehow, is. ..................................................... TG: You be best to stop assuming too much. The process of bhavanga consciousness would not affect my thesis at all in disavowing "absence condition" or "disappearance condition" which is the main topic that Nina and I were discussing at this time. Bhavanga consciousness is an interesting theory that I do not disavow for your information. I generally like the idea. It seems to work. I might have a different outlook than you on how it "mechanically functions," but I'm still working on it. Oh sure, I could read the text and rotely believe what they say...or I could use that as a guide and investigate it through direct experience. I'll do the latter. I know, I'm arrogant to the core to think that I could understand something like that. ......................................................................... TG: "...This means it is the 'active sense contact experience' that propagates consciousness.pro Scott: This is a created term - 'active sense contact experience' - and one I've not read in the suttas or anywhere. What does it mean? How does it improve on what is already in place? ....................................................... TG: I don't give a toot whether its a creative term or not. Insight is all about creating insight...not dogmatic ideology. But anyway, let's examine it for you ... "Active" means there is "activity occurring." "Sense" refers to the "senses." So together we have "senses that are active." I.E., there is "action occurring regarding senses." Now contact is -- "the coming together of sense object, sense base, and corresponding sense consciousness." That is "contact." This coming together produces as "experience." An "experience" is something that is "experienced." That means there is a "conscious reaction" to some type of stimuli. There now, that wasn't so hard to understand was it? Or...gosh... maybe you were just attempting to be disparaging? I'll leave it up to the audience. .............................................................. TG: "...The consciousness that is falling away would have to accord with this following principle -- 'With the ceasing of this, that ceases.' Something 'falling away' can only lead to the falling away of something else. Not to the arising of something else." Scott: You've concretely misunderstood this principle, ....................................................... TG: There's a surprise!!! Stop the presses. As we can see from this and below, you just "choose" to violate the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising and provide no support for doing so. I can only surmise that its because it conflicts with the "sacred commentaries." ;-) You say I only see the Buddha's Dependent Arising principles teaching uni-directionally (below)? That doesn't make any sense that I can figure in the context of the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising. I don't even think you can explain it, so I won't ask you to. Sounds like a hollow distraction. ............................................................ as I've suggested before, seeing it as only unidirectional, which is simply not correct. How do you account for any arising then? ................................................................... TG: #1 I don't "account for arising" by saying that something that is "absent" is the cause. LOL I'll leave that "flight of fancy" up to Abhidhamma. "Arising" or "ceasing" or "becoming-otherwise" are all mere "change." Phenomena change. The "new form" resulting from that change is what we consider an "arising." 'Arising,' 'ceasing,' or 'becoming-otherwise' are all expressions indicative of "change." The term "becoming-otherwise" should be reason enough for understanding that "arising" and ceasing" do not refer to existence and non-existence...but rather, a mere process of change. Current conditions "become-otherwise." An idea of a "thing" that arises is mere conventional outlook. Including the elements. Phenomena are actually just continuously changing. Yes yes yes, I know, permanence view. LOL ..................................................................... Can there be two or more 'consciousnesses' at a time? If so, how many objects of these multiple, simultaneous consciousnesses at a time? .................................. TG: I don't know where you're going with this so pass. .................................................. TG: "...The 'old consciousness' and its associations have provided momentum for the new conditions, including consciousness, to form as they have. But they only 'led on' to the next 'active condition' and their passing had no 'conditioning impetus' IMO. It is only the 'present active conditions' that have power to do conditioning. The 'present active conditions' are the result of 'past active conditions' but those 'past active conditions' are done conditioning and are Absent." Scott: How does this 'momentum' function? Is it 'energy'? You imply that it has an effect 'over time' - from past to present. You've not done away with absence condition here, you've simply reworded it. Please explain how 'the present active conditions are the result of the past' without using absence condition. You can't eat your cake and have it too. .......................................................... TG: "Absence condition" has soooo been done away with! Its in the dust heap of indefensible theories. BTW, I was almost sucked in to answering your questions on momentum. Wrote a paragraph on it. Then decided... Nah, you don't get to know. Maybe later if you're ready. Santa says you're on the naughty list so...my hands were tied. ;-/ TG OUT #93313 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 5:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/12/7 Scott : > Dear Herman, > > > H: "...Your assessment is possibly based on a view that the present is > aptly described as existing, and in that case, we should not then use > the same word existing to apply to nibbana. The being of nibbana is > not anything like the being of the present, and we should not confuse > the matter by using the same word 'exist' for both of them. For the > being of the present is anicca, and nibbana simply is." > > Scott: Okay. Nibbaana is timeless. Do you accept that Nibbaana > 'is'/'is real'/'has reality'/'is a reality'/'is not a nothing'/'is a > something'? > Yes, I accept that Nibbana is. And for the sake of precision only, that does not translate into Nibbana being one reality amongst other realities, nor does it translate into Nibbana being a something. > Me: "Here the thesis seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be experienced..." > > H: "It seems to me that 'experience through the mind' is identical > with thought..." > > Scott: No, this is not the way I see it. Mundane psychology would > suggest that 'thought' is the property of 'mind' but 'mind' according > to Abhidhamma is conditioned, momentary, and made up of impermanent > citta and cetasikas with various characteristics and functions. > 'Thoughts' (the object of 'thinking') is concept; the thinking is > naama. Nibbaana is 'experienced' by specialized sorts of > consciousness only in a series in the mind (as in not related to the > five senses - you can't literaly see Nibbaana). Nibbaana cannot be an > object of experience simply due to thinking about it. OK. > > H: "...If so, you are saying that the existence of nibbana is mind > dependent. The view that being is mind dependent is called idealism, > and I am happy for you to have that view..." > > Scott: No, Nibbaana is not 'mind-dependent'. Nibbaana is the > Unconditioned. If we've established that it is a reality (pick your > own term) and that it is timeless, then we've established that > Nibbaana exists independent of 'mind.' ('Mind', in this sense, > referring generically to conditioned realities - naama.) This does > not alter the fact that Nibbaana serves as object for certain types of > consciousness. It causes 'mind', under proper conditions, to bend > towards it. OK. Nibbana is not nama. And it is not rupa either. And it has no characteristic whatsoever. So what is it that is known when nibbana serves as object for whatever consciousness? > > H: "...But I don't think that Buddhism is idealist in nature. DO is > quite unequivocal that nama and rupa mutually condition each other." > > Scott: There are different ways in which naama and ruupa are mutually > conditioned/conditioning. And an object is condition for the > consciousness experiencing it. Are you saying that nibbana is a condition for nama? > > Me: "The thesis here seems to be that Nibbaana cannot be known." > > H: "Yes, as in directly known, like red, or soft, or ouch, any > experience unmediated by thought. Absence can only be known in the > context of presence." > > Scott: Is Nibbaana then equated with 'absence'? As in 'nothing'? The > phrase 'unmediated by thought' is hard for me to understand. Can you > please elaborate? 'Red' is ruupa, so not comparable to Nibbaana; > 'soft' is ruupa, so, again, not comparable to Nibbaana; 'ouch' is post > 'hardness' thinking and conceptual, I'd guess, if I'm following you. > So Nibbaana is not experienced as these things are. Is that it? How > is it 'experienced'? Nibbana is. Nibbana equates to being. Experience of any kind is identical with knowing (something). It is not possible to know being, it has no characteristics. It is only possible to know characteristics. > > As far as I know, naama *is* experience. We are dealing with a > 'mental' process here - not a material one (generally speaking and > leaving out the whole thing about 'mind-base'). How can you say that > thought 'mediates' experience? This is psychology but is it Dhamma - > one never knows with you ;-) - ? Also, can you be clearer regarding > whether or not the view allows for the experience of Nibbaana - > cessation (or whatever synonym you wish) - in a significant way, like > that it ends further becoming? Nibbana is cessation, not of being, but of knowing. It is self-contradictory to know cessation. > > H: "...So absence is known indirectly, or as you say, through the mind > door. But not as the presence of a characteristic, or as a present > thought, but as the after-the-fact realisation that there were no > characteristics i.e. there was no knowing." > > Scott: Is this the living arahat who thinks about Nibbaana 'after the > fact' (you don't seem to dig that whole idea)? Is this the moment of > reviewing consciousness which arises after the arising and falling > away of the Path and the Fruit? 'Known indirectly' in what way? By what? I don't think there is anything that knows. But there is knowing. And all knowing is anicca. There is also just being, which from a perspective of knowing, is the absence, or the cessation of knowing. But when there is no knowing, there is no knowing of that. But it can be known, after the fact, that there was no knowing. > > At any rate, over to you, and yeah, if we keep going on this topic > you know we'll both go insane too, right? I agree :-) Me, myself, I #93314 From: "connie" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 9:05 pm Subject: Re: Vis. revisited. nichiconn Dear Visitors, PPn i, 7. That is why the Blessed One said: 'When a wise man, established well in Virtue, / Develops Consciousness and Understanding, / Then as a bhikkhu ardent and sagacious / He succeeds in disentangling this tangle'. 8. Herein there is nothing for him to do about the [native] understanding on account of which he is called wise; for that has been established in him simply by the influence of previous kamma. c: The wise one is triple rooted - from birth! That just sunk in today. Thanks, Nina... I hadn't planned on opening up Nanamoli's translation when I finished PM Tin's. peace, connie #93315 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 8:04 pm Subject: What is Suffering? bhikkhu0 Friends: What is Suffering? At Savatthi. Sitting to one side, the Venerable Radha said to the Blessed One: Venerable sir, it is said, 'suffering, suffering, What now, venerable sir, is suffering? Radha, all form is suffering, all feeling is suffering, all perception is suffering, all intentional mental formation is suffering, and consciousness itself is suffering. Understanding this, Bhikkhu, a well instructed Noble Disciple experiences disgust towards any form, disgust towards any feeling, disgust towards any perception, disgust towards any mental construction, & disgust towards consciousness itself! Experiencing disgust, he becomes disillusioned! Through this disillusion his mind is released. When mind is released, one instantly knows: This mind is liberated, and one understands: Extinguished is rebirth, this Noble Life is all completed, done is what should be done, there is no state of being beyond this... Comments: These 5 clusters of clinging are what denotes both the internal 'individual' and the 'external' “real” world. However as they continually change, no same 'self'=identity or 'substance'=reality can ever be found neither internally nor externally... Since always changing they are thus always lost & therefore are they always ultimately suffering... An inner mental prison of craving for something inevitably and spontaneously vanishing... A feverish Folly strategy… .... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya 22:55 III 185 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net What is Suffering? #93316 From: "connie" Date: Sun Dec 7, 2008 9:34 pm Subject: Wonderful Paritta chanting nichiconn Hi Phil, All, just wanted to give the link to Bhikkhu Bodhi's lectures on the Sutta Nipata for anyone interested in hearing more, but this one will also give you his talks on the perfections (next page) and MN. If you've tried to listen to older versions of his MN talks, you'll appreciate the improved audio. http://www.bodhimonastery.net/bm/about-buddhism/audio.html peace, connie #93317 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 2:04 am Subject: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Dear friends, If someone sees a person he is acquainted with or he has a particular relation with, he thinks, as soon as he has seen him even for a moment, a long story about him. If he sees a person he does not know, the story is short; he thinks only for a little while about him and then the story is over. He does not continue to think about him. As a person develops paaa, he acquires more understanding of the excellent qualities of the Buddha and of the Dhamma he taught in all details. One can appreciate the teachings from the beginning level, the level of restraint, or guarding, of the senses (samvara sla) with regard to the Paatimokkha, the Disciplinary code for the monks. This is the conduct through body and speech befitting the samana, the person who is a monk, who leads a peaceful life. We read in the Visuddhimagga (I, 50) about the restraint of the monk with regard to seeing: What is proper resort as guarding? Here A bhikkhu, having entered inside a house, having gone into a street, goes with downcast eyes, seeing the length of a plough yoke, restrained, not looking at an elephant, not looking at a horse, a carriage, a pedestrian, a woman, a man, not looking up, not looking down, not staring this way and that. This is called proper resort as guarding. This was said to remind us not to continue the story after the seeing and dwell on it for a long time, thinking in various ways of this or that person or matter. When we have seen, we should know that it is only seeing. No matter whether one looks no further than the length of a plough yoke ahead or not, there is seeing and then it is gone. In that way one will not be absorbed in the outward appearance and details. Paaa can clearly understand that it is just because of thinking that we are used to seeing the outward world which is full of people. If we do not think, there is only seeing and then it is gone. Can there be many people at that moment? However, one is used to thinking for a long time, and thus one is bound to think time and again of many different subjects. --------------- Nina. #93318 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 2:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. revisited. nilovg Dear Connie, Op 8-dec-2008, om 6:05 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > 8. Herein there is nothing for him to do about the [native] > understanding on account of which he is called wise; for that has > been established in him simply by the influence of previous kamma. > > c: The wise one is triple rooted - from birth! That just sunk in > today. ------- N: Yes, I would not have noticed either the meaning of 'native', the roots one is born with. As you say, born with wisdom, the vipaakacitta is accompanied by wisdom and this is conditioned already. No self who can do anything about it. It has far-reaching consequences. If one is not born with wisdom, no attainment of jhaana and no attainment of enlightenment is possible in that life. And if one is born with wisdom, understanding has to be developed during that life as is explained further. Nina. #93319 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: how to view the self egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/12/7 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > > It's all about understanding, isn't it? - understanding the > advantages of detachment and other kusala states, and understanding > the disadvantages of attachment (etc). Right understanding is the > greatest form of kusala. > But why is understanding more advantageous than a lack of it? Does some better end await the wise person? In the end, don't we all meet the same end? You will understand that I am just continuing the discussion, I have no better answers than any one else. > <. . .> > H: > More benefits. But now I need to ask, beneficial for what? You > have not yet identified what your method will achieve for it's > practitioner. > -------------------- > > In its own right it is a handy piece of conventional wisdom: "I > should not delay paying respect to the Buddha: I should not delay > showing kindness to my friends. Life is too short for delaying!" Just to keep you honest, your advice was to stay as close as possible to the present. I imagine that whether our life will be long or short is of no concern to us in that state. The future, like the past is immaterial to understanding now, isn't it? > > But it is also found in the Pali texts, and so it is not just > conventional wisdom; it is also a way of understanding paramattha > dhammas - now. > > ------------------------------ > <. . .> > H: > Just so that you know my motivation in writing, I see the > ascending ladder of jhanas as being the practical steps of the method > you are talking about. But if someone were to ask me what are jhanas > good for, I could only say that they are a pleasant, but temporary > diversion. > ------------------------------- > > Yes, without right understanding of paramattha dhammas everything > (even jhana) is, at best, a temporary diversion. > > Is that what you meant? :-) I have no particular agenda, honest :-) Me, myself, I #93320 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Wonderful Paritta chanting philofillet Hi Sarah > Thanks for calling by and kindly sharing the links. I'm going to try and listen to some sometime this weekend, thank you. I'd like to listen to Ven Silananda as you've highly praised the audio. Yes, I find it remarkable. To be honest, the group droning aspect of the usual chants we can hear takes away their warmth, I think. But you'll see what I mean about U Silananda's warmth which I've appreciated in other talks. I particularly like the Mangalla (?) sutta, in which blessings are listed, including some very mundane things I appreciate especially.As with many suttas, it progresses through some very mundane factors such as supporting one's spouse and children, and reaches attainments towards the end. Thanks also for your nice words on friendship. Of course you are a Dhamma friend for life, though for the time being there won't be much discussion. I noticed that one of the blessings listed in that suttas was "discussing dhamma at suitable times." It really isn't suitable for me now, there are other duties, so I think that's why I always struggle and fail to pursue discussions. I sense it isn't suitable to have a lot of discussion now, and DSG always is compelling and there are so many posts. For the time being I will be at a quieter group (hosted by Tep) where there aren't as many posts and I can occasionally post without getting carried away. But I'll be back here someday, no doubt about that. Metta, Phil #93321 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:06 am Subject: Re: Wonderful Paritta chanting philofillet Hi Jon > To my understanding, the kalyana-mitta ('kalyaa.na-mitta') is any > person who is a Dhamma friend for the moment. That is to say, it > refers to an instance of being helped with some aspect of the Dhamma > by another. Hmmm. OK, I'm not sure this is the way I've heard it. I think it is taught that a person qualifies by virtue of certain consistencies. For example, in Mangalla sutta I just quoted to Sarah, it is said that it is a blessing to have met a person who has done something or other to the kilesas. I don't think it means momentarily. For example, from having seen you here at DSG for several years, I can say that you are a person who has made great progress in weaking the defilement of anger - I have never seen a hint of it in your posts. Of course I would need to hang out with you and perhaps experiment by insulting your wife or something...but I think you are a person who has made great progress in weakening anger and I can consider you a kalyana-mitta in that sense since it is a weakness of mind. The Buddha says that we know people's virtue by associating with them for some time. That's pretty clear. He doesn't say we see a moment of virtue in someone and appreciate it as something special, not from what I've seen, but you could be right. I'll keep thinking on it. I'll drop it there, thanks. Metta, Phil #93322 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:09 am Subject: Re: Wonderful Paritta chanting philofillet Hi Connie. Thanks so much, an awesome link. I didn't know about most of these series. And since I am so keen on the parittas these days, very, very helpful. Thanku thanku thanku (sadhu plus thank you) Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Hi Phil, All, > > just wanted to give the link to Bhikkhu Bodhi's lectures on the Sutta Nipata #93323 From: "Phil" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:14 am Subject: Re: how to view the self philofillet Hi Ken Hmm. The below is interesting to reflect on, thanks! Metta, (monsieur fabriquer des bonbons.) > When it is properly explained they can see how living for shorter and > shorter periods could help even more. Eventually when the subject > returns to the presently arisen namas and rupas they say, "Ah, now I > get it!" :-) > > Ken H > (monsieur juste le moment) > #93324 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self egberdina Hi connie, 2008/12/7 connie : > hey, TG, > > not sure which conditions you accept. just that I was thinking earlier that the absence of the past life might be required for the appearance of this one. It is an enormous leap to go from seeing one thing following another to then say that it was the absence of the former that brought the latter about. Does the absence of the night condition the arising of the day? Me, myself, I #93325 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 4:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: how to view the self egberdina Hi connie, 2008/12/7 connie : > Hey, TG, > > Just so we know what they might be, here's what Buddhaghosa writes about those last two in The Path of Purity: > << Non-material states which have ceased quite immediately and which render service by giving an opportunity for the proceeding of immaterial states which arise immediately after themselves are the non-presence-cause. As it has been said: "States of mind and mental properties which have ceased quite immediately are in the non-presence causal relation to the present states of mind and mental properties." > Those which render service through absence are the absence-causes. As it has been said: "States of mind and mental properties which are absent quite immediately are the absence-cause of the present states of mind and mental properties." >> > What is quite immediately absent, indeed, is an understanding of the difference between necessity and sufficiency It doesn't matter how well he disguises it with his characteristic poor wording, Buddhagosa is enthralled by a logical fallacy. And a few others with him, it appears. Ho hum. Me, myself, I #93326 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 5:37 am Subject: Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear TG, Thanks for the reply: TG: "...Bhavanga consciousness is an interesting theory that I do not disavow for your information. I generally like the idea. It seems to work. I might have a different outlook than you on how it 'mechanically functions,' but I'm still working on it...or I could use that as a guide and investigate it through direct experience. I'll do the latter..." Scott: Sorry for anticipating your disavowal when none was forthcoming. As for 'different outlooks' on the Dhamma I remain, as you know, highly skeptical. For one thing, I can't imagine how you will recast bhavanga-citta - perhaps to suggest one call it 'the sub-conscious' or some such. I'm sorry to have to wonder as well how it is you plan to use 'direct experience' to 'investigate' the functioning of the 'mechanics' of bhavanga-citta. I'll be considered rude if I ask but (in for a penny, in for a pound) - how do you plan on doing this? I'll take another liberty to anticipate that the methodology won't proceed along any lines such as through the slow development of satipa.t.thaana, where impersonal consciousness and mental factors perform their characteristic functions. I'd hazard that this 'investigation' will be an intellectual one - simply by thinking about it. How will you propose to directly experience bhavanga-citta? TG: "...'Active' means there is 'activity occurring.' 