#96000 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:23 pm Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs jonoabb Hi All For those of you who are interested, the Bhikkhu Bodhi translations of the 2 sutta quotes given by Suan are: MN 2, Sabbaasava ("All the Taints") Sutta, MLDB p.91 at par. 21 SN 46:1, "The Himalayas" Sutta, CDB p.1567 Jon #96001 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed Feb 18, 2009 10:29 pm Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Buddha epsteinrob Hi Suan, and Jon. > > > Section 182, Himavantasuttam, Pabbatavaggo, Bojjhangasamyuttam, > Mahaavaggo, Samyuttanikaayo. > > > Here, we can find the Buddha reinforcing the expression `bhaavento' > (developing) with the expression `bahuliikaronto' (repeatedly doing > developmental activities). > > And, before repeatedly doing these developmental activities, the > practitioner first firmly bases oneself on, and establishes oneself > in, Theravada moral principles (Siila). > > Those above evidences are telling us that the Buddha was explicitly > instructing us to undertake formal Theravada bhaavanaa. Thank you. That appears to be quite instructive, and may supply Jon with the ancient reference to meditation on the part of the Buddha which he requested of me. Best, Robert Ep. ============== #96002 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Feb 18, 2009 11:56 pm Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Buddha jonoabb Hi Robert E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" > > Here, we can find the Buddha reinforcing the expression `bhaavento' > > (developing) with the expression `bahuliikaronto' (repeatedly doing > > developmental activities). > > > > And, before repeatedly doing these developmental activities, the > > practitioner first firmly bases oneself on, and establishes oneself > > in, Theravada moral principles (Siila). > > > > Those above evidences are telling us that the Buddha was explicitly > > instructing us to undertake formal Theravada bhaavanaa. > > Thank you. That appears to be quite instructive, and may supply Jon > with the ancient reference to meditation on the part of the Buddha > which he requested of me. I'm afraid it doesn't. There's nothing in Suan's comment that helps explain why these passages are to be understood in terms of activities to be done. I suggest you have a look at the passages yourself and see if you agree. Do you have access to the BB translations? Jon #96003 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 12:23 am Subject: Lukas questions. nilovg Dear Lukas, Your questions were helpful to all of us, and we also profited from Kh. Sujin's answers. I shall make it into a series of transcriptions. If someone here likes to ask questions again on this subject, please can you help me and answer questions addressed to me? I rather spend time on transcribing a great part of our useful discussions, I also promised Ann. So, I rather stay quiet for a while, my physical capacities are limited. Kh. Sujin said that you know all the answers and understand very well. As to Conditions, I shall be grateful to Connie if she wants to continue, she is very capable to do this. Nina. #96004 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 3 sarahprocter... Dear Jessica & all, --- On Tue, 17/2/09, jessicamui wrote: >While meeting with Sujin last week, we discussed that when one is in jhana, all the citta and cetasikas experience the same object of meditation - the nimita. Therefore, although piti and sukha are present in the lower levels of jhana, the mind does NOT know it while in jhana, …. S: Correct – the object of the jhana cittas is the kasina or other kammatthana (object of samatha) only. …. > nor does the body experience the rapture since it is a mental phenomenon. …. S: Just to clarify, body-sense consciousness can only ever experience a tangible object rupa, i.e solidity (hardness/softness), temperature (heat/cold) or motion (pressure). Piiti (rapture) is a cetasika which accompanies certain kusala (wholesome) cittas, (or kiriya cittas of the arahat) and certain akusala (unwholesome) cittas. So you're correct that a) it is never experienced by jhana cittas and b) it's never experienced by body-sense consciousness. … J:>When I read Maha-Assapura Sutta of MN39 (translated by Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikku Bodhi), under the four jhanas(p367) , it is said that ".. he enters upon and abides in the first jhana, which is accompanied by applied and sustained thoughts, with rapture and pleasure born of seclusion. He makes the rapture and pleasure born of seclusion drench, steep, fill and pervade this body, so that there is no part of his whole body unpervaded by the rapture and pleasure born of seclusion... " J:>Does this mean the person is no longer in jhana since he directs his mind to experience the rapture ? …. S: Even now, when not in jhana, cittas rooted in anger or joy condition the rupas of the body, even when not experienced. For example, when angry, the object of the consciousness is the concept about which we're angry, such as our thoughts about the weather, some bad news or what someone said. The same applies when we're happy or excited about something. So when jhana cittas and associated factors arise, the rupas of the body must certainly be conditioned. Of course, no one is ever able to literally 'direct his mind'. Such dhammas arise and fall away by conditions. After the jhana cittas have fallen away, there is reviewing of the jhana cittas and the jhana factors which arose, the object and so on. On the different degree/intensity of piiti and its effect on the body, Nina in 'Cetasikas' quotes the 5 kinds as detailed in the commentaries which I quoted before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/45565 >[Ch.11 Enthusiasm (piiti) contd] Piiti has many intensities. The Visuddhimagga (IV, 94) and the Atthasaalinii (I, Part IV, Chapter 1, 115,116) explain that there are five kinds of piiti. We read in the Visuddhimagga: * "… But it is of five kinds as minor happiness, momentary happiness, showering happiness, uplifting happiness, and pervading (rapturous) happiness. Herein, minor happiness is only able to raise the hairs on the body. Momentary happiness is like flashes of lightning at different moments. Showering happiness breaks over the body again and again like waves on the sea shore. Uplifting happiness can be powerful enough to levitate the body and make it spring into the air… But when pervading (rapturous happiness) arises, the whole body is completely pervaded, like a filled bladder, like a rock cavern invaded by a huge inundation."