'Sense' refers to the 'senses.' So together we have 'senses that are active.' I.E., there is 'action occurring regarding senses.' Now contact is -- 'the coming together of sense object, sense base, and corresponding sense consciousness.' That is 'contact.' This coming together produces as 'experience.' An 'experience' is something that is 'experienced.' That means there is a 'conscious reaction' to some type of stimuli." Scott: Thanks for the clarification. When you suggest 'senses that are active,' I wonder if you are referring to all senses active at once? Or one sense, then another, then another, active in succession? Does 'active' mean 'in the process of experiencing?' When you refer to the familiar Dhamma terms such as 'sense-object,' 'sense-base,' and 'sense-consciousness,' do you mean to use these terms in the way in which they are analyzed and defined within the Abhidhamma? Or do you have your own definitions in place? By 'conscious reaction' I assume you are limiting your data to that which 'a person' thinks he or she is experiencing or imagines him- or herself to be aware of experiencing - i.e., to experience that is conditioned by ignorance. The Abhidhamma and Commentarial conception of lightning-fast moments of consciousness arising and falling away much faster than so-called 'conscious awareness' (mundane) can grasp would more likely lead to a lack of awareness or to a process that would be more likely to be labeled 'unconscious' in relation to the 'conscious awareness' of wholes or 'the compact'. TG: "...As we can see from this and below, you just 'choose' to violate the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising and provide no support for doing so." Scott: Yes, I've made an error, but I'll rectify it below. There are a number of places in which this description of pa.ticca samuppaada is found. I've taken it from SN 12 21 (1) Dasabalasutta.m "...'Such is form, such its origin, such its passing away; such is feeling, such its origin, such its passing away; such is perception, such its origin, such its passing away; such are volitional formations, such their origin, such their passing away; such is consciousness, such its origin, such its passing away. Thus when this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be, with the cessation of this, that ceases..." [...iti ruupa.m iti ruupassa samudayo iti ruupassa attha"ngamo, iti vedanaa iti vedanaaya samudayo iti vedanaaya attha"ngamo, iti sa~n~naa iti sa~n~naaya samudayo iti sa~n~naaya attha"ngamo, iti sa"nkhaaraa iti sa"nkhaaraana.m samudayo iti sa"nkhaaraana.m attha"ngamo, iti vi~n~na.naaa.m iti vi~n~na.nassa samudayo iti vi~n~na.nassa attha"ngamo. Iti imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti, imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati. Imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti, imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.] What I've mixed up here is that the above refers to existence (as in 'this life') and, when talking about origin, existence, and cessation, it is referring, not to momentary dhammas as is explained in the method of the Pa.t.thaana, but to the origin and passing away of the five aggregates (cessation occurring at the moment of the Path and Fruit and the final passing away of an arahat). What I've mixed up are the two modes of explanation between the Pa.ticca Sammupaada (Dependent Origination) and the Pa.t.thaana. (Conditional Relations). What I'd forgotten, the view prevents you from accepting, that is, there is difference between these two modes of explanation and they are not to be mixed. TG: "...You say I only see the Buddha's Dependent Arising principles teaching uni-directionally (below)? That doesn't make any sense that I can figure in the context of the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising." Scott: See above. You are correct to point out my momentary lapse. TG: #1 I don't 'account for arising' by saying that something that is 'absent' is the cause...'Arising' or 'ceasing' or 'becoming-otherwise' are all mere 'change.' Phenomena change. The 'new form' resulting from that change is what we consider an 'arising.' 'Arising,' 'ceasing,' or 'becoming-otherwise' are all expressions indicative of 'change.'" Scott: Since D.O. refers to this existence, and not to the moment or to C.R., and since these two are not to be mixed as you do above, this is the error I see you committing. Without an understanding of C.R. and the focus of this mode of explanation, you cannot appreciate the subtleties of the teaching. TG: "The term 'becoming-otherwise' should be reason enough for understanding that 'arising' and 'ceasing' do not refer to existence and non-existence...but rather, a mere process of change. Current conditions 'become-otherwise.'" Scott: No, D.O. does refer to existence. C.R. refers to 'process of change' but does so in reference to dhammas with characteristics and functions. TG: "An idea of a 'thing' that arises is mere conventional outlook. Including the elements. Phenomena are actually just continuously changing." Scott: No. I'll stop for now as this is too long already... Sincerely, Scott. #93327 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 7:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" nilovg Dear TG, Since Connie gave me homework, I try to answer several posts of yours in one, if you do not mind. Op 27-nov-2008, om 1:31 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Don't get me wrong, I consider mindfulness EXTREMELY important. I just > consider the "ultimate reality view" that you overlay upon your > brand of > mindfulness to be uncalled for and detrimental. And not the > teaching of the Buddha. ------- N: Mindfulness of what? Surely only of what appears now? You always come back to this: ultimate realities, and: distinct or own characteristics and you find this reification. Ultimate realities, we can also just call them dhammas, and this term is used to distinguish them from concepts. A reality like seeing is always seeing, even if you give it another name. Or lobha, it is always lobha. This is not so with concepts like a table that is an impression of a whole and has a specific lable or name. A reality, not a concept, can be an object of direct awareness, without having to name it. But here we differ. Characteristic, I do not think merely of the three general charactreistics of impermanence, dukkha and anatta which are fully realized at enlightenment. I refer to a beginning of understanding: this or that reality has a characteristic, meaning: it can be experienced as such when it appears to sati. Distinct characteristic: seeing is different from hearing or from lobha. Thus these are just words helping us to develop direct awareness and understanding. Not a big deal what terms we use. ------ We discussed absence condition. Same as contiguity-condition, anantara paccaya. Antara is in between, anantara: no gap. If one citta is not succeeded by the next one without gap, you would drop dead. Without citta no life. We discussed S II, 61 about mind. You quoted B.B.'s transl. I compared his note, p. 770: < The statement should not be taken to mean that one thing arises and something altogether different, which had not arisen, ceases."Day and night" is said by way of continuity, taking a continuity of lesser duration than the previous one (i. e., the one stated for the body). But one citta is not able to endure for a whole day or a whole night. Even in the time of a fingersnap many hundred thousand of ko.tis of cittas arise and cease...> Perhaps it all boils down to the ways you and I see citta. You also said: no prenascence in the D.O. You mean, everything is smultaneous, the conditioning factors and the conditioned factors? But ignorance that is akusala conditions merritorious kamma- formations. How come? The Vis. explains: not by conascence but by upanissaya paccaya, decisive support. ------- Quote N: Only one citta at a time arises and then falls away, but cittas succeed one another from birth to death, and death is followed by rebirth. ....................................................................... TG: I don't see consciousness as composed of "individual cittas"...one popping up after the other ceases. I don't believe in this "staccato" view of phenomena. And I think it amounts to a type of "entity view." ------ N: See B.B.'s note if you like that. No entity or reification, each citta that arises falls away. You dislike: each citta, and here we differ. Can't be helped ;--)) Nina. #93328 From: "connie" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 9:33 am Subject: how to view the self nichiconn Hi, Herman, c: > I was thinking earlier that the absence of the past life might be required for the appearance of this one. h: It is an enormous leap to go from seeing one thing following another to then say that it was the absence of the former that brought the latter about. Does the absence of the night condition the arising of the day? c: again, Just so we know what they might be, here's what Buddhaghosa writes about those last two in The Path of Purity: << Non-material states which have ceased quite immediately and which render service by giving an opportunity for the proceeding of immaterial states which arise immediately after themselves are the non-presence-cause. As it has been said: "States of mind and mental properties which have ceased quite immediately are in the non-presence causal relation to the present states of mind and mental properties." > Those which render service through absence are the absence-causes. As it has been said: "States of mind and mental properties which are absent quite immediately are the absence-cause of the present states of mind and mental properties." >> tho not clear about it, by past and present life, i meant the death and rebirth consciousnesses. If you mean night as in darkness of ignorance and day as in light of wisdom, that is, states of mind and mental properties, yes. Otherwise, 'What is quite immediately absent, indeed, is an understanding of the difference between' the different types of realities and we remain 'enthralled by a logical fallacy. ... Ho hum.' connie #93329 From: "connie" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 9:39 am Subject: how to view the self nichiconn thanks, TG, if i may, one last word: buddhaghosa's reiterations were not (#93308) so much those "of his contemporaries" as the prior teachers of the ariyan lineage. all a matter of faith, whether buddhas arise or not. peace out, man, connie #93330 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 5:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts TGrand458@... Hi Scott In a message dated 12/8/2008 6:37:49 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: As for 'different outlooks' on the Dhamma I remain, as you know, highly skeptical. For one thing, I can't imagine how you will recast bhavanga-citta - perhaps to suggest one call it 'the sub-conscious' or some such. I'm sorry to have to wonder as well how it is you plan to use 'direct experience' to 'investigate' the functioning of the 'mechanics' of bhavanga-citta. ....................................................... TG: You need not worry about my "casting calls." You have the books that tell you what to think and that should be sufficient. ;-) .......................................................... I'll be considered rude if I ask but (in for a penny, in for a pound) - how do you plan on doing this? I'll take another liberty to anticipate that the methodology won't proceed along any lines such as through the slow development of satipa.t.thaana, where impersonal consciousness and mental factors perform their characteristic functions. I'd hazard that this 'investigation' will be an intellectual one - simply by thinking about it. ............................................................... TG: Here's a major problem. You CORRECTLY state that 'consciousness' and 'mental factors' are impersonal ... but then follow it immediately by saying that they "perform their characteristic functions." "They" aren't performing "their" anything. "They" are impersonal 'resultants' of forces beyond "their" control. What "they" do, is just based on conditional circumstances. The idea that they have "their own characteristics" is just self view creeping in the outlook. In actuality, they are like a marionette. Just pushed along by "something else." Hey, its in the Visuddhimagga so its got to be right, right? LOL As to your assumption about my method of practice. I split my time pretty equally between mindfulness and thinking thank you. Maybe 60/40 on the side of mindfulness. However, much of the Satipatthana Sutta can be seen to deal with 'reviewing causal factors' which is almost exclusively what I do when I'm thinking. So if that is considered, then its more like 90/10 mindfulness. My practice is far more driven by directly realizing, than intellectually conjecturing. If I was more of an intellectual, I would have certainly learned Pali and been more of a scholar. However, I have yet to meet one university professor specializing in Buddhism, who I would care to emulate in terms of their understanding. From what I could tell, they had little. There must be others I haven't met that would not fit that mold. This is not meant to disparage scholarship either. I think if someone can do both, its the best of both worlds. The conditions of "your" mind are different than "mine." You have no way to understand how I've arrived at my understandings. You merely guess base on your conditions, which have not gone the route of "my" conditions. There's no easy way to bridge the gap. ................................................................ How will you propose to directly experience bhavanga-citta? ...................................................... TG: I haven't proposed. How do you directly understand it? Or is reading it in a book sufficient proof for you? Or do you not accept it? ............................................................ TG: "...'Active' means there is 'activity occurring.' 'Sense' refers to the 'senses.' So together we have 'senses that are active.' I.E., there is 'action occurring regarding senses.' Now contact is -- 'the coming together of sense object, sense base, and corresponding sense consciousness.corresponding sense conscious together produces as 'experience.together produces as 'experienc is 'experienced.is 'experienced.' That means there is a 'consci type of stimuli." Scott: Thanks for the clarification. When you suggest 'senses that are active,' I wonder if you are referring to all senses active at once? ................................................... TG: I guess we could wonder almost anything if we wanted to. ;-) I wonder if you're sitting in a tree while you're writing this? On a lap-top perhaps? .................................................. Or one sense, then another, then another, active in succession? Does 'active' mean 'in the process of experiencing?p When you refer to the familiar Dhamma terms such as 'sense-object,W 'sense-base,'sense-base,' and 's'sense-base,' and ' terms in the way in which they are analyzed and defined within the Abhidhamma? Or do you have your own definitions in place? ................................................. TG: Try the Suttas. They don't bite. ..................................................... By 'conscious reaction' I assume you are limiting your data to that which 'a person' thinks he or she is experiencing or imagines him- or herself to be aware of experiencing - i.e., to experience that is conditioned by ignorance. ..................................................... TG: Ahhh, you'd be assuming wrongly again. ........................................................ The Abhidhamma and Commentarial conception of lightning-fast moments of consciousness arising and falling away much faster than so-called 'conscious awareness' (mundane) can grasp would more likely lead to a lack of awareness or to a process that would be more likely to be labeled 'unconscious' in relation to the 'conscious awareness' of wholes or 'the compact'. ............................................................ TG: How about a source for the Abhidhamma/commentarial outlook of lightning fast moments of consciousness that are much fast than we can grasp. And I hope you have something better than a "lightning bolt" analogy. I'm not denying it, I just want to see what they have said that makes you say this so forcefully. And I agree the mind is extremely fast. But the rudimentary causal connectiveness of mentality can be discerned. I'm sure with more practice it can become more refined. ........................................................................ TG: "...As we can see from this and below, you just 'choose' to violate the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising and provide no support for doing so." Scott: Yes, I've made an error, ....................................................... TG: <------- fell off his chair with minor stroke. ........................................................ but I'll rectify it below. There are a number of places in which this description of pa.ticca samuppaada is found. I've taken it from SN 12 21 (1) Dasabalasutta.f "...'Such is form, such its origin, such its passing away; such is feeling, such its origin, such its passing away; such is perception, such its origin, such its passing away; such are volitional formations, such their origin, such their passing away; such is consciousness, such its origin, such its passing away. Thus when this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be, with the cessation of this, that ceases..." [...iti ruupa.m iti ruupassa samudayo iti ruupassa attha"ngamo, iti vedanaa iti vedanaaya samudayo iti vedanaaya attha"ngamo, iti sa~n~naa iti sa~n~naaya samudayo iti sa~n~naaya attha"ngamo, iti sa"nkhaaraa iti sa"nkhaaraana.iti sa"nkhaaraana.m samudayoiti sa"nkhaaraana. vi~n~na.naaa.vi~n~na.naaa.m iti vi~n~na.nassa samudayo attha"ngamo. Iti imasmi.m sati ida.m hoti, imassuppaadaa ida.m uppajjati. Imasmi.m asati ida.m na hoti, imassa nirodhaa ida.m nirujjhati.] What I've mixed up here is that the above refers to existence (as in 'this life') and, when talking about origin, existence, and cessation, it is referring, not to momentary dhammas as is explained in the method of the Pa.t.thaana, but to the origin and passing away of the five aggregates (cessation occurring at the moment of the Path and Fruit and the final passing away of an arahat). .............................................................. TG: Well, you still got it wrong. Its a "causal principle" that applies to all conditions anytime, anywhere, anyhow. ............................................................. What I've mixed up are the two modes of explanation between the Pa.ticca Sammupaada (Dependent Origination) and the Pa.t.thaana. (Conditional Relations). What I'd forgotten, the view prevents you from accepting, that is, there is difference between these two modes of explanation and they are not to be mixed. ............................................................. TG: Hummmmm... Makes the Patthana look bad if it cannot accurately reflect the Suttas, much less actuality. I'd say this is Exhibit A as to why Abhidhamma is unreliable... much less the commentaries that tend to exaggerate such errors. ................................................................ TG: "...You say I only see the Buddha's Dependent Arising principles teaching uni-directionally (below)? That doesn't make any sense that I can figure in the context of the Buddha's principles of Dependent Arising." Scott: See above. You are correct to point out my momentary lapse. ................................................................ TG: I'm sorry Scott, I'm just flat out experiencing hallucinations now. Please be advised that anything I say after this is probably deranged. .................................................................. TG: #1 I don't 'account for arising' by saying that something that is 'absent' is the cause...'Arising' or 'ceasing' or 'becoming-otherwise'becoming-otherwise' are all mere 'change.' P 'new form' resulting from that change is what we consider an 'arising.' 'Arising,' 'ceasing,' or 'becoming-otherwise'arising.' 'A expressions indicative of 'change.'" Scott: Since D.O. refers to this existence, and not to the moment or to C.R., and since these two are not to be mixed as you do above, this is the error I see you committing. Without an understanding of C.R. and the focus of this mode of explanation, you cannot appreciate the subtleties of the teaching. ................................................................. TG: Oh, I'm feeling much better now. Things seem to be as normal. D.O. is only restricted to "conditions." There are no other restrictions. ............................................................ TG: "The term 'becoming-otherwiseTG: "The term 'becoming-otherwise understanding that 'arising' and 'ceasing' do not refer to existence and non-existence.and non-existence...but rather, a mere process conditions 'become-otherwise.co Scott: No, D.O. does refer to existence. C.R. refers to 'process of change' but does so in reference to dhammas with characteristics and functions. ........................................................ TG: Shall I post the Buddha's "fire stick" analogy, or are you familiar with it? That analogy is a demonstration of D.O. Many others in the Suttas dealing with inanimate objects as well. D.O. applies to all conditions. The 12 Fold Chain being the most important D.O. conditional set of circumstances for the Buddha's purposes of teaching how to eliminate suffering. BTW, When I spoke of existence and non-existence above, I was referring to the Buddha's denial of such...in the ultimate sense. Are you familiar with that quote, or should I post it as well? TG OUT Thanks for stopping. This is about twice as long as I care to post. ............................................................. TG: "An idea of a 'thing' that arises is mere conventional outlook. Including the elements. Phenomena are actually just continuously changing." Scott: No. I'll stop for now as this is too long already... Sincerely, Scott. #93331 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 5:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/8/2008 8:19:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: N: Mindfulness of what? Surely only of what appears now? ................................................ TG: Before I continue with this, please answer this question... Do you consider the full practice described in the Satipatthana Sutta to be the practice of mindfulness? TG #93332 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 5:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] how to view the self TGrand458@... Hi Connie In a message dated 12/8/2008 10:39:35 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, nichicon@... writes: if i may, one last word: buddhaghosa'if i may, one last word: buddhaghosa's reiterations were not (#93308) so much those "of his contemporaries" as the prior teachers of the ariyan lineage. all a .......................................................... TG: My understanding is that the Visuddhimagga was meant to reiterate the best understanding available to the best monks at Buddhaghosa's time. Obviously, or hopefully, that understand was, yes, based on the ariyan lineage. Still, what was available at Buddhaghosa's time, was what was contemporary to him. Thank goodness the lineage has been passed down and even we have a amazingly good record of it! TG #93333 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 11:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts nilovg Dear TG and Scott, following your dialogue, commiserating with TG who fell off his chair because of a black out, or what? I found some material, see below. Here you have your lightning flashes. Op 8-dec-2008, om 19:17 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > The Abhidhamma and Commentarial conception of lightning-fast moments > of consciousness arising and falling away much faster than so-called > 'conscious awareness' (mundane) can grasp would more likely lead to a > lack of awareness or to a process that would be more likely to be > labeled 'unconscious' in relation to the 'conscious awareness' of > wholes or 'the compact'. > > ............................................................ > > > TG: How about a source for the Abhidhamma/commentarial outlook of > lightning > fast moments of consciousness that are much fast than we can grasp. > And I > hope you have something better than a "lightning bolt" analogy. I'm > not > denying it, I just want to see what they have said that makes you > say this so > forcefully. ---------- N: The Dhammasanga.nii, when dealing with the first type of kusala citta, states: and then it enumerates the many cetasikas that assist the citta. The Expositor (p. 76 etc.) explains numerous meanings of samaya, such as: time or occasion, concurrence of causes, moment. It explains that the should be classed as the one moment in the sense of occasion, they form the occasion for the production of merit. It states: It shows the extreme shortness of the time in the occurrence of kusala citta and it points out . It stresses that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: ------ Nina. #93334 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 11:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" nilovg Hi TG, Op 8-dec-2008, om 19:20 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > TG: Before I continue with this, please answer this question... Do you > consider the full practice described in the Satipatthana Sutta to > be the > practice of mindfulness? -------- N: Yes, from the beginning to the end. But do not forget the beginning, we should not overreach to a level we are not ready for yet. Nina. #93335 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:07 pm Subject: The speed of cittas egberdina Peoples, It may be beneficial to consider what speed is, before the speed of cittas is used to explain something away. Speed is a measurement. A measurement is a comparison between one thing and another. Speed is relative. It is claimed by some that there is only ever one citta. It is mostly the same people who claim that each citta arises and vanishes with great speed. What is not understood by those who make this claim is that the speed with which something falls away can only be known in relation to something else, which is falling away at a different rate. But there is nothing else, for there is only this one citta. Either the speed of cittas cannot be known, and should not be speculated about, or there is something else that knows the falling away of citta, whilst it remains standing, relatively. You cannot have your single citta, and it's rapidity. Sorry. Me, myself, I #93336 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts truth_aerator Dear Scott, > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > A: "Scott, that sutta says that Nibbana is unconditioned and samsara > is conditioned. Please tell me a sutta where the Buddha says that > concepts are eternal, not subject to change!" > > Scott: I don't play the 'tell me a sutta game'. Then we may have trouble agreeing coz I take Buddha as THE teacher. > A: "A person with right view cannot hold anything as permanent. > Concepts are fully conditioned and thus not self, like the rest of > things in Samsara." > > Scott: Pa~n~natti are not 'fully conditioned' because they do not >have an arising, a change while persisting, nor a vanishing. Sutta quote please. Pannati are objects of the mind, which are fully conditioned, they certainly aren't objects of the nose, eyes or the other 3 senses. In this sense > they are timeless. This is why pa~n~natti are not real in the > ultimate sense. Then Avijja is not real, etc etc etc, . With best wishes, #93337 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:28 pm Subject: Re: Suttas in which the Buddha held back the deep teaching? truth_aerator Hi Jon, >--- "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > > It is a prerequisite for any and every attainments. Period. The > > length, strenth and duration may vary. Shorter Jhana may do for > > lesser achievments and for some people > > Well your position on this question seems to change with each > post ;-)) My understanding and considering of Buddha's teaching improves all the time, so the later posts are generally more correct then earlier. > If jhana is a prerequisite for enlightenment, Jhana + wisdom. > but not for the development of insight, does this mean the >development of insight by > a person who has not yet attained jhana can proceed only so far but > no further, unless and until jhana is then attained? Is there > textual support for such an idea? > > Jon By properly developing insight, jhana happens as well. Some good suttas: 471. If he develops mindfulness of the body (kayagatasati), for the fraction of a second, it is said he abides in jhana. Has done his duties by the Teacher, and eats the country's alms food without a debt. If he makes much of that, it would be more gainful AN 1:15 ekadhamma pali ==== 600. Bhikkhus, they that do not partake mindfulness of the body, do not partake deathlessness and they that partake mindfulness of the body, partake deathlessness. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/016-Ekadhammapali-e.html ========= If one thing, Beggars, is made to become, made much of, the fruit of Streamwinning may be seen with one's own eyes. What is that One thing? Remembering that which relates to body. If this one thing, Beggars, is made to become, made much of, the fruit of Streamwinning may be seen with one's own eyes. http://halfsmile.org/buddhadust/www.buddhadust.org/TheOnes/OnesInPali5 85-654end.htm#611 These 3 suttas tell us that 1)kayagatasati is required for even friut of stream entry (sotapattiphala ). 2) that development of kayagatasati leads to Jhana. This is also seen in MN119. With best wishes, #93338 From: "connie" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 3:40 pm Subject: The speed of cittas nichiconn Peoples, h: It is claimed by some that there is only ever one citta. c: if they mean 'at a time in a single being', they are correct. if they mean there is only one kind or one permanent 'citta', they might be corrected. h: It is mostly the same people who claim that each citta arises and vanishes with great speed. c: fairly easy to point out the discrepancy in the claims of "only ever one" and "each citta". h: What is not understood by those who make this claim is that the speed with which something falls away can only be known in relation to something else, which is falling away at a different rate. c: I'd think it was the above they didn't understand, but then I'm not concerned so much with speed. h: But there is nothing else, for there is only this one citta. c: Again, this might be the whole problem. Remind them to include the attendant cetasikas, the object of all that, and, we might add, whatever other else might be considered to be play... the eye base and past kamma, for instance. h: Either the speed of cittas cannot be known, and should not be speculated about, or there is something else that knows the falling away of citta, whilst it remains standing, relatively. c: another citta or series of them would qualify as something else. h: You cannot have your single citta, and it's rapidity. Sorry. c: say! is citta timeless? maybe a clue to it's rapidity, if anyone really cares, could be found in the different objects of cittas. good luck setting them straight, man. connie #93339 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas egberdina Hi connie, 2008/12/9 connie : > Peoples, > > > > h: It is claimed by some that there is only ever one citta. > > c: if they mean 'at a time in a single being', they are correct. Does a citta occur in time? Or does time occur in a citta? Me, myself, I #93340 From: "connie" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 6:02 pm Subject: The speed of cittas nichiconn Hi Herman, H; Does a citta occur in time? Or does time occur in a citta? c: i've always heard time is just a concept. for myself, i just think if there were no cittas, there'd be no idea of time & that time is relative. i've no idea whether it makes any difference how one sees it - both questions could be answered either yes or no. what makes you ask? connie #93341 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 1:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/8/2008 12:36:17 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi TG, Op 8-dec-2008, om 19:20 heeft _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) het volgende geschreven: > TG: Before I continue with this, please answer this question... Do you > consider the full practice described in the Satipatthana Sutta to > be the > practice of mindfulness? -------- N: Yes, from the beginning to the end. But do not forget the beginning, we should not overreach to a level we are not ready for yet. Nina. .................................................................... TG: OK, thanks for this clarification. I'll go back and check your previous post. I will point out here, and you must know this, that there is much in the Satipatthana Sutta that goes beyond -- "only what appears now." Although "mindfulness" is most usually considered a type of monitoring of 'direct present experience,' it also incorporates reviewing causal/conditional factors of that experience: -- arising factors, ceasing factors, arising and ceasing factors. This 'reviewing' is analysis and is conceptual. Not only that, but the Satipatthana deals with things such as comparing to various stages of a corpse and realizing that this body too will become like that. This is analysis, not direct experience. Reviewing the foulness of the bodily parts is conceptual contemplative analysis. In the Five Aggregates section says: -- "Here a bhikkhu understands: 'Such is material form, such its origin, such its disappearance, etc. This deals with understanding conditional circumstances, its goes well beyond mere "only what appears now." Mindfulness is much broader than the assertion: -- "only what appears now." That said, I accept completely that "what appears now," in terms of being directly aware of experiences, is a major PART of mindfulness. Mindfulness is rich and deep and has scope. I'll try to get to the other post later tonight if I have time. TG OUT #93342 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 1:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Nina In a message dated 12/8/2008 8:19:13 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear TG, Since Connie gave me homework, I try to answer several posts of yours in one, if you do not mind. Op 27-nov-2008, om 1:31 heeft _TGrand458@..._ (mailto:TGrand458@...) het volgende geschreven: > Don't get me wrong, I consider mindfulness EXTREMELY important. I just > consider the "ultimate reality view" that you overlay upon your > brand of > mindfulness to be uncalled for and detrimental. And not the > teaching of the Buddha. ------- N: Mindfulness of what? Surely only of what appears now? You always come back to this: ultimate realities, and: distinct or own characteristics and you find this reification. ........................................................................ TG: I find the claim of "ultimate realities" to be based on theoretical framework and quite frankly, pretentious. Not personally at you, just the general notion that all these folks are stating what "ultimate realities" are. God bless em. ;-) "Own characteristic," on the other hand, comes off sounding like self-view. I think at best, its a poor way to state the issue. The statement "own characteristic" tends to conceal the conditional factors propagating phenomena. I much prefer the Visuddhimagga's and Suttas description of phenomena being like a marionette. What kind of "own characteristic" could a marionette have? I'll leave it at that. .............................................................................. .... Ultimate realities, we can also just call them dhammas, and this term is used to distinguish them from concepts. A reality like seeing is always seeing, even if you give it another name. Or lobha, it is always lobha. This is not so with concepts like a table that is an impression of a whole and has a specific lable or name. A reality, not a concept, can be an object of direct awareness, without having to name it. But here we differ. ............................................................... TG: We sure do. :-) I think a concept is every bit as real and every bit as conditioned. A concept is just more likely 'delusional oriented.' ............................................................... Characteristic, I do not think merely of the three general charactreistics of impermanence, dukkha and anatta which are fully realized at enlightenment. I refer to a beginning of understanding: this or that reality has a characteristic, meaning: it can be experienced as such when it appears to sati. Distinct characteristic: seeing is different from hearing or from lobha. Thus these are just words helping us to develop direct awareness and understanding. Not a big deal what terms we use. ------ We discussed absence condition. Same as contiguity-conditioWe anantara paccaya. Antara is in between, anantara: no gap. If one citta is not succeeded by the next one without gap, you would drop dead. Without citta no life. ..................................................................... TG: Just how many so-called different conditions in the Patthana are the same condition? Seems like we're whittling them down pretty good now. ;-) I can't argue with you about contiguity-condition, cause I use it myself and like it. :-) .......................................................... We discussed S II, 61 about mind. You quoted B.B.'s transl. I compared his note, p. 770: < The statement should not be taken to mean that one thing arises and something altogether different, which had not arisen, ceases."Day and night" is said by way of continuity, taking a continuity of lesser duration than the previous one (i. e., the one stated for the body). But one citta is not able to endure for a whole day or a whole night. Even in the time of a fingersnap many hundred thousand of ko.tis of cittas arise and cease...> Perhaps it all boils down to the ways you and I see citta. You also said: no prenascence in the D.O. You mean, everything is smultaneous, the conditioning factors and the conditioned factors? ............................................. TG: No, not at all. I see phenomena as continually 'transitioning' in an interactive manner. That means that phenomena are both moving and altering shape simultaneously. The formations that appear to us evolve from that process and are part of that process. The dynamic structure "behind it" are the Four Great Elements. Even consciousness is "supported by it and bound up with it"...i.e., the 4 GE's ................................................... But ignorance that is akusala conditions merritorious kamma- formations. How come? The Vis. explains: not by conascence but by upanissaya paccaya, decisive support. ........................................................ TG: Thanks for the interesting post Nina. I don't think I'll get into this question cause I'd have to spend too much time on it. TG OUT #93343 From: "connie" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 7:11 pm Subject: Re: On Concepts nichiconn if I may answer, Scott, S: How will you propose to directly experience bhavanga-citta? c: first hearsay, eventually inference & finally, by coming out of 'trance'. right? peace, connie #93344 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 7:18 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------------- KH: > > It's all about understanding, isn't it? - understanding the > advantages of detachment and other kusala states, and understanding > the disadvantages of attachment (etc). Right understanding is the > greatest form of kusala. H: > But why is understanding more advantageous than a lack of it? -------------- Because it conditions good qualities and hinders (or destroys) bad qualities. ----------------------- H: > Does some better end await the wise person? ----------------------- I am interpreting "person" to mean the five khandhas and "wise person" to mean the five khandhas when they contain panna. The end that awaits the "wise" khandhas is beautiful. So too is its beginning and middle. Good-but-not-wise khandhas are also quite beautiful. Foolish khandhas, however, are ugly from start to finish. ---------------------------- H: > In the end, don't we all meet the same end? ----------------------------- Beautiful is not the same as ugly, is it?. ------------------------------------- <. . .> H: > Just to keep you honest, your advice was to stay as close as possible to the present. I imagine that whether our life will be long or short is of no concern to us in that state. -------------------------------------- It's a matter of understanding. If we can understand conventional urgency - to do what needs to be done while there is still time - then we can begin to understand how panna feels. ------------------------- H: > The future, like the past is immaterial to understanding now, isn't it? ------------------------- Yes; it's now or never. Ken H #93345 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 7:51 pm Subject: Re: The speed of cittas kenhowardau Hi Herman, -------- H: > Peoples, -------- Yes, Herman! ----------- H: > It may be beneficial to consider what speed is, before the speed of cittas is used to explain something away. Speed is a measurement. A measurement is a comparison between one thing and another. Speed is relative. ---------- The Buddha taught something called anicca. Anicca is a characteristic of all conditioned dhammas and it makes them impermanent. It makes them impermanent in the absolute sense of the word. There is no need to compare conditioned dhammas with something else to see if they are any more or less impermanent. They are impermanent - they have the anicca characteristic. End of story! ---------- <. . .> H: > > You cannot have your single citta, and it's rapidity. Sorry. ---------- Sorry, not listening! :-) Ken H #93346 From: TGrand458@... Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 4:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The speed of cittas TGrand458@... Hi Ken H, Herman In a message dated 12/8/2008 8:52:00 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: The Buddha taught something called anicca. Anicca is a characteristic of all conditioned dhammas and it makes them impermanent. It makes them impermanent in the absolute sense of the word. There is no need to compare conditioned dhammas with something else to see if they are any more or less impermanent. They are impermanent - they have the anicca characteristic. End of story! ............................................................... TG: This whole topic regarding the speed of "dhammas" is an issue brought forth by the Abhidhamma sector I do believe. Now we're being chastised by that same sector for dealing with the issue they brought up? LOL I'm getting use to it. Speed of impermanence was the issue, not impermanence in general. Well, since I've gone this far. All 'conditions' are impermanent. But I'm curious...how does a "conditioned dhamma" HAVE the impermanence characteristic? Did they purchase it at "Dhammas R Us"? I can see the slogan -- Buy one "own characteristic" and we'll throw in an "anicca characteristic" for half price. ;-) Those "Dhammas" have so many characteristics inside of them I'm surprised they don't explode. This is not just you Ken, I know this is the Abhidhamma style of speaking. But it sure seems like there is an "entity-view" hiding amongst them there "Dhammas" in the way in which they are spoken about. TG OUT #93347 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 9:00 pm Subject: Clinging to the concept "I Am"! bhikkhu0 Friends: Releasing the Misinterpretation "I Am" launches into Freedom! The Blessed Buddha once noted: It is by clinging, friends, that the notion: 'I am' occurs, not without clinging! And by clinging to what does the notion: 'I am' occur, not without clinging? It is by clinging to form, to feeling, to perception, to mental constructions, & to consciousness that the notion: 'I am' occurs, and not without this clinging! Suppose, friends, a young woman, or a young man, fond of fashion & jewellery, would examine her own facial image in a mirror or in a bowl filled with pure, clear, clean water: She would look at it with clinging, not without clinging... Even and exactly so too, it is by clinging to form, to feeling, to perception, to mental constructions, to consciousness that the notion: 'I am' occurs, and not without this subconscious, yet quite detrimental, deep and rigid clinging... Clinging to what is impermanent, transient and prone to vanish is very painful! What is changing & painful cannot be 'Mine' nor 'What I Am' nor 'My Self'! Understanding this the intelligent Noble disciple is disgusted with all forms, all feelings, all perceptions, all mental constructions, & every consciousness. Being disgusted creates disillusion. This very disillusion launch mental release! When released the mind becomes unagitated! By being entirely imperturbable one attains Awakening right there and then, and one instantly understands: This mind is irreversibly freed! Rebirth is ended, the Noble Life is concluded, done is what should be done, there is no state of being after or beyond this... ... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikāya 22:83 III 105 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net Clinging to the concept "I Am"! #93348 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Dec 8, 2008 11:29 pm Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) sarahprocter... Hi TG, Herman & all, --- On Sun, 7/12/08, TGrand458@... wrote: >>S: I'd say it is citta (and associated cetasikas) which thinks. "By 'consciousness (citta) is meant that which 'thinks' of its object, is aware variously." (Atth., 'Analysis of Terms'). The Pali for this is: "Cittan ti aarmamma.na.m cintetii ti citta.m vijaanaatii ti attho." ............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ...... >TG: To say that it is "citta which thinks" is to interject an entity "citta" into a process that has no such entity. It it no better from a "delusion perspective" than saying it is a "person that thinks." In this latter case, it is an entity "person" that is interjected into a process that has no such entity. >TG: All this namas, rupas, cittas talk, is just subtle grasping after entities in most cases. The reason, Sarah, you can't just say "consciousness, etc.," is because it would deny you the "entities" and "substance" that you construct this "dhammas view" upon. ***** S: There are realities which rise and fall, performing their various functions regardless of whether there is any gross or subtle grasping onto them. There is never any self or 'substance' inside, outside or underlying such dhammas. Perhaps you will find the following extract helpful: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel186.html#theravada Anicca (Impermanence) According to Theravada, by Bhikkhu ~Nanamoli " Acariya Buddhaghosa, though not identifying being with being-perceived rejects the notion of any underlying substance — any hypostasis, personal or impersonal — thus: [One contemplating rise and fall] understands that there is no heap or store of unarisen mentality-materiality [naama-ruupa] [existing] prior to its arising. When it arises, it does not come from any heap or store; and when it ceases, it does not go in any direction. There is nowhere any depository in the way of a heap or store, prior to its arising, of the sound that arises when a lute is played, nor does it come from any store when it arises, nor does it go in any direction when it has ceased [cf. SN 35.205/vol. iv, 197], but on the contrary, not having been, it is brought into being by depending on the lute, the lute's soundboard, and a man's appropriate effort, and immaterial [aruupa] dhammas come to be [with the aid of specific conditions], and having been, they vanish. — Vis. Ch. xx/p. 630 The transience and perpetual renewal of dhammas is compared in the same work (Ch. xx/p. 633) to dewdrops at sunrise, a bubble on water, a line drawn on water (AN 4.37), a mustard seed on an awl's point, and a lightning flash (Mahaa Niddesa p. 42), and they are as coreless (nissaara) as a conjuring trick (SN 22.95/vol. iii, 142), a mirage (Dhp 46), a dream (Sn 4.6/v. 807), a whirling firebrand's circle (alaata cakka), a goblin city (gandhabba-nagara), froth (Dhp 46), a plantain trunk (SN 22.95/vol. iii, 141), and so on. Before leaving the aspect of rise and fall, the question of the extent (addhaana) of the moment (kha.na), as conceived in the commentaries, must be examined (The Abhidhamma mentions the kha.na without specifying any duration). A Sutta cited above gave "arising, fall, and alteration of what is present" as three characteristics of anything formed. In the commentaries this is restated as "rise, presence, and dissolution" (uppaada-.thiti-bha"nga; see e.g., Vis. Ch. xx/p. 615), which are each also called "[sub-] moments" (kha.na). These sub-moments are discussed in the Vibha"nga commentary: To what extent does materiality last? And to what extent the [mental] immaterial? Materiality is heavy to change and slow to cease; the immaterial is light to change and quick to cease. Sixteen cognizances arise and cease while [one instance of] materiality lasts; but that ceases with the seventeenth cognizance. It is like when a man wanting to knock down some fruit hits a branch with a mallet, and when fruits and leaves are loosed from their stems simultaneously; and of those the fruits fall first to the ground because they are heavier, the leaves later because they are lighter. So too, just as the leaves and fruits are loosed simultaneously from their stems with the blow of the mallet, there is simultaneous manifestation of materiality and immaterial dhammas at the moment of relinking [pa.tisandhi] at rebirth... And although there is this difference between them, materiality cannot occur without the immaterial nor can the immaterial without materiality: they are commensurate. Here is a simile: there is a man with short legs and a man with long legs; as they journey along together, while long-legs takes one step short-legs takes sixteen steps; when short-legs is making his sixteenth step, long-legs lifts his foot, draws it forward and makes a single step; so neither out-distances the other, and they are commensurate. — Khandha-Vibha"nga A/Vbh. 25-6" ***** Metta, Sarah ======== #93349 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 3:05 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The doors, its objects and processes sprlrt Dear Nina, thanks for your comment, much appreciated - Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alberto. > I appreciate your post, especially the last sentence. > Nina. #93350 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 3:05 am Subject: Re: The doors, its objects and processes sprlrt Hi Once it has fallen away, citta (and its cetasika) is gone forever without any trace or residue left, it is real just for an instant. The same applies to the previous and to the next, but the past one doesn't exist anymore and the next one hasn't come into existence yet. Time is not really an issue for satipatthana, since it can only experience directly the dhammas, and not once they're not there anymore or if they're not there yet, in which case they can only be concepts, unrelated to the present dhammas and to satipatthana. The falling away of the last citta of a sense door process conditions the arising of bhavanga/life continuum citta repeatedly, which, in the plane of the 5 khandhas, our plane, requires only the presence of its physical basis, hadaya rupa, while the other rupas involved in the previous sense door vithi/process, though arising again due the conditions that are still there (utu, kamma, citta, ahara), don't get noticed at all. Sanna khandha arises with all cittas, it marks and remembers its objects, which are conditions as object/arammana and habits/pakatupanissaya paccaya, and bhavanga citta/life-continuum is also the mind door, mano dvara, and it is because of these (and also others) conditions that mind door processes must follow a sense door one. The first citta to arise in mind door process is again a kiriya citta, avajjana/adverting, but it is the one composed with viriya/effort cetasika, since it preceeds and determines the jati (kusala or akusala) of the sequence of 7 javana/impulsion cittas that follows, in which kamma is done and sankhara khandha such as avijja or panna, lobha or alobha, dosa or adosa, are accumulated. Through mind door processes citta cognizes what sanna has just marked in a sense door one, rupa-dhammas, and satipatthana starts to notice this. K. Sujin encourage us not to pay attention to nimitta and anubyanjana/details, to concepts following the first mind door process, in which kilesa such as avijja, lobha or dosa keep changing further what already are shadow of dhammas, and turn them into a person or a thing we like or dislike. Alberto #93351 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 5:33 am Subject: Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Thanks for the reply: H: "Yes, I accept that Nibbana is. And for the sake of precision only, that does not translate into Nibbana being one reality amongst other realities, nor does it translate into Nibbana being a something." Scott: It is the 'opposite' to everything conditioned. H: "OK. Nibbana is not nama. And it is not rupa either. And it has no characteristic whatsoever. So what is it that is known when nibbana serves as object for whatever consciousness?" Scott: Nibbaana *is* classified as naama or aruupa (as we know its not ruupa). It is not like conditioned naamaa, since it is the asa"nkhataa dhaatu. I think it is naama because, as is one of the meanings of the word, it makes conditioned consciousness bend towards it - it is an object of lokuttara citta and accompanying cetasikas. H: "Are you saying that nibbana is a condition for nama? Nibbana is. Nibbana equates to being. Experience of any kind is identical with knowing (something). It is not possible to know being, it has no characteristics. It is only possible to know characteristics." Scott: In the Muulpariyaaya sutta.m (MN1) it notes: "A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of mental fermentations - who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge -- He directly knows Nibbaana as Nibbaana. Directly knowing Nibbaana as Nibbaana, he does not conceive things about Nibbaana, does not conceive things in Nibbaana, does not conceive things coming out of Nibbaana, does not conceive Nibbana as 'mine,'does not delight in Nibbaana. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you. " Scott: Nibbaana bends kusala states onto it. It is condition for naama - object predominance condition (aaramma.naadhipati-paccaya). I don't agree that 'nibbaana equates to being'. Can you explain this further? Nibbaana has characteristics: su~n~natta (voidness), animitta (signlessness), and appa.nihita (desirelessness). Also, consider Udaana 8.3: "There is, monks, an Unborn, Unbecome, Unmade, Uncompounded (ajaata.m abhuuta.m akata.m asankhata.m). If there were not this Unborn..., then there would be no deliverance here visible from that which is born, become, made, compounded. But since there is this Unborn, Unbecome, Unmade, Uncompounded, therefore a deliverance is visible from that which is born, become, made, compounded." H: "Nibbana is cessation, not of being, but of knowing. It is self-contradictory to know cessation." Scott: Then this again suggests that 'being' persists? Is eternal? This suggests that being=Nibbaana? H: "I don't think there is anything that knows. But there is knowing. And all knowing is anicca. There is also just being, which from a perspective of knowing, is the absence, or the cessation of knowing. But when there is no knowing, there is no knowing of that. But it can be known, after the fact, that there was no knowing." Scott: The above is convoluted. If it means to say that there is no one who knows but there is knowing, then I think this is true. Then, since it seems to suggest that Nibbaana can't be known, I don't know what to make of it in relation to Dhamma. I don't know what it says regarding 'being' as 'the absence or cessation of knowing' - this distinction is unclear. If it means to suggest that there is no knowing after cessation - that is that no conditioned dhamma continues or arises 'in Nibbaana' after the death of an arahat, then this, I think is true. If it suggests that Nibbaana cannot be known, as I said - that knowing and being are somehow mutually exclusive - then this would hardly seem to correspond to the Dhamma as I read it. Consider DN 19 8, the Mahaagovinda sutta.m: "Again, the Lord has well explained to his disciples the path leading to Nibbaana, and they coalesce, Nibbaana and the path, just as the waters of the Ganges and the Yamunaa coalesce and flow on together and we can find no other proclaimer of the path leading to Nibbaana...other than the Lord." Scott: This clearly states that the path and Nibbaana come together - that Nibbaana bends knowing to it and is known thereby. Any comments? Sincerely, Scott. #93352 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 6:01 am Subject: Series Survey Quote nilovg Dear friends, In what way someone thinks, depends on the conditions which have been accumulated. People may see the same thing, but each individual thinks differently. When people see, for example, a flower, one person may like it and think it beautiful, whereas someone else may dislike it. It all depends on the individuals thinking. Each person lives with his own thoughts, and thus, the world is in reality the world of thinking. When sati is aware of nama and rpa it will be clearly known that it is only a type of nama which thinks of different subjects. If the characteristic of the nama which thinks is clearly known, it can be understood that someones conception of people and beings is not real. When someone is sad and he worries, he should know that there is sadness just because of his thinking. It is the same in the case of happiness, it all occurs because of thinking. When someone sees on T.V. a story he likes, pleasant feeling arises because he thinks of the projected image he looks at. Thus, people live only in the world of thinking, no matter where they are. The world of each moment is naama which arises and experiences an object through one of the sense-doors and through the mind-door, and after that citta continues to think of different stories..... Day in day out there are only nama and rpa, arising and falling away each moment. When they have fallen away, there is nothing left of them, they do not last even for a moment. We should know that our enjoyment or sorrow which arose in the past have fallen away, that they are completely gone. Now there is just the present moment and it is only at this moment that we can study realities and understand them as not self, not a being or a person. (The End) ********* Nina. #93353 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 3:47 am Subject: Re: "Speaking the Same Language" (Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts) TGrand458@... Hi Sarah In a message dated 12/9/2008 12:29:55 A.M. Mountain Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: >TG: All this namas, rupas, cittas talk, is just subtle grasping after entities in most cases. The reason, Sarah, you can't just say "consciousness, etc.," is because it would deny you the "entities" and "substance" that you construct this "dhammas view" upon. ***** S: There are realities which rise and fall, performing their various functions regardless of whether there is any gross or subtle grasping onto them. There is never any self or 'substance' inside, outside or underlying such dhammas. .................................................................. TG: I did read all your quotes you had included...read them many times before. ;-) Because you have this notion that there are "arising semi-non-existent permanent non-realities (i.e., concepts)," you must trumpet this notion of "realities" or your views lose much of their foundation. I don't buy into either position, so the whole thing to me is a blown out of proportion theory about things that don't exist in the way you think they do. The notion that "realities perform THEIR functions" seems to turn a blind eye to awareness that these phenomena are merely being conditionally propagated along...with no "action of THEIR own." Hence the "marionette analogy" which appears in the Visuddhimagga too. Well, as Nina says -- "but we differ" (or something like that.) LOL Take care Sarah. TG #93354 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 12:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" nilovg Hi TG, Op 9-dec-2008, om 3:19 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > Although "mindfulness" is most usually considered a type of > monitoring of > 'direct present experience,' it also incorporates reviewing causal/ > conditional > factors of that experience: -- arising factors, ceasing factors, > arising and > ceasing factors. This 'reviewing' is analysis and is conceptual. -------- N:At the second stage of tender insight there is direct understanding of dhammas as being conditioned. It is insight knowledge, not thinking. I understand that this may seem like thinking of a concept but this is not so. We cannot imagine how this is possible, but so many things we cannot imagine. That is why I was cautious in my answer: we have to begin at the beginning. I find it perfectly reasonable that first different dhammas have to be investigated before their being conditioned can be directly known and later on their arising and falling away. I come back to the first stage later. -------- > TG: Not only > that, but the Satipatthana deals with things such as comparing to > various > stages of a corpse and realizing that this body too will become > like that. This > is analysis, not direct experience. -------- N: By means of concepts we are reminded to develop satipatthaana and led to the direct experience of realities that appear. When reading the sutta we are reminded all the time: there are no persons, no beings. Mere dhammas arising and falling away. When we see a corpse it is like a replica of the person we used to know, but it is a lifeless doll. When we touch it, it is so cold. The corpse does not know anything, just physical phenomena, rupas, arising and falling away. Our body will be like that as you say. But even now, what is the body? A heap of rupas that do not know anything, that cannot experience anything. Touch a corpse, touch a living body, what appears: three of the four great Elements: solidity, heat, motion. The purpose of all this is detachment from the idea of my body that belongs to me. I quote from the Co. to the Satipatthaanasutta (the Way of Mindfulness, Ven. Soma) about postures. Here is also the simile of a puppet. Like you I also find this very helpful. ----------- > > TG: Reviewing the foulness of the bodily parts is conceptual > contemplative > analysis. In the Five Aggregates section says: -- "Here a bhikkhu > understands: > 'Such is material form, such its origin, such its disappearance, > etc. This > deals with understanding conditional circumstances, its goes well > beyond mere > "only what appears now." -------- N: Also this contemplation on the foulness of the body is very daily: we come across the body parts all day long. We are forgetful, but the Buddha brings us back to dhamma now: hair of the head, hair of the body, nails, teeth, skin. We find them important but they are mere rupas. When seeing, only colour appears, when touching, only hardness, softness, heat. cold, motion or pressure appears. These contemplations are also subjects of samatha, but they are useful for all people, no matter they want to cultivate a high degree of calm or not. --------- > TG: > Mindfulness is much broader than the assertion: -- "only what > appears now." > That said, I accept completely that "what appears now," in terms of > being > directly aware of experiences, is a major PART of mindfulness. > Mindfulness is > rich and deep and has scope. ------- N: Each stage of insight has as object what appears now, since only that can be directly and thoroughly known. Thus, also the second stage pertains to direct understanding of conditions. But, there is also another way of understanding origination and cessation, and here we come to the four Truths. Scott referred to this, but the subject is very complicated. ------- Nina. #93355 From: "connie" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 2:40 pm Subject: Vis. revisited. nichiconn Dear Nina, All, > 8. Herein there is nothing for him to do about the [native] > understanding on account of which he is called wise; for that has > been established in him simply by the influence of previous kamma. > > c: The wise one is triple rooted - from birth! That just sunk in > today. ------- N: Yes, I would not have noticed either the meaning of 'native', the roots one is born with. c: (thinking 'nice of you to say, but it was stated even before that if i'd read it right!', only says): The 'nativity' comes up again in ch.3's discussion on character; for example, iii 86 ends: N: As you say, born with wisdom, the vipaakacitta is accompanied by wisdom and this is conditioned already. No self who can do anything about it. It has far-reaching consequences. If one is not born with