(IV, 98) * Piiti is able to condition bodily phenomena. The “uplifting happiness” which is the fourth kind of piiti can even levitate the body. One example given by the Visuddhimagga and the Atthasaalinii is the case of a young woman whose parents did not allow her to go to the monastery to listen to the Dhamma. She looked at the shrine which was lit by moonlight, saw people worshipping and circumambulating the shrine and heard the chanting. Then “uplifting happiness” made her jump into the air and arrive at the monastery before her parents."< **** S: I notice that I've marked the passage you referred to in my text with all the Pali terms, so we can continue to discuss it in more detail if you wish. There are similar passages in other suttas, such as the Sama~n~naphaala Sutta. I think these are important points which you raised in Bangkok and here. Metta, Sarah p.s. Apologies for the delayed responses. ======= #96005 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: E-card from Bangkok - discussions with A.Sujin 3 sarahprocter... Dear Jessica & all, --- On Tue, 17/2/09, jessicamui wrote: >We discussed the difference between the pariyatti, pattatti and pativeda with Sujin last week. Sarah and the ones who were there: please correct my understandings if it is wrong: Pariyatti is to experience the present moment nama/rupu phenomenon with sati where panna may or not not present. ... S: This is correct intellectual understanding about these present namas and rupas. Sati and panna have to be present. Pariyatti is a level of panna already. ... >Pattatti is the sati arising with panna momentarily. The panna may be week, may be strong. It can discern the reality. .... S: Pa.tipatti refers to satipatthana. It is the direct understanding of the namas and rupas, so panna has to be firm, though of course it is of degrees. Pa.ti means to reach and patti means particular (object). So it is the direct reaching of the nama or rupa. ... >Pativeda:vipassana nana level of panna where the panna is quite mature and well established. ... S: Correct. [See more in 'U.P.' in the files under "Pariyatti, Patipatti, Pativeda"] I think this is another good topic to continue to discuss as there are so many different ideas about what 'practice' means. It relates to the on-going discussions on bhavana too. Metta, Sarah ========= #96006 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:06 am Subject: Lukas Questions 1, no 1. nilovg Dear Lukas, Q. 2. Can you say more about present moment? I'll find it the only way to develop more understanding. -------- Kh S: That is so true. It is now. N: We never hear enough, we have to continue to listen in order to accumulate more understanding. That is a condition for sati but we should not wish for it. Ann: I think that many people just think of wanting to have sati. What about right understanding? That is much more important. Kh S: Now there is a reality and there can be awareness when there are the right conditions for its arising. But what about the understanding? That is more important. For example, now everyone can experience hardness, but what about the understanding of hardness as just a reality. It is not different from daily life or from this moment. The reality now is exactly the same when there is no understanding or when there is understanding. The same reality is experienced. N: But there is always some idea of the hardness of my body, my hardness. Kh S: That is why it is not enough to think about awareness; we should have more and more understanding of realities in order to become detached from them, detached from seeing them as mine or something permanent. N: It is so hard to get rid of that idea. Kh S: Desire hinders the progress of understanding. If we realize how much ignorance has been accumulated from past lives up till now, we see that there cannot be suddenly strong understanding. N: We cling to self with tanhaa, di.t.thi or maana (conceit). It is very difficult to know these different ways of clinging when I have the feeling that it is my hardness. Kh S: I think that there is not di.t.thi every moment. Who can know whether there is clinging with or without wrong view? It can be known when there is awareness and right understanding. We should start correctly, we should just speak about realities as dhammas. They should be seen as just dhammas. One thinks without understanding about the Dependent Origination or any other subject. (to be continued). ****** Nina. #96007 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 2:40 am Subject: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 8. nilovg Dear friends, After the first stage of insight pa has to be developed further so that it can directly understand conditions for the realities which arise. The second stage of insight is discerning conditions for nma and rpa (paccaya-pariggaha-na). Then pa can be developed further to the degree of realizing the arising and falling away of