wisdom, no attainment of jhaana and no attainment of enlightenment is possible in that life. And if one is born with wisdom, understanding has to be developed during that life as is explained further. c: I think we can't really know what our inborn nature must be but can certainly study the nature of the moment. The point about not just any and everyone being able to attain jhaana doesn't sit well with some, but it's good to know that jhaana is not a prerequisite for stream entry. I also like very much the ending of #93333, when you were talking about the Expositor on the meanings of samaya: N: It stresses that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: thank you, connie #93356 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 4:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, TG (and Nina) - > TG: Before I continue with this, please answer this question... Do you > consider the full practice described in the Satipatthana Sutta to > be the > practice of mindfulness? -------- N: Yes, from the beginning to the end. But do not forget the beginning, we should not overreach to a level we are not ready for yet. Nina. .................................................................... TG: OK, thanks for this clarification. I'll go back and check your previous post. I will point out here, and you must know this, that there is much in the Satipatthana Sutta that goes beyond -- "only what appears now." Although "mindfulness" is most usually considered a type of monitoring of 'direct present experience,' it also incorporates reviewing causal/conditional factors of that experience: -- arising factors, ceasing factors, arising and ceasing factors. This 'reviewing' is analysis and is conceptual. Not only that, but the Satipatthana deals with things such as comparing to various stages of a corpse and realizing that this body too will become like that. This is analysis, not direct experience. Reviewing the foulness of the bodily parts is conceptual contemplative analysis. In the Five Aggregates section says: -- "Here a bhikkhu understands: 'Such is material form, such its origin, such its disappearance, etc. This deals with understanding conditional circumstances, its goes well beyond mere "only what appears now." Mindfulness is much broader than the assertion: -- "only what appears now." That said, I accept completely that "what appears now," in terms of being directly aware of experiences, is a major PART of mindfulness. Mindfulness is rich and deep and has scope. I'll try to get to the other post later tonight if I h ave time. TG OUT ===================== I don't think that mindfulness is a form of consciousness of "what appears now" or of something contemplated. I think it is a mental monitoring operation of keeping in mind (or remembering) to "stay present" in the sense of not getting lost in thought or in sloth & torpor. As I see it, this is the basic means of holding the hindrances in abeyance. With metta, Howard #93357 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 12:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Howard, Nina In a message dated 12/9/2008 5:10:09 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: I don't think that mindfulness is a form of consciousness of "what appears now" or of something contemplated. I think it is a mental monitoring operation of keeping in mind (or remembering) to "stay present" in the sense of not getting lost in thought or in sloth & torpor. As I see it, this is the basic means of holding the hindrances in abeyance. With metta, Howard ............................................................... TG: This is a good point Howard. Good contribution! I agree with this, but think it also ties in with monitoring the "the present moment," as well as "staying present" while contemplating things such as the bodily parts, charnel grounds, conditionality arising and ceasing factors, etc. which require "conceptual work" as well. Mindfulness combines many skills and is not "one-dimensional" which is way I reject that it is merely "what appears now." TG OUT #93358 From: TGrand458@... Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 2:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" TGrand458@... Hi Howard (follow up) In a message dated 12/9/2008 5:10:09 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: I don't think that mindfulness is a form of consciousness of "what appears now" or of something contemplated. I think it is a mental monitoring operation of keeping in mind (or remembering) to "stay present" in the sense of not getting lost in thought or in sloth & torpor. As I see it, this is the basic means of holding the hindrances in abeyance. With metta, Howard ..................................................................... TG: Thinking about it some more ... and I think you're right. What you describe IS mindfulness. What the Satipatthana Sutta details is what types of content THAT mindfuless should apply to. In a sense, mindfulness probably should not be disassociated from that content (or related content), anymore than consciousness can be disassociated from its relation with the physical. So whereas I looked at the entire scheme of the Satipattha Sutta as describing mindfulness, I think justifiably so, yet I think your post isolates 'mindfulness' more definitively. TG OUT #93359 From: "connie" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 7:57 pm Subject: Vis. Revisited. nichiconn (or, bookworms avenged) dear friends, In ch.3, starting from the Buddha as the best in the list of good friends who might give a meditation subject, following the Stream Enterer, they are (iii,64): << an ordinary man who has obtained jhana, one who knows three Pitakas, one who knows two Pitakas, one who knows one Pitaka, in descending order [according as available]. If not even one who knows one Pitaka is available, then it should be taken from one who is familiar with one Collection together with its commentary, and one who is himself conscientious. For a teacher such as this who knows the texts guards the heritage, and protects the tradition, will follow the teachers' opinion rather than his own. Hence the Ancient Elders said three times 'One who is conscientious will guard it'. >> Before this, in the section on the ten impediments, the following stories are told: <<51. 9. Books means responsibility for the scriptures. That is an impediment only for one who is constantly busy with recitations, etc., but not for others. Here are relevant stories. The Elder Revata, it seems, the Majjhima reciter, went to the Elder Revata, the dweller in Malaya (the Hill Country), and asked him for a meditation subject. The Elder asked him 'How are you in the scriptures, friend?' - 'I am studying the Majjhima [Nikaaya], venerable sir.' - 'The Majjhima is a hard responsibility, friend. When a man is still learning the First Fifty by heart, he is faced with the Middle Fifty; and when he is still learning that by heart, he is faced with the Last Fifty. How can you take up a meditation subject?' - 'Venerable sir, when I have taken a meditation subject from you, I shall not look at the scriptures again.' He took the meditation subject, and doing no recitation for nineteen years, he reached Arahantship in the twentieth year. He told bhikkhus who came for recitation 'I have not looked at the scriptures for twenty years, friends, [96] yet I am familiar with them. You may begin'. And from beginning to end he had no hesitation ever over a single syllable. 52. The Elder Mahaa-Naaga, too, who lived at Karuliyagiri (Karaliyagiri) put aside the scriptures for eighteen years, and then he recited the Dhaatukathaa to the bhikkhus. When they checked this with the town-dwelling elders [of Anuraadhapura], not a single question was found out of its order. 53. In the Great Monastery too the Elder Tipi.taka-Cuula-Abhaya had the golden drum struck, saying 'I shall expound the three Pi.takas in the circle of [experts in] the Five Collections of discourses', and this was before he had learnt the commentaries. The community of Bhikkhus said 'Which teachers' teaching is it? Unless you give only the teaching of our own teachers we shall not let you speak'. Also his Preceptor asked him when he went to wait on him 'Did you have the drum beaten, friend ?'. - 'Yes, venerable sir' - 'For what reason?' - 'I shall expound the scriptures, venerable sir.' - 'Friend Abhaya, how do the teachers explain this passage?' - 'They explain it in this way, venerable sir.' The Elder dissented, saying 'Hum'. Again three times, each time in a different way, he said 'They explain it in this way, venerable sir'. The elder always dissented, saying 'Hum'. Then he said 'Friend, your first explanation was the way of the teachers. But it is because you have not actually learnt it from the teachers' lips that you are unable to maintain that the teachers say such and such. Go and learn it from our own teachers'. - 'Where shall I go, venerable sir?' - 'There is an Elder named Mahaa-Dhammarakkhita living in the Tulaadhaarapabbata Monastery in the Roha.na country beyond the [Mahaveli] River. He knows all the scriptures. Go to him'. Saying 'Good, venerable sir', he paid homage to the Elder. He went with five hundred bhikkhus to the Elder Mahaa-Dhammarakkhita, and when he had paid homage to him, he sat down. The Elder asked "Why have you come?'. -'To hear the Dhamma, venerable sir.' - 'Friend Abhaya, they ask me about the Diigha and the Majjhima from time to time, but I have not looked at the others for thirty years. Still you may repeat them in my presence by night, and I shall explain them to you by day.' He said 'Good, venerable sir', and he acted accordingly. 54. The inhabitants of the village had a large pavilion built at the door of his dwelling, and they came daily to hear the Dhamma. Explaining by day what had been repeated by night, [97] the Elder [Dhammarakkhita] eventually completed the instruction. Then he sat down on a mat on the ground before the Elder Abhaya and said 'Friend, explain a meditation subject to me'. - 'What are you saying, venerable sir, have I not heard it all from you? What can I explain to you that you do not already know?' The senior Elder said 'This path is 55. different for one who has actually travelled by it'. The Elder Abhaya was then, it seems, a Stream Enterer. When the Elder Abhaya had given his teacher a meditation subject, he returned to Anuraadhapura. Later, while he was expounding the Dhamma in the Brazen Palace, he heard that the Elder had attained nibbana. On hearing this, he said 'Bring me [my] robe, friends'. Then he put on the robe and said 'The Arahant path befits our teacher, friends. Our teacher was a true thoroughbred. He sat down on a mat before his own Dhamma pupil and said, "Explain a meditation subject to me". The Arahant path befits our teacher, friends'. For such as these books are no impediment. >> peace, connie #93360 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 8:54 pm Subject: Radical Release! bhikkhu0 Friends: Detaching Release from all Internal and all External: The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, desire and lust for any form, for any feeling, for any perception, for any construction & for any consciousness is a corruption of the mind! Desire and lust for the earth element: All that is Solid... Desire and lust for the water element: All that is Fluid... Desire and lust for the fire element: All that is Hot... Desire and lust for the air element: All that is Moving... Desire and lust for the space element: All that is three Dimensional & Desire and lust for the consciousness element: All Awareness itself, is a corruption of the mind! When a Bhikkhu has overcome & left all behind these mental corruptions, his mind seeks for inward withdrawal… A mind prepared & enhanced by such renunciation becomes wieldy, fit, focused and open for those subtle mental states, that are to be realized only by direct experience and knowledge... Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya SN 27:9-10 III 234 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net Radical Release! #93361 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 10:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: how to view the self egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/12/9 kenhowardau : > > > ---------------------------- > H: > In the end, don't we all meet the same end? > ----------------------------- > > Beautiful is not the same as ugly, is it?. > No, it isn't. And that is because craving is not the same as aversion. Something is beautiful because it is liked, not because beauty is an inherent characteristic of objects or situations, that somehow imposes itself on experience. In the same way, something is ugly because of aversion towards the object or situation, and not by virtue of some characteristic of the object. > ------------------------------------- > <. . .> > H: > Just to keep you honest, your advice was to stay as close as > possible to the present. I imagine that whether our life will be long > or short is of no concern to us in that state. > -------------------------------------- > > It's a matter of understanding. If we can understand conventional > urgency - to do what needs to be done while there is still time - > then we can begin to understand how panna feels. > > ------------------------- > H: > The future, like the past is immaterial to understanding now, > isn't it? > ------------------------- > > Yes; it's now or never. > I agree with you. And, I believe, it is craving and aversion, that continually removes us from the present. Cheers Herman #93362 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 10:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas egberdina Hi connie, 2008/12/9 connie : > Peoples, > > > h: It is mostly the same people who claim that each citta arises and vanishes with great speed. > > c: fairly easy to point out the discrepancy in the claims of "only ever one" and "each citta". > Yes, indeed. > > h: What is not understood by those who make this claim is that the speed with which something falls away can only be known in relation to something else, which is falling away at a different rate. > > c: I'd think it was the above they didn't understand, but then I'm not concerned so much with speed. > Me neither. > > h: But there is nothing else, for there is only this one citta. > > c: Again, this might be the whole problem. Remind them to include the attendant cetasikas, the object of all that, and, we might add, whatever other else might be considered to be play... the eye base and past kamma, for instance. > > > h: Either the speed of cittas cannot be known, and should not be speculated about, or there is something else that knows the falling away of citta, whilst it remains standing, relatively. > > c: another citta or series of them would qualify as something else. > I am advised by those who intimately know the theory that each citta vanishes without remnant. To be able to speak of another citta, or a series of cittas, is to introduce a remnant of former cittas, that remain, somehow. Else, they could not be known. > > h: You cannot have your single citta, and it's rapidity. Sorry. > > c: say! is citta timeless? maybe a clue to it's rapidity, if anyone really cares, could be found in the different objects of cittas. > > > > good luck setting them straight, man. > > connie > I don't have my hopes set high. So, at least I won't be disappointed. And if peoples agree, all good and well :-) Cheers Herman #93363 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 11:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" nilovg Hi Howard, Op 10-dec-2008, om 1:09 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't think that mindfulness is a form of consciousness of "what > appears now" > > or of something contemplated. I think it is a mental monitoring > operation of keeping > in mind (or remembering) to "stay present" in the sense of not > getting lost in > thought or in sloth & torpor. ------- N: Sure, at the moment of kusala citta accompanied by sati and pa~n~na, even of a slight degree, one is not lost. To stay present: but there must be an object that is experienced. The big question is: what object? To stay present can include many things. Nina. #93364 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 11:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Threes (31-33) and commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta: DN 33.1.10(31) 'Three obstacles:*1038 lust, hatred, delusion. (Tayo ki~ncanaa - raago ki~ncana.m, doso ki~ncana.m, moho ki~ncana.m.) ------ N: ki~ncana means something, anything, and the subco glosses: trifle, ki~ncikkhaa. The Co explains it as obstruction. When lust has arisen it consumes beings and obstructs them. And it is the same with the other two. Co: Ki~ncanaati palibodhaa. Raago ki~ncananti raago uppajjamaano satte bandhati palibundhati tasmaa ki~ncananti vuccati. Itaresupi dviisu eseva nayo. ----------------------- Sutta: DN 33.1.10(32) 'Three fires: lust, hatred, delusion. (Tayo aggii - raagaggi, dosaggi, mohaggi.) ------- The Co explains that lust, when arisen, consumes beings and that it is the same for hatred and delusion. The Co. gives the story of a young bhikkhunii in Citta Pabbata vihaara. She went to the Uposatha Hall and stood looking at a figure of a doorkeeper. Lust arose in her and consumed her so that she died. The other bhikkhuniis came and said: That is the young bhikkhunii standing, summon her. One of them took her by her hand, saying, Why do you stand? When she was just taken like that she fell down, because she had passed away. The Co states that the devas who are debauched in mind are consumed by dosa and the devas who are debauched by pleasure are consumed by moha. Because of moha they are forgetful. Because of amusement they are overcome at mealtime and die. N: We read about dosa in the Visuddhimagga, Ch XIV, 171: The term support, nissaya, refers to the heartbase, the physical base of all cittas other than the sense-cognitions. The Tiika explains that dosa as it were pierces the body. Sometimes dosa is compared to a dart that pierces the body. It affects also the body and can cause sickness. ------- The subco adds to burning, that it burns again and again (anu anu dahana). It states that depending on lust that has arisen the element of heat that is very acute burns the location of the heart just like the external element of heat. ------------- N: Lobha, dosa and moha are called obstructions in the previous section and here they are compared to fire because they are dangerous and cause great damage to the person in whom they arise. Even when they are of a slight degree, they are dangerous because they are accumulated and thus, there are conditions for them to arise again and again. ----------- Co: Aggiiti anudahana.t.thena aggi. Raagaggiiti raago uppajjamaano satte anudahati jhaapeti, tasmaa aggiiti vuccati. Itaresupi eseva nayo. Tattha vatthuuni ekaa daharabhikkhunii cittalapabbatavihaare uposathaagaara.m gantvaa dvaarapaalaruupaka.m olokayamaanaa .thitaa.... _______ Nina. #93365 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Dec 9, 2008 11:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: attention to Han. nilovg Dear Han, I wrote to TG about the cemetery meditations. Now I would like to listen to you, hearing what your Burmese teachers have to say. I hope you are well. Nina. Op 9-dec-2008, om 21:23 heeft Nina van Gorkom het volgende geschreven: > When we see a corpse it is like a replica of the person we used to > know, but it is a lifeless doll. When we touch it, it is so cold. The > corpse does not know anything, just physical phenomena, rupas, > arising and falling away. > Our body will be like that as you say. But even now, what is the > body? A heap of rupas that do not know anything, that cannot > experience anything. Touch a corpse, touch a living body, what > appears: three of the four great Elements: solidity, heat, motion. > The purpose of all this is detachment from the idea of my body that > belongs to me. #93366 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The speed of cittas egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/12/9 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > -------- > H: > Peoples, > -------- > > Yes, Herman! > > ----------- > H: > It may be beneficial to consider what speed is, before the speed > of cittas is used to explain something away. > > Speed is a measurement. A measurement is a comparison between one > thing and another. Speed is relative. > ---------- > > The Buddha taught something called anicca. Amen, brother! Anicca is a characteristic > of all conditioned dhammas and it makes them impermanent. It makes > them impermanent in the absolute sense of the word. Anicca makes them (dhammas) not them. Anicca means that no thing is ever itself (things change while standing - things start as one thing and ceases as another - no known thing is ever itself) > > There is no need to compare conditioned dhammas with something else > to see if they are any more or less impermanent. They are > impermanent - they have the anicca characteristic. End of story! If a dhamma with it's own characteristic is "seen", it only means the present anicca has been blindsided by craving/aversion. End of story! Cheers Herman #93367 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:12 am Subject: Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear connie, Regarding: Me: "How will you propose to directly experience bhavanga-citta?" c: "first hearsay, eventually inference & finally, by coming out of 'trance'. right?" Scott: As you say. Sincerely, Scott. #93368 From: "sprlrt" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 5:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas sprlrt Hi Herman (and Connie) ... H: I am advised by those who intimately know the theory that each citta vanishes without remnant. To be able to speak of another citta, or a series of cittas, is to introduce a remnant of former cittas, that remain, somehow. Else, they could not be known. ... I might be wrong but I think that dhammas are far more subtle to know than people, tables, theories, mirages etc, otherwise the world we all sentient beings live in, just one among the many worlds that exist, wouldn't be such a crowded place :-) Anyway, as I mentioned in the post to which I think you are referring, the function of sanna khandha is to mark or remember the objects it experiences, an experience it shares with the other 3 nama khandhas, each with their own function, characteristic etc. (vedana, sankhara or the other 50 cetasikas, and vinnana or citta). Sanna is a paramattha dhamma, the uncountable objects it has marked and it remembers can be both paramattha dhammas and concepts, though concepts are far many more, than the real dhammas, since every sense door process is followed by many, possibly even more than that, mind door ones, and all but the first one have a concept as object, and all of them are marked and remembered by sanna khanda, otherwise how could the Buddha (and other arahants too) have recollected their past lives? Sanna is real, it arises for a moment and can provide an object to the mind to think about, when there are conditions for this to happen. Take a table, no table there actually, but after seeing consciuousness and other cittas of a sense process experience a visible rupa (table, chairs, mirages, dogs etc.), sanna marks that rupa and when mind door processes arise & fall, that rupa, visible object, get recognized by sanna, which has experienced that rupa many many times before in this lifetime (not to mention previous ones) and named it "table" or whatever that word is in german, italian, thai, pali etc., and turns into something meaningful for the self that sees it, something we can lay a tablecloth on, and dishes, forks, spoons etc. before having a meal, of course this is not to say that it is more conducive to satipatthana eating standing up and straight from the pan the food was cooked in. Alberto PS Here is also a quote from K. Sujin's Survey on the subject: The "Atthaslin", in the same section (361), explains synonyms of the word "past". We read: "Ceased, that is, has reached cessation". Past dhamma has ceased completely, just as fire which has been extinguished. "Dissolved, that is, gone to destruction, departed." There is nothing left, just as someone who has died, who is no more. That is the characteristic of falling away. "Changed, that is, transformed by abandoning the original nature." So long as a dhamma has its original, usual nature, it exists, but when it abandons its original nature, it does not exist anymore. "Terminated, this means gone to the term (end) called cessation." It cannot exist any longer, that is the meaning of cessation. "Exterminated..." This word is stronger then the preceding term "terminated", and the meaning is: It has disappeared completely, there is nothing left of it. "Dissolved after having arisen, that is, departed after having come to be." This does not mean that the dhamma did not exist. It was, because it had arisen, but after its arising it departed, it disappeared completely, and there is nothing left of it. We then read: "Which are past dhammas? Rpa, feeling, perception, formations, consciousness." These are the five khandhas which are conditioned dhammas, sankhata dhammas. The five khandhas comprise the following realities: Rpakkhandha: all rpas which arise and fall away. Vedankkhandha: all feelings, vedan cetasika, which arise and fall away. Sakkhandha: remembrance or perception, sa cetasika, which arises and falls away. Sakhrakkhandha, fifty cetasikas which are "formations", which "form up" conditions, such as attachment, aversion, jealousy, avarice, confidence, energy and wisdom; they arise and then fall away. Viakkhandha, each type of citta which arises and falls away. Everything which arises is conditioned dhamma, it is one of the five khandhas, and thus it falls away again. For which of the khandhas are we then still longing, to which of them do we still cling? Each khandha arises and then falls away; it dissolves, disappears completely, there is nothing left of it, there is nothing worth clinging to. #93369 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - -----Original Message----- From: Nina van Gorkom To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 1:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" Hi Howard, Op 10-dec-2008, om 1:09 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't think that mindfulness is a form of consciousness of "what > appears now" > > or of something contemplated. I think it is a mental monitoring > operation of keeping > in mind (or remembering) to "stay present" in the sense of not > getting lost in > thought or in sloth & torpor. ------- N: Sure, at the moment of kusala citta accompanied by sati and pa~n~na, even of a slight degree, one is not lost. To stay present: but there must be an object that is experienced. ------------------------- Howard: Of course - staying present is being present to whatever appears through a sense door. ------------------------- The big question is: what object? To stay present can include many things. ------------------------ Howard: And whatever it is, it is important to be aware of it, not missing it due to being lost in thought or sloth & torpor. (That is not to say that thinking or lethargy can't occur. The key word in the foregoing is 'lost'.) ----------------------- Nina. ====================== With metta, Howard #93370 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: "There are no persons" vs "there are no beings?" nilovg Hi TG, Op 9-dec-2008, om 3:56 heeft TGrand458@... het volgende geschreven: > "Own characteristic," on the other hand, comes off sounding like > self-view. > I think at best, its a poor way to state the issue. The statement "own > characteristic" tends to conceal the conditional factors > propagating phenomena. > I much prefer the Visuddhimagga's and Suttas description of > phenomena being > like a marionette. What kind of "own characteristic" could a > marionette have? > I'll leave it at that. -------- N: Nama has a characteristic different from rupa, and this has to be learnt over and over, in being aware of them, before the first stage of insight can be realized. And at the first stage the arising and falling away of nama and rupa cannot yet be realized, not yet. But from then on pa~n~naa can develop further. No need to make a big deal out of 'own characteristic'. This term is just used to denote: this dhamma is different from that dhamma. It is nothing special. We take nama and rupa together all day long, and this conditions the self view. 'My seeing', not knowing that visible object, which is rupa, is absolutely different from seeing, which is nama. Without awareness of each of them separately we have no idea what nama is, what rupa is and this is so basic. Concepts like a doll or a corpse are just used to help us to understand the truth of non-self. We cling to our body which is alive, but also now the rupas of the body are like a log of wood, they have no experience. You find functions of nama and rupa seem like entities. It depends on how you understand functions. They fall away immediately, how could they be entities. Nina. #93371 From: "connie" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 2:49 pm Subject: The speed of cittas nichiconn Hi Herman, I like Alberto's sa~n~na answer, but maybe you'll find something worthwhile in what Lama Govinda (The Psychological Attitude of Early Buddhist Philosophy) has to say on (pp.56-9): 'The Dynamic Character of Dependent Origination': << Since the entire series is to be thought of as a circle, every link can be combined with another (as is, in fact, carried out in the Pa.t.thaana) and, indeed, in whichever succession one chooses (whreby only the emphasis, but not the substance, would change). Thus 'vi~n~naa.na paccaya sa'nkhaaraa' is just as correct as 'sa'nkhaara paccaya vi~n~naa.na' or 'ta.nhaa paccaya sa'nkhaara', and so on. In this way we have here neither a purely temporal, nor yet a purely logical causality, but a living, organic relationship, a simultaneous correlation, juxtaposition and succession of all the links, in which each, so to say, represents the transverse summation of all the others, and bears in itself its whole past as well as all the possibilities of its future. And precisely on this account the entire chain at every moment and from every phase of it, is removable, and is neither tied to 'causes lying in an unreachable distant past', not yet referred to a future beyond the limits of vision in which perhaps, some time, the effects of these causes will be exhausted. Only thus is the possibility of becoming free conceivable, for how could causes heaped up since beginningless time, and working on with natural necessity ever come to an end? The idea that the consequence of all deeds, whether of a mental or corporeal kind, must be tasted to the very last morsel, and that through every most trivial action, through the slightest motion of the heart, one is further involved in the inextricable net of fate, is assuredly the most frightful spectre that the human heart, or more correctly, the human intellect, has ever conjured up; for only the subsequent conceptualization and concretizing of the vital connexions of destiny could, out of the living law of our inmost being, manufacture the blind necessity of a mechanical law. Mechanical laws are applicable only to inert 'things' or to conceptual units, i.e. mental abstractions, but not to living, i.e. growing, organisms which are units only in the sense of their continuity (santaana) and direction of transformation (kamma-bhava). This does not mean that the law of cause and effect is to be eliminated from the realms of psychology and biology, but only that it is restricted and modified and can operate only under certain conditions. The law of dependent origination (pa.ticcasamuppaada) is, in fact, the Middle Way avoiding the extremes of rigid necessity - with which the free will would be incompatible - and blind chance which would make development and progress towards a higher goal impossible. In this respect the formula of dependent origination shows itself as the necessary counterpart of the anattaa-idea, which emphasizes the dynamic character of existence and conceives the individual from the standpoint of life and growth, in contrast to the fossilized concept of an absolute entity which would logically call for similarly absolute (lifeless) laws. A modern German philosopher expresses a similar idea in the following way: 'By thinking of nature as if it were built up from dead, immutable stones, the scholar will only incur the penalty of one who deprives himself of the power to attain any new outlook; but to see Man in this way will bring vengeance on each individual, and in each individual case it becomes injustice, violation, torture, demoralization. No ideal, no work of art, no value, no institution, no tariff of payment, no bargain should be thought of as a mere 'thing', i.e. without relationship to re-establishment and rebirth into the aliveness of a tangible world, i.e. into an individual life.' {57n1: Translated from Prof. O. Weidenbach's , p.187.} Life knows no absolute units but only centres of relation, continuous processes of unification, because reality cannot be broken up into bits; therefore each of its phases is related to the others, thus excluding the extremes of complete identity or non-identity. 'To believe that the doer of the deed is the same as the one who experiences its result (in the next life): this is one extreme. To believe that the doer of the deed, and the one who experiences its result, are two different persons: this is the other extreme. Both these extremes the Perfect One has avoided and taught the truth that lies in the middle of both {57n2: Nidaana-Sa'myutta No.46, translated by Nyaa.natiloka Thera.}, namely the law of dependent origination. The twelve links of the formula represent in their succession the most obvious form of their dependency (pa.ticca) with respect to their origination (uppaada). From the standpoint of time they can be divided into three periods - past, present, and future - usually conceived as three consecutive existences, though they could just as well be applied to a succession of moments in the incessantly flowing stream of consciousness, or to different periods (past, present, and future) within one and the same life. Thus the pa.ticcasamuppaada could be accepted in its general idea even by those who do not share the Buddhist view about rebirth in past and future existences. This view, by the way, can never be proved nor disproved scientifically, like many facts of experience. But it is important to see that the structure of the Buddhadhamma - even if we take it only as a system of thought - does not depend on it and is not affected by the idividual attitude towards this problem. Buddhist psychology itself is quite alive to the relativity of terms like 'birth' and 'death.' According to the Abhidhamma birth and death take place simultaneously every moment; and mystics like Milarepa made no difference between this and other lives - regarding them as all one. 'Accustomed as I've been to meditating on this life and the future life as one, I have forgot the dread of birth and death.' {58n1: , p.246; translated by Kazi Dawasamdup, edited by Dr. Evans-Wentz.} One might even go one step farther and regard one's own life and the lives of others, including those who lived before as well as those who will live after us, . In this vision the materialist with his theory of our common ancestry and heredity and the idealist with the most world-embracing views will meet each other. Another division, from the standpoint of potentiality (or action and reaction) divides the pa.ticcasamuppaada in four parts. Avijjaa and sa'nkhaaraa represent in this case the potential aspect of karmic force (kamma-bhava) accumulated in the past (I) which conditions the birth process (uppatti-bhava), the resultant aspect (vipaaka) of karma in the present life (group II), consisting of consciousness, the psycho-physical apparatus with its six sense organs, contacts and feelings. The following links of the present existence - craving, clinging, and becoming - are again karma in the making, i.e. kamma-bhava (group III) (corresponding to the potential aspect in the past), the result of which is rebirth in the future life with the necessary consequences of old age, suffering, and death (group IV) - corresponding to the resultant aspect of karma in the present existence. The parallelism of the first and third group and of the second and fourth respectively is reflected in the close relationship of its constituents which almost amounts to identity: ta.nhaa and upaadaana are forms of avijjaa, as already explained: jaati, jaraa-mara.na are only a short expression for vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa, vedanaa which constitute the five karma-results in contradistinction to the five karma-causes (avijjaa, sa'nkhaaraa, tanhaa, upaadaana, kamma-bhava); bhava, which here means 'kamma-bhava', is synonymous with sa'nkhaaraa. Buddhaghosa, therefore, says in his Visuddhi-Magga: 'Five causes were there in the past, Five fruits we find in present life, Five causes do we now produce, Five fruits we reap in future life.' {59n1: Translated by Nyaa.natiloka who refers to a parallel in Pa.tosa.mbhida, ~Naa.nakathaa No.4.} >> You might get more out of reading Nyanaponika Thera's "Abhidhamma Studies". Ch. 5 deals with "The Problem of Time". warp speed, connie #93372 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 3:24 pm Subject: Re: The speed of cittas kenhowardau Hi TG, ------------ <. . .> TG: This whole topic regarding the speed of "dhammas" is an issue brought forth by the Abhidhamma sector I do believe. Now we're being chastised by that same sector for dealing with the issue they brought up? LOL I'm getting use to it. ------------------ No, not at all: you can bring up the 'speed of dhammas' as many times as you like. My point in saying "end of story" was that the impermanence of dhammas was due to their having the inherent characteristic, anicca - end of story! ------------------ TG: > Speed of impermanence was the issue, not impermanence in general. ------------------ Absolute impermanence would imply there was nothing that changed more quickly, wouldn't it? I think that's all we need to know about speed. ----------------------- TG: > Well, since I've gone this far. All 'conditions' are impermanent. ------------------- O'oh, there's that nebulous Sea of Conditions again. Apparently, in this sea of conditions there is nothing that conditions and there is nothing that gets conditioned - but there are conditions nonetheless. (?) How would you know? What would manifest? --------------------------- TG: > But I'm curious...how does a "conditioned dhamma" HAVE the impermanence characteristic? Did they purchase it at "Dhammas R Us"? I can see the slogan -- Buy one "own characteristic" and we'll throw in an "anicca characteristic" for half price. ;-) Those "Dhammas" have so many characteristics inside of them I'm surprised they don't explode. --------------------------- Every conditioned dhamma has the anicca characteristic. If one dhamma conditions another to arise, it too will have the anicca characteristic. Does that answer your question? Or do you want to go back to 'the first cause?' ------------------------------ TG: > This is not just you Ken, I know this is the Abhidhamma style of speaking. But it sure seems like there is an "entity-view" hiding amongst them there "Dhammas" in the way in which they are spoken about. ------------------------------ Entity-view? When you say "entity" do you mean an absolute reality (paramattha dhamma) or are you referring to something that is thought to exist outside the world of paramattha dhammas? If you mean the former then there would be nothing wrong with entity view (paramattha- dhamma view). If, however, you were talking about a "sea of conditions" then I would have to conclude there was definitely entity (non-paramattha) view involved. No doubt about it, I'm sorry! :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, TGrand458@... wrote: > > Hi Ken H, Herman > > > In a message dated 12/8/2008 8:52:00 P.M. Mountain Standard Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > The Buddha taught something called anicca. Anicca is a characteristic > of all conditioned dhammas and it makes them impermanent. It makes > them impermanent in the absolute sense of the word. > > There is no need to compare conditioned dhammas with something else > to see if they are any more or less impermanent. They are > impermanent - they have the anicca characteristic. End of story! > > #93373 From: "colette" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 1:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas (are they monitored by a "prefect" or law officer) ksheri3 Hi Alberto, Yes, I thought your reply to this hallucination of quantifying a citta was good: > I might be wrong but I think that dhammas are far more subtle to know > than people, tables, theories, mirages etc, otherwise the world we all > sentient beings live in, just one among the many worlds that exist, > wouldn't be such a crowded place :-) Is "citta" a thought? Is it nothing more than a thought? Now we can play. Okay, are you saying that if "citta" is nothing more than a thought, THEN it can be regulated? <...> I'm behind ya 100% on this paragraph, that cittas are so transient AND THEY LEAVE RESIDUE, THEY LEAVE A TRACE OF THEIR EXISTANCE, THEY LEAVE A BIJA (SEED) WHICH COMES INTO FRUITION BY MEANS OF CLINGING. Luckily I have J.Lennon to fall back on when he says "well they shake their heads and they look at me as if I've lossed my mind". Thank You Alberto. Have a good one bros. toodles, colette #93374 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 3:56 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi Herman, ---------- <. . .> KH: > > Beautiful is not the same as ugly, is it?. H: > No, it isn't. And that is because craving is not the same as aversion. Something is beautiful because it is liked, not because beauty is an inherent characteristic of objects or situations, that somehow imposes itself on experience. In the same way, something is ugly because of aversion towards the object or situation, and not by virtue of some characteristic of the object. ------------------- I can sympathise with anyone who says that beauty is 'in the eye of the beholder.' And also 'good and evil:' Shakespeare said that only thinking makes them so. That was right as far as it went. But Shakespeare didn't know about namas and rupas. They have absolute characteristics. Pleasant rupas are inherently different from unpleasant rupas. Kusala namas are inherently different from akusala namas . . . It's a wonderful, profound, unique, new teaching! -------------------------- KH: > > Yes; it's now or never. H: > I agree with you. And, I believe, it is craving and aversion, that continually removes us from the present. -------------------------- Them too, but ignorance of paramattha dhammas is the real killer. Ken H #93375 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:24 pm Subject: Re: The speed of cittas kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------- <. . .> KH: > >Anicca is a characteristic > of all conditioned dhammas and it makes them impermanent. It makes > them impermanent in the absolute sense of the word. H: > Anicca makes them (dhammas) not them. ------- Dhammas are dhammas. Conditioned dhammas are impermanent dhammas. They are impermanent because they have the anicca characteristic. ---------------------- H: > Anicca means that no thing is ever itself (things change while standing - things start as one thing and ceases as another - no known thing is ever itself) ---------------------- One big problem with this Mahayana philosophy is that it doesn't make sense. To say that something is not itself is nonsense. ------------------------------ H: > If a dhamma with it's own characteristic is "seen", it only means the present anicca has been blindsided by craving/aversion. End of story! ------------------------------- End of Mahayana story, you mean! :-) Nagarjuna saw that he could never teach eternal reward (as the Christians call it) while the Abhidhamma remained in tact. If we understand that conditioned dhammas exist then we can understand that there can be the final cessation of conditioned dhammas. Nagarjuna and his followers didn't want anything to do with final cessation. Not many people do. Ken H #93376 From: "Robert" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 9:57 pm Subject: Re: how to view the self avalo1968 Hello Ken, Please elaborate on what you were referring to below as an inherently pleasant rupa. I think I can understand when you say kusala namas are inherently different from akusala namas, but I am having trouble picturing what would be an inherently pleasant rupa. I have always understood rupa as being that which can be experienced through the five senses and that could not be inherently pleasant or unpleasant. What is the correct definition of rupa? Thank you - Robert A. > But Shakespeare didn't know about namas and rupas. They have absolute > characteristics. Pleasant rupas are inherently different from > unpleasant rupas. Kusala namas are inherently different from akusala > namas . . . It's a wonderful, profound, unique, new teaching! > #93377 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:27 pm Subject: How to meet the Future Buddha Metteyya? bhikkhu0 Friends: How to Meet Buddha Metteyya: Buddha Metteyya - the Friendly One - will be the last Buddha in this Aeon! 1: One give gifts (dana ), 2: One should observe morality (sila ), 3: One should practice meditation (bhavana ), 4: One have to be firm & determined (dalha ), 5: Hoping urgently for meeting him with agitated mind (ubbigga-manasa ), 6: One should be stirred by an acute sense of urgency (samvega ), 7: The Observance days (uposatha ) should be rigorously kept. 8: Friendliness (metta ) should be quite carefully cultivated. 9: Deep Concentration (samadhi ) should be regularly trained. 10: Real Understanding should be sought & achieved (panna ). Right conduct can be compared to having sound limbs. Right understanding can be compared to being able to see. If one or the other is missing, a person will be unsuccessful. If both is fully present, the person will be successful. How is The Formal Aspiration to Meet Buddha Ariya Metteyya? http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/Metteyya/arimet10.htm <....> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net How to meet the next future Buddha Metteyya? #93378 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts sarahprocter... Hi TG, --- On Thu, 4/12/08, TGrand458@... wrote: >>S: I'd say there is wise reflecting on concepts, such as wise reflecting on the Buddha's virtues or on the Dhamma, which leads to more calm, more detachment and further understanding. However, the reflecting on concepts can never lead to liberation by itself. ............ ......... ......... ......... ...... >TG: I agree completely. ............ ......... ......... ......... ...... S:>>Ultimately it is the function of right understanding to detach and as you suggest, there has to be the development of such detachment from both the aggregates and the concepts about them. ............ ......... ......... ......... ......... >TG: I agree completely again. A new record! .... S: Yes, nice to have such a record for a change:-) Still basking in the sunny warmth this end .... ... >>Sarah p.s My thoughts and very best wishes to your wife and her friend's family at this time. Thank you for sharing another reminder about the importance of the Dhamma now! ............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... >TG: Thank you so much Sarah. She had progressive cancer and some pain apparently went on for some time without her having it checked out. So she only had about 3 weeks notice when they found it. I didn't know her, but when I heard that she died holding her husbands arm screaming "help me" as her lungs were filling with blood, really hit me too. It was terrifying for her. A 51 and little time to digest it, she just wasn't at all prepared for death, not that any of us necessarily are. Very sad situation. Samsara. :-( >Conditions are crushing us and we have no control over it. If "Dhamma now" means we need to keep making a vigilant effort, I agree. Thanks again Sarah! .... S: Yes, a very sad situation, samsara as you say.....However prepared we may be, such circumstances are certainly the toughest kind of test. I wish her husband and family the very best - it must have been a very tough time for them as well. I certainly agree about the 'crushing conditions' and 'no control'. Making a vigilant effort now, yes, as long as this is also understood to be subject to the same 'crushing conditions' and 'no control'. Transient phenomena roll on, including 'vigilant effort'. At moments of appreciating and understanding this, the anatta aspect of dhammas, there is vigilant effort. Thank you, TG, for kindly sharing the circumstances of your wife's friend - a good reminder to us all that pain and sickness are inevitable sooner or later. Best wishes to your wife too. Metta, Sarah ======== #93379 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Dec 10, 2008 11:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Detailed instructions sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, (Alex & all), You expressed the following beautifully, I thought: --- On Tue, 2/12/08, sprlrt wrote: >The Dhamma gives all the possible indications on the only path which leads out of samsara, satipatthana. Maybe during our beginningless but possibly not endless journey we've heard these explanations many times before, or maybe we're hearing them for the first times in this round of existence. Do we regard dhammas as me and people, as mine and things, as concepts? If so, would those "dhammas" require a Sammasambuddha to be uncovered? Aren't the dhammas far more subtle and elusive than that? According to the Puggala pannati, of the four types of persons who can understand the Dhamma, only two types still remain in our days: neyya puggala, people who require guidance and have to study and develop a great deal of panna to attain nibbana, and padarama puggala, who cannot attain nibbana in this round of existence in spite of all study. In our position how can we afford to skip the Abhidhamma pitaka, in which all dhammas are explained in lenghty details, and jump straight into the Sutta pitaka, which takes for granted an in depth knoledge of dhammas, with any chance of understanding correctly its indications? ... S: How can we (afford to skip the Abhidhamma) indeed? Alex likes to quote repeatedly about the four types of person you refer to above, but I don't think he appreciates that even the details of this are to be found in the Abhidhamma Pitaka and Netti, the ancient commentary to the teachings:-). Actually, many of the 'sutta-only-folk' here are taking on board a lot of Abhidhamma detail and understanding without their even realising it, perhaps:-)). Keep up your helpful summaries, Alberto! Metta, Sarah ======= #93380 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 12:06 am Subject: Re: how to view the self kenhowardau Hi Robert, ---------------- RA: > Please elaborate on what you were referring to below as an inherently pleasant rupa. -------------------- Over the years at DSG I have noticed that many Abhidhamma students (far more knowledgeable than I) have missed this particular point. As you will no doubt agree, good kamma bears good fruit and bad kamma bears bad fruit. The relevant texts have been discussed here many times. According to my understanding 'fruit' refers to pleasant and unpleasant (or desirable and undesirable) sense objects. And I think 'bearing' refers to the *experiencing* of such objects. So vipaka is a moment of sense-consciousness in which a pleasant or unpleasant object is expereinced. And this experience is conditioned by past kamma. The texts say that all sense rupas can be broadly classified as (1) pleasant (2) pleasant/neutral and (3) unpleasant. The first is the result of good kamma, the second of moderately good kamma, and the third of bad kamma. In a moment of vipaka the citta and cetasikas that experience the object always experience it in accordance with its inherent nature. This includes'vipaka feelings.' At the body door a pleasant body- sense rupa will be experienced with a degree of pleasant feeling, and an unpleasant body-sense rupa will be experienced with a degree of unpleasant feeling. (There is never any kusala or akusala kamma involved in vipaka, but there can be these pleasant and unpleasant feelings.) At the four other sense-doors, the impact of the rupa is not strong enough to condition pleasant and unpleasant feelings, and so the feeling (vedana-cetasika) is always neutral at those doors. Even so, all sense rupas are inherently pleasant or unpleasant. Mind- consciousness (as distinct from sense-consciousness) will usually react with craving for pleasant objects and aversion for unpleasant objects (although this is not always the case). This happens even before there has been any conceptualising about the object. It happens in response to the object's inherent nature. ------------------ RA: > I think I can understand when you say kusala namas are inherently different from akusala namas, but I am having trouble picturing what would be an inherently pleasant rupa. ------------------ For the purposes of satipatthana the anicca, dukkha and anatta characteristics are the important ones. And so it is not really necessary to be able to identify any particular rupa as being pleasant or unpleasant. Only the principles about this important point (good kamma, good result: bad kamma, bad result) need to be understood. ----------------- R: > I have always understood rupa as being that which can be experienced through the five senses and that could not be inherently pleasant or unpleasant. ------------------ Yes, some rupas (seven of them) can be experienced through the sense doors. They are the visible, the audible, the olfactory, the gustatory and the [three] tangible rupas. Other rupas can be known at the mind door. As I was saying, it is quite common for Dhamma students to overlook the fact that sense rupas are always - by their inherent natures - pleasant, pleasant-neutral or unpleasant. The texts describe these qualities as being basically the same as we know them in conventional daily life. They can't be pointed out, of course, but if they could they would be easily recognised by the 'ordinary sensible man in the street.' Ken H #93381 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 12:43 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. nilovg Hi James, Op 6-dec-2008, om 2:00 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > I think that we make a mistake if we assume that everytime > the Buddha mentions the six doorways that he is talking about > satipatthana. In the following sutta you quote, Ananda is clearly > talking about satipatthana: using the six doorways to see the three > characteristics. But, this does not translate into the same thing > in the sutta "The All" because there is no lesson there about the > three characteristics. Therefore that sutta isn't about > satipatthana. -------- N: Your post made me reflect further on the sutta of The All. As you say, the first of this series does not mention the three characteristics, and if you look at B.B.'s notes: here, in the first sutta, the All refers to the sensebases. The following suttas deal with the pari~n~nas, clear comprehension, which develops in the course of the stages of insight. As to the first sutta on The All, when the Buddha preached this, was it meant to just hear about it? To have just intellectual understanding of the experiences of the objects through the six doors? I do not think so. What the Buddha said is completely new. We never considered before just seeing that experiences colour through the eye-door. We mixed all impressions and we were immediately absorbed in our thoughts about what is seen, a person, a thing. The arising and falling away of seeing and what is visible cannot be realized immediately, but these realities can be investigated more and more, so that we begin to understand: there is seeing, not 'I see', there is visible object, not something I possess. We can begin to understand their anattaness. When the Buddha preached about realities appearing through the six doors, this meant that people should not be negligent. When hearing or reading about seeing, it can be a condition to be aware right at that moment of seeing that appears so that the truth of seeing can be known. Not a person who sees, not my seeing. It is most urgent to learn this. People in the Buddha's time could attain enlightenment when they heard about the six doors. They had accumulated understanding to that degree. Khemaka, while he preached about realities, could attain enlightenment. When listening there can also be awareness and the development of understanding. So, each time when we read suttas we can be encouraged to be mindful of realities, so that the All will be understood as it is. ****** Nina. #93382 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas (are they monitored by a "prefect" or law officer) sprlrt Hi Colette, ... C: Is "citta" a thought? Is it nothing more than a thought? Now we can play. A: Citta is a dhamma and is real, a thought is pannati and is a convention, not something real, no matter how deeply rooted, and I know we don't agree on this ... Dhammas, 89 cittas, 52 cetasikas and 28 rupas, can be classified and grouped in several different ways, depending on the aspect one is considering. The first, basic, classification divides dhammas into two groups, nama and rupa. The nama group includes all the dhammas that can experience something, an object. Citta is nama and cetasikas are nama, one citta at the time arise together with its cetasikas, at least seven (including sanna, memory, and vedana, feeling), at the same physical base and they all experience the same object, and then fall away together. Rupa cannot experience any objects. Nama (citta & cetasikas) can have three types of objects: rupa, nama and pannati/thoughts. The first class of objects, rupa, can be experienced by nama only through the 5 senses, while the other two, nama (citta & cetasikas) and thoughts/pannati can be experienced by nama (citta & cetasikas) only through the mind door, by thinking when the object of nama is thought/pannati, or by satipatthana when the object of nama is a (single characterisic of a) nama dhamma. All this can be said in many different and more detailed ways but its meaning can be only one. C: Okay, are you saying that if "citta" is nothing more than a thought, THEN it can be regulated? <...> I'm behind ya 100% on this paragraph, that cittas are so transient AND THEY LEAVE RESIDUE, THEY LEAVE A TRACE OF THEIR EXISTANCE, THEY LEAVE A BIJA (SEED) WHICH COMES INTO FRUITION BY MEANS OF CLINGING. A: Conditions is the name of the game, and the object that nama dhammas have, including thoughts, are one (two actually, object, arammana and habits, pakatupannissaya paccayas) of them. I think that when there is thinking that the citta can be controlled or regulated by thinking there is more clinging than when thinking that the citta thinks whatever it thinks because there are all the conditions for thinking that way. Just thinking though... Alberto #93383 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts egberdina Hi Scott, 2008/12/10 Scott : > Dear Herman, > > Thanks for the reply: > > H: "OK. Nibbana is not nama. And it is not rupa either. And it has no > characteristic whatsoever. So what is it that is known when nibbana > serves as object for whatever consciousness?" > > Scott: Nibbaana *is* classified as naama or aruupa (as we know its not > ruupa). It is not like conditioned naamaa, since it is the > asa"nkhataa dhaatu. Nibbana is classified by some commentators, not by the Buddha. As you know, Nibbana is absent from the Sabba Sutta, in which the Buddha expounds the All. Nibbana is included by the commentators, who do not seem to understand the significance of "Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." I think it is naama because, as is one of the > meanings of the word, it makes conditioned consciousness bend towards > it - it is an object of lokuttara citta and accompanying cetasikas. > More commentarial innovation. It might be best to cease discussion at this point. You are discussing Theravadan commentaries, and I am discussing from the vantage point of the overlap between Buddhist Suttas and my life. Cheers Me, myself, I #93384 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas egberdina Hi connie, 2008/12/9 connie : > Hi Herman, > > H; Does a citta occur in time? Or does time occur in a citta? > > c: i've always heard time is just a concept. for myself, i just think if there were no cittas, there'd be no idea of time & that time is relative. i've no idea whether it makes any difference how one sees it - both questions could be answered either yes or no. what makes you ask? > I ask in order to test the pronouncements of people who write in the vein "This is the way it is, and no other". I do not see you as being in that camp :-) Cheers Herman #93385 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 1:53 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. szmicio Dear Nina, > N: What the Buddha said is completely new. We > never considered before just seeing that experiences colour through > the eye-door. We mixed all impressions and we were immediately > absorbed in our thoughts about what is seen, a person, a thing. L: When citta experiences a concept(pa~n~nati), can sati arise and know this citta? Can sati arise and know a concept which is an object for this citta? Still has a lot of doubts about pa~n~nati. What is it? I can smell, i can see, i can hear, i can think, but what is a concept? Citta thinks and we can "touch" it, but we cant "touch" a concept. I think its good to know that there are a realities and a concepts. Realities are real, concepts not. But how citta can experience something that isn't a paramattha dhamma? How long a concept lasts? what is a nimitta of thinking? What is a characteristic, manifestation, function and proximate cause of pa~n~nati? Best wishes Lukas #93386 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas egberdina Dear Alberto, 2008/12/11 sprlrt : > Hi Herman (and Connie) > > ... > H: I am advised by those who intimately know the theory that each citta > vanishes without remnant. To be able to speak of another citta, or a > series of cittas, is to introduce a remnant of former cittas, that > remain, somehow. Else, they could not be known. > ... > > I might be wrong but I think that dhammas are far more subtle to know > than people, tables, theories, mirages etc, otherwise the world we all > sentient beings live in, just one among the many worlds that exist, > wouldn't be such a crowded place :-) I am sorry if anything I say appears harsh, but the above makes no sense to me at all. If you believe it is important enough, could you try rephrasing it to help me understand your point? I understand what you have written to say "dhammas are far more subtle to know than dhammas, dhammas, dhammas etc" > > Anyway, as I mentioned in the post to which I think you are referring, > the function of sanna khandha is to mark or remember the objects it > experiences, an experience it shares with the other 3 nama khandhas, > each with their own function, characteristic etc. (vedana, sankhara or > the other 50 cetasikas, and vinnana or citta). Sanna is a paramattha > dhamma, the uncountable objects it has marked and it remembers can be > both paramattha dhammas and concepts, though concepts are far many > more, than the real dhammas, since every sense door process is > followed by many, possibly even more than that, mind door ones, and > all but the first one have a concept as object, and all of them are > marked and remembered by sanna khanda, otherwise how could the Buddha > (and other arahants too) have recollected their past lives? > > Sanna is real, it arises for a moment and can provide an object to the > mind to think about, when there are conditions for this to happen. I imagine that in order to stay within the theory, this "mind" also is just a momentary arising? > Take a table, no table there actually, In order to deny the reality of a table, I first have to conceive of it. >but after seeing consciuousness > and other cittas of a sense process experience a visible rupa (table, > chairs, mirages, dogs etc.), sanna marks that rupa and when mind door > processes arise & fall, that rupa, visible object, get recognized by > sanna, which has experienced that rupa many many times before in this > lifetime What?? Sanna is a momentary arising in one part of the theory, but persistent in the next part? I hope you are able to clarify. Cheers Me, myself, I #93387 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 2:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: how to view the self egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/12/11 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > ---------- > <. . .> > KH: > > Beautiful is not the same as ugly, is it?. > > > H: > No, it isn't. And that is because craving is not the same as > aversion. > Something is beautiful because it is liked, not because beauty is an > inherent characteristic of objects or situations, that somehow imposes > itself on experience. In the same way, something is ugly because of > aversion towards the object or situation, and not by virtue of some > characteristic of the object. > ------------------- > > I can sympathise with anyone who says that beauty is 'in the eye of > the beholder.' And also 'good and evil:' Shakespeare said that only > thinking makes them so. That was right as far as it went. > > But Shakespeare didn't know about namas and rupas. They have absolute > characteristics. Pleasant rupas are inherently different from > unpleasant rupas. Kusala namas are inherently different from akusala > namas . . . It's a wonderful, profound, unique, new teaching! > Please correct me where I have misunderstood you. There is pleasant red, and unpleasant red. The pleasance and unpleasance are in the red. But that is two characteristics, not one. Pleasant red is pleasant and red. Unpleasant red is unpleasant and red. Therefore, pleasant red and unpleasant red are not absolute. They are reducible. > -------------------------- > KH: > > Yes; it's now or never. > > H: > I agree with you. And, I believe, it is craving and aversion, > that continually removes us from the present. > -------------------------- > > Them too, but ignorance of paramattha dhammas is the real killer. Well, is there anything else besides paramattha dhammas? If paramattha dhammas are ignorant of paramattha dhammas, so be it. Cheers Herman #93388 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 3:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The speed of cittas egberdina Hi KenH, 2008/12/11 kenhowardau : > Hi Herman, > > ------- > <. . .> > KH: > >Anicca is a characteristic >> of all conditioned dhammas and it makes them impermanent. It makes >> them impermanent in the absolute sense of the word. > > > H: > Anicca makes them (dhammas) not them. > ------- > > Dhammas are dhammas. Conditioned dhammas are impermanent dhammas. > They are impermanent because they have the anicca characteristic. > > ---------------------- > H: > Anicca means that no thing is > ever itself (things change while standing - things start as one thing > and ceases as another - no known thing is ever itself) > ---------------------- > > One big problem with this Mahayana philosophy is that it doesn't make > sense. To say that something is not itself is nonsense. > I love it when you flatter me. You credit me, whose only serious Buddhist studies have been meditation and the Suttas of the Pali canon, with being Mahayana or something. Geez, I assume that that means that there are others, presumably called Mahayanists, who have understood Buddhist Sutta notions like mind starting as one thing and ceasing as another, and change while standing, to mean that all phenomena are anicca ie they lack identity. > ------------------------------ > H: > If a dhamma with it's own characteristic is "seen", it only > means the present anicca has been blindsided by craving/aversion. End > of story! > ------------------------------- > > End of Mahayana story, you mean! :-) > > Nagarjuna saw that he could never teach eternal reward (as the > Christians call it) while the Abhidhamma remained in tact. If we > understand that conditioned dhammas exist then we can understand that > there can be the final cessation of conditioned dhammas. Nagarjuna > and his followers didn't want anything to do with final cessation. > Not many people do. > Cessation is cessation. Final cessation is no more cessation than just cessation. There is no difference between absent and totally absent. Can we agree on that? In the interest of fairness, though, I do think that the folks who invented the bhavanga citta, the unknown knowing, are the ones who fear cessation more than anyone. All constructive comments are welcome. Me, myself, I #93389 From: "Herman Hofman" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 3:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The speed of cittas egberdina Hi KenH (and TG), Sorry to butt in. 2008/12/11 kenhowardau : > Hi TG, > > ----------------------- > TG: > Well, since I've gone this far. All 'conditions' are > impermanent. > ------------------- > > O'oh, there's that nebulous Sea of Conditions again. Apparently, in > this sea of conditions there is nothing that conditions and there is > nothing that gets conditioned - but there are conditions nonetheless. > (?) > > How would you know? What would manifest? > Craving/aversion. Ken's world :-) Cheers Herman #93390 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 4:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts sarahprocter... Hi Alex, TG & all, --- On Tue, 2/12/08, Alex wrote: TG:>> Here is Nyanatiloka' s Dictionary description of mind-object- base >(ayatana) -- "it may be physical or mental, past, present, or >future, real or imaginary" > > > >> That settles the issue. LOL A:> It does settle the issue, Sarah. >The mind contents may refer to "real or imaginary" , but that doesn't change the fact that mental content exists and is fully conditioned. .... S: Sorry, but it doesn't settle the issue. Nyantiloka's dictionary has always been a wonderful asset, but it does contain errors and this is a glaring one. As Nina mentioned, I mentioned some of these to B.Bodhi as editor of BPS (the publisher), but he pointed out that it's very difficult to make any changes to any published text when the author is no longer alive. The same error was in the first edition of CMA, edited by B.Bodhi, but as I recall, this has been corrected now. For a lot more detail and textual support, see 'Ayatanas' in U.P. Metta, Sarah ======== #93391 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:00 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts scottduncan2 Dear Herman, Regarding: H: "Nibbana is classified by some commentators, not by the Buddha. As you know, Nibbana is absent from the Sabba Sutta, in which the Buddha expounds the All." Scott: Below is the Sabbasutta.m You've capitalised 'All' for effect and nuanced meaning, I suppose. The balk is directed at the notion that Nibbaana is classified as naama, as far as I can tell. SN 23 (1) Sabbasutta.m "...And what, bhikkhus, is the all? The eye and forms, the ear and sounds, the nose and odours, the tongue and tastes, the body and tactile objects, the mind and mental phenomena. This is called the all. "If anyone, bhikkhus, should speak thus, 'Having rejected this all, I shall make known another all' - that would be a mere empty boast on his part. If he were questioned he would not be able to reply and, further, he would meet with vexation. And for what reason? Because, bhikkhus, that would not be within his domain." [...Ki~nca, bhikkhave, sabba.m? Cakkhu~nceva ruupaa ca, sota~nca saddaa ca, ghaana~nca gandhaa ca, jivhaa ca rasaa ca, kaayo ca pho.t.thabbaa ca, mano ca dhammaa ca " ida.m vuccati, bhikkhave, sabba.m. Yo, bhikkhave, eva.m vadeyya " 'ahameta.m sabba.m paccakkhaaya a~n~na.m sabba.m pa~n~naapessaamī'ti, tassa vaacaavatthukamevassa; pu.t.tho ca na sampaayeyya, uttari~nca vighaata.m aapajjeyya. Ta.m kissa hetu? Yathaa ta.m, bhikkhave, avisayasmi''nti...] H: "Nibbana is included by the commentators, who do not seem to understand the significance of "Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." Scott: Nibbaana is 'included by the commentators' in what? As naama? What is your alternative? What are your arguments against Nibbaana being included as naama? Do you mean to say that the Sabbasutta.m supports the view that Nibbaana is not 'classified' by the Buddha? It certainly isn't classified as one of 'all' the conditioned realities. Or do you mean to suggest that since Nibbaana is not included in a list of conditioned realities that it does not exist? (I thought I'd understood you otherwise, so I'd guess not). I'm sorry but I've not grasped the point this sutta is supposed to support. The 'all' is as it is said, no? This is the range of conditioned dhammas. Nibbaana is the Unconditioned dhaatu. One would not expect to find Nibbaana in this particular list. H: "You are discussing Theravadan commentaries, and I am discussing from the vantage point of the overlap between Buddhist Suttas and my life." Scott: Well, one *does* discuss the Theravadan commentaries on the list, since they are one of the stated accepted textual sources of discussion. Rather than add your voice to the tiresome refrain in the song about how unsatisfactory the commentaries are, why not continue to discuss? I've offered suttas for you, but little comment until I add the commentarial position. Why not? I get it that you are not in favour of the commentarial position. Do you mind if, in discussing suttas with you, I add the commentarial view whenever it suits since this is what I intend to learn in the process? Stick to the suttas then. I'm offering them. What do you mean when you refer to the 'overlap between Buddhist Suttas and [your] life'? Are you suggesting that because one hasn't known Nibbaana one can't discuss it? You wanted to discuss Nibbaana in the first place. I'd be interested in hearing what you mean in this. And what of this sutta I offered: DN 19 8, Mahaagovinda sutta.m: "Again, the Lord has well explained to his disciples the path leading to Nibbaana, and they coalesce, Nibbaana and the path, just as the waters of the Ganges and the Yamunaa coalesce and flow on together and we can find no other proclaimer of the path leading to Nibbaana...other than the Lord." [Supa~n~nattaa kho pana tena bhagavataa saavakaana.m nibbaanagaaminii pa.tipadaa sa.msandati nibbaana~nca pa.tipadaa ca. Seyyathaapi naama ga"ngodaka.m yamunodakena sa.msandati sameti, evameva supa~n~nattaa tena bhagavataa saavakaana.m nibbaanagaaminii pa.tipadaa sa.msandati nibbaana~nca pa.tipadaa ca. Eva.m nibbaanagaaminiyaa pa.tipadaaya pa~n~naapetaara.m iminaapa"ngena samannaagata.m satthaara.m neva atiita.mse samanupassaama, na panetarahi, a~n~natra tena bhagavataa.] Scott: The Buddha seems to be making reference to a point at which everyday life (pa.tipadaa - that is, the culmination of the development of pa~n~naa such that the Path arises and Nibbaana is known) and Nibbaana coalesce. Any comments? I'm hoping you'd reconsider your decision to stop the discussion. I'd hoped that you came in not only to take over for TG but to kindly offer me some much desired intelligent discourse. If you'll not reconsider, thanks for discussing to this point, Herman. Sincerely, Scott. #93392 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Suttas in which the Buddha held back the deep teaching? sarahprocter... Hi Alex, Butting in on your thread with Jon... --- On Tue, 2/12/08, Alex wrote: A: a)jhana mastery does not seem to be a prerequisite for insight development for sotapanna level (although it can certainly help). .... S: I almost had one of TG's fits!! What about all those hundreds of sutta quotes you force-fed us with supposedly showing how essential they were for enlightenment? Weren't you even saying that enlightenment occurred during jhana or something like that? ... A:> It may be the case that jhana, at least of momentary kind, occur just before stream path and/or stream fruition. ... S: Next you'll be referring to the two kinds of jhana - mundane or arammanupanijhana and supramundane or lakkhanupanijhana and suggesting this is what you've been talking about all along, lol! ... A:> The above assumes that Yoniso Manasikaro doesn't include Jhana. 2 conditions for ditthipanno 1) Voice of another 2) Yoniso manasikaro .... S: !!! ... A:> MN2 and AN2.? However all drastically changes for Anagami and especially Arhatship. ... S: What is your support for this? How does the path "drastically change"? Isn't it the continuation and development of the same 8-fold path? Metta, Sarah ======== #93393 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts sarahprocter... Hi TG, Alex & all, >>S: " 'But, venerable sir, in what way can a bhikkhu be called skilled in the elements?' > > "There are, Aananda, these eighteen elements: the eye element, the form element, the eye-consciousness element; .......the body element, the tangible element, the body-consciousness element; the mind element, the mind-object element, the mind-consciousness element. When he knows and sees these eighteen elements, a bhikkhu can be called skilled in the elements." > <....> > .............................................................. >S: As the translators' note to the above quote says: "The mind- object element (dhammadhaatu) includes the subtle material pheonomena not involved in sense cognition, the three mental aggregates of feeling, perception, and formations, and Nibbaana. It ***does not include concepts, abstract ideas, judgements, etc. Though these latter are included in the notion of mind-object (dhammaarammana.As the translators' note to the above quote says: "The mind-object element (dhammadhaatu) includes the subtle material pheonome > > ........................................................... > > > TG: Good Try!!! This "note of the translator" is merely the translator > saying what Abhidhamma says about it. I.E. -- "...according to Abhidhamma..." > > > "What Abhidhamma says about it" is the issue!!! The above note is full of > interior self contradiction. Concepts and such are included in the notion of > "mind-object," but not mind-object-element"? That makes sense...NOT. .... S: No contradiction. Concepts are included in dhammaaramma..na (mind- object), because this refers to all objects of cittas. It's very broad. So sense objects, cittas, cetasikas, subtle rupas, nibbana and concepts can be dhammaarammana, objects of cittas. However, when it comes to dhamma-dhaatu (mind-object element), this is specifically one of the 18 elements (in the sutta above), referring as the note says just to cetasikas, subtle rupas and nibbana. The dhatus (elements) only include paramattha dhammas, dhammas which arise and fall in an absolute sense and can be directly known by insight. So attachment is dhamma-dhatu which can be known when it appears. 'Computer' can be conceived by the mind and the concept, 'computer' is therefore an object of citta, but it can never be directly known, because it doesn't have any characteristics of a reality. It is therefore not a dhatu which 'bears' such characteristics. Metta, Sarah ======== #93394 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas sprlrt Dear Herman, > I might be wrong but I think that dhammas are far more subtle to know > than people, tables, theories, mirages etc, otherwise the world we all > sentient beings live in, just one among the many worlds that exist, > wouldn't be such a crowded place :-) H: I am sorry if anything I say appears harsh, but the above makes no sense to me at all. If you believe it is important enough, could you try rephrasing it to help me understand your point? I understand what you have written to say "dhammas are far more subtle to know than dhammas, dhammas, dhammas etc" A: There is only one dhamma that the eye is able to see, visible rupa only, all the things we "see" are not dhammas, this is my understanding of the Buddha teaching, and this can be proved only by satipatthana, when there are the conditions for panna to arise, instead of avijja, to experience that visible rupa, before sanna turns into something we are more or less familiar with (a table, for instance). If we (mis)take that table for the dhamma that the Buddha called visible object, I think we are on the wrong path. > > Sanna is real, it arises for a moment and can provide an object to the > mind to think about, when there are conditions for this to happen. H: I imagine that in order to stay within the theory, this "mind" also is just a momentary arising? A: Yes, mind and its concomitants are not separable, though they have separate characteristics, functions etc. > Take a table, no table there actually, H: In order to deny the reality of a table, I first have to conceive of it. A: But if you don't conceive a table there is no need to deny it or, at the moment there is sati and panna experiencing visible object, a dhamma, there is no table. >but after seeing consciuousness > and other cittas of a sense process experience a visible rupa (table, > chairs, mirages, dogs etc.), sanna marks that rupa and when mind door > processes arise & fall, that rupa, visible object, get recognized by > sanna, which has experienced that rupa many many times before in this > lifetime H: What?? Sanna is a momentary arising in one part of the theory, but persistent in the next part? I hope you are able to clarify. A: I'll try, the last citta of a sense door process is followed by several bhavanga citta, the last of these is also the mind door, bhavangupaccheda, through wich the object marked or rembembered by the sanna of that citta is passed on, all according to conditions, to the next cittas of this new process. Conditioned dhammas don't last, by they are themselves the conditions for their arising again, six in particular, called hetus, are root-conditions, which are three akusala, moha (avijja), lobha and dosa, and three kusala, amoha (panna), alobha and adosa. Panna is the kusala root that can eventually, when complete, experience nibbana for the last time and destroy all three akusala roots and change the nature of the other three roots from kusala, i.e. still producing results, to kiriya, functional only. Alberto #93395 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts jonoabb Hi TG Thanks for the reply, and apologies for the delay in acknowledging. > TG: My "unconventional approach" is to study Suttas and apply the teachings > to experiences of "my own" and observations of the external world as well. > I study supplimental material and compare it to Suttas to see if it holds up > to Suttas. If it does, then I may find it useful as well. Then the crux is, > do these studies, teachings, practices, lead to detachment or not? If they > do, then they are confirmed to whatever degree they lead to detachment. So what is your understanding of "leading to detachment", in this context? Detachment from what? Jon #93396 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:49 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Series Survey Quote. jonoabb Hi James > Are you kidding me? You don't know what sutta I am talking about > that refers to "The All"? It is, of course, the sutta titled "The > All" (Sabba Sutta): Thanks for the sutta reference. This is one of the suttas I mentioned in an earlier post that is found in the Salayatana ("six sense-bases")-samyutta of the SN. In this sutta, "the All" refers to the six sense-bases. As the commentary explains (according to a footnote in the BB translation), the all of the six sense-bases ("aayatana-sabba") has a narrower range than the all-inclusive all ("sabba-sabba"), i.e., everything knowable, being that which comes into range of the Buddha's knowledge of omniscience. As with the other suttas in the salayatana-samyutta, I would see this sutta as talking about matters directly relevant to the development of insight. Jon > "Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I > will speak." > > "As you say, lord," the monks responded. > > The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear > & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile > sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. 1 > Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe > another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his > statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put > to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html #93397 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:51 am Subject: Re: Suttas in which the Buddha held back the deep teaching? jonoabb Hi Alex > > If jhana is a prerequisite for enlightenment, > > Jhana + wisdom. > > > but not for the development of insight, does this mean the > >development of insight by > > a person who has not yet attained jhana can proceed only so far but > > no further, unless and until jhana is then attained? Is there > > textual support for such an idea? > > By properly developing insight, jhana happens as well. You're a man of surprises, Alex. This is something I've been saying all along! But I'm not sure whether we mean the same thing ;-)) To my understanding, for the person who has developed insight to a high degree but has not developed mundane jhana, when magga citta arises (i.e., when enlightenment is attained) the accompanying samadhi is of the intensity of jhana, and this is the meaning of "momentary samadhi/jhana". Is this your understanding also? Jon PS Thanks for the interesting sutta quotes (snipped for now) #93399 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Thu Dec 11, 2008 5:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts sarahprocter... Dear TG, (Alex, Scott & all), [Continuing my reply to TG's #93115] >>S: This is why, as in this sutta which Scott recently quoted, the teachings only refer to the arising, alteration and falling away of the khandhas (unless they are using a simile or analogy to illustrate a point, such as with the rotting away of the ship): > > Scott:> SN 22 37 (5) Aanandasutta. > > >"...Good, good, Aananda! With form, Aananda, an arising is discerned (uppaado pa~n~naayati) (uppaado pa~n~naayati) , a vanishing is discer(an alteration of that which stands is discerned (.thitassa a~n~nathatta. a~n~nathatta. m). With fa~n~nathatta. > formations.. formations. ..conscious ness an arising is discerne > discerned, an alteration of that which stands is discerned... d > > >"...Saadhu saadhu, aananda! Ruupassa kho, aananda, uppaado > pa~n~naayati, vayo pa~n~naayati, .thitassa a~n~nathatta. p > pa~n~naayati. Vedanaaya... sa~n~naaya.. pa~n~naayati. Vedanpa~ > vi~n~naa.nassa uppaado pa~n~naayati, vayo pa~n~naayati, .thitassa > a~n~nathatta. a~n~nathatta. m pa~n~naayati. Imesa.m kho, aananda, d > pa~n~naayati, vayo pa~n~naayati, .thitassa a~n~nathatta. p > pa~n~naayatiiti. p > ..... > > > ............ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ..... .... .. > > > TG: NOTHING! Nothing there to support their contention. > >TG: Very interesting to note you are dealing with a Sutta that states -- "an alteration of that which stands is discerned." Not theorized as some billionth of a second happening, but actually discerned. Wouldn't Scott say -- How can something stand and change through time...this must be permanence view.... I'll have to run it by Scott. ;-) .... S: The 'alteration of that which stands' just refers to the aging of a dhamma - the momentary aging of the dhamma which is discerned by insight, indicating that there is no break between the arising and falling away of that dhamma. Again, you may find it helpful to look at ~Nanamoli's article on "Anicca (Impermanence) According to Theravada one more time on this point, especially the last quote given by him from the commentary to the Vism. in the following on this point: http://www.accessto insight.org/ lib/authors/ various/wheel186 .html#theravada "This leads us to the second of the three aspects, that of the formation mentioned above; for to be impermanent is to have a beginning and an end, to have rise and fall. "Bhikkhus, there are three formed characteristics of the formed: arising is evident and fall is evident and the alteration of what is present [.thitassa a~n~nathattam] is evident" (AN 3.47/vol. i, 152). And one who possesses the Five Factors of Endeavor [padhaaniya" nga] "has understanding, possesses understanding [pa~n~naa] extending to rise and disappearance" (DN 33/ vol. iii, 237). "Acariya Buddhaghosa makes use of the empirically observable in order to arrive at the radical concept of rise and fall. A cup gets broken (VbhA. 49); the asoka tree's shoot can be seen to change in the course of a few days from pale to dark red and then through brown to green leaves, which eventually turn yellow, wither, and fall to the ground (Vis. Ch. xx/p. 625). The illustration of a lighted lamp is also used; where it goes to when its oil and wick are used up no one knows... But that is crudely put; for the flame in each third portion of the wick as it gradually burns away ceases there without reaching the other parts... That is crudely put too; for the flame in each inch, in each half-inch, in each thread, in each strand, will cease without reaching the other strands; but no flame can appear without a strand (Vis. Ch. xx/p. 622). By regarding seeming stability in ever shorter periods and minuter detail, a momentary view is arrived at. Anything whatever, first analyzed into a five-category situation, is then regarded as arising anew in each moment (kha.na) and immediately dissolving, "like sesamum seeds crackling when put into a hot pan" (Vis. Ch. xx/pp. 622, 626). This is further developed in the commentary to the Visuddhimagga: "Formed [sa"nkhata] dhammas' arising by means of cause and condition, their coming to be after not being, their acquisition of individuality [attabhaava] , is their rise. Their instantaneous cessation and exhaustion when arisen is their fall. Their other state through aging is their alteration. For just as when the occasion [avatthaa] of arising dissolves and the occasion of dissolution [bha"nga] succeeds it, there is no break in the basis [vatthu] on the occasion facing dissolution, in other words, presence [.thiti], which is what the term of common usage 'aging' refers to, so too it is necessary that the aging of a single dhamma is meant, which is what is called 'momentary [instantaneous] aging.' And there must, without reservation, be no break in the basis between the occasions of arising and dissolution, otherwise it follows that one [thing] arises and another dissolves. VisA. 280" ***** TG:> My advice...denounce the Suttas as heresy and get it over with. Whenever you try to use them for support of dhammas theory, realities vs concepts, etc., its just a mess and they harm your position far more than support it. ... S: Any my advice to you and everyone is to really consider what is said in the Suttas and other parts of the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries carefully. Where it seems there are contradictions, such as in the definitions of mind-objects and mind-object element which you mentioned or here with regard to the 'alteration of that which stands' and the momentary nature of dhammas, consider further before jumping to conclusions about whether the Abhidhamma, ancient commentaries or even certain suttas (as some suggest) have really got it all wrong. Metta, Sarah ========