realities in succession. This is the third stage of insight, comprehension by groups (sammasana na). After that pa should be developed to the degree of realizing the arising and falling away of one reality at a time, separately. This is the first stage of principal insight (mah-vipassan), knowledge of the arising and falling away of nma and rpa (udayabbaya na). After that pa must be developed further so that it can penetrate more the impermanence of realities which fall away all the time. This is the second stage of principal insight, knowledge of dissolution (bhanga na). Then pa must be developed still further to the stage of seeing more clearly the danger and disadvantage of the falling away of realities. This is the third stage of principal insight, knowledge of appearance as terror (bhaya na). After that the fourth stage can be realized, which is knowledge of danger (dnava na). After that pa should be developed to the degree of the fifth stage of insight, knowledge of dispassion (nibbid na). After that several more stages of insight have to be reached before enlightenment can be attained. Pa should understand directly the characteristics of realities. It is impossible to enter the gateway to nibbna if the characteristic of nma is not known, and if only the postures of sitting, lying down, standing or walking are known. If someone knows which posture he has assumed, he has only remembrance or perception of the rpas which arise together in different compositions and constitute a whole of a posture. He does not realize the characteristics of nma and rpa, one at a time, as they arise and appear naturally, just as they are, through the different doorways and then fall away. ******** Nina. #96008 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:04 am Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Threes (49-50) scottduncan2 Dear Friends, Continuing (correctly this time, I hope): CSCD Tii.ni anuttariyaani " dassanaanuttariya.m, pa.tipadaanuttariya.m, vimuttaanuttariya.m. Walshe DN 33.1.10(49) 'Three "unsurpassables": of vision, of practice, of liberation (dassanaanuttariya'm, pa.tipadaanuttariya'm, vimuttaanuttariya'm). Olds [3.49] Three ultimates[ 3.49 ]: The ultimate sight, the ultimate undertaking, the ultimate freedom. RD's [3.49] Three supreme things, to wit, that of vision, that of procedure, that of freedom. **olds: [3.49] (aanuttariyaani: dassana-, pa.tipadaa-, vimutti-) aanuttariyaani: PED: incomparableness, excellency, supreme ideal; anuttara (an+uttara): nothing higher, without a superior, incomparable, second to none, unsurpassed, excellent, preeminent; anuttariya: preeminence, superiority, excellency; highest ideal, greatest good ***rd: 3.49B. refers these to categories of Path, Fruit, and Nibbaaana, with alternative assignments. CSCD Tayo samaadhii " savitakkasavicaaro samaadhi, avitakkavicaaramatto samaadhi, avitakkaavicaaro samaadhi. Walshe DN 33.1.10(50) 'Three kinds of concentration: with thinking and pondering, *1052 with pondering without thinking, with neither (savitakko savicaaro samaadhi, avitakko vicaara-matto samaadhi, avitakko avicaaro samaadhi). Olds [3.50] Three Highs: With Thought and with Reaction; Without Thought and with only a small amount of Reaction; Without Thought and without reaction RD's [3.50] Three species of concentration:3.50--that of mental application followed by sustained thought, that of sustained thought without mental application, that of concentration without either. *walshe: 1052 Different stages of jhaana. The distinction made between the first two seems to reflect the (later) Abhidhammic subdivision of the first jhaana into two. **olds: [3.50] (samaadhii: savitakko savicaaro, avitakko vicaara-matto, avitakko avicaaro) Walshe: thinking and pondering; Rhys Davids: mental application sustained thought; Bodhi: thinking and examining See my re-apprasial of the meaning of vitaka and vicara, Rethinking Vitakka and Reacting to a new definition of Vicara See: Glossology: Samadhi ***rd: 3.50 Samaadhi. Cf. M. III, 162; S. IV, 360; A. IV, 300; Compendium 95. Sincerely, Scott, connie, Nina. #96009 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 5:37 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs scottduncan2 Dear Jon, All, Regarding: MN 2, Sabbaasava ("All the Taints") Sutta, MLDB p.91 at par. 21: "What taints, bhikkhus, should be abandoned by developing? Here a bhikkhu, reflecting wisely, develops mindfulness enlightenment factor, which is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, and ripens in relinquishment. He develops the investigation-of-states enlightenment factor ... the energy enlightenment factor ... the tranquility enlightenment factor ... the concentration enlightenment factor ... the concentration enlightenment factor ... the equanimity enlightenment factor, which is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, and ripens in relinquishment. While taints, vexation, and fever might arise in one who does not develop these enlightenment factors, there are no taints, vexation, or fever in one who develops them. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by developing." SN 46:1, "The Himalayas" Sutta, CDB p.1567: "...And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, develop the seven factors of enlightenment? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness, which is based on seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. He develops the enlightenment factor of the discrimination of states ... the enlightenment factor of energy ... the enlightenment factor of rapture ... the enlightenment factor of tranquility ... the enlightenment factor of concentration ... the enlightenment factor of equanimity, which is based upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. It is in this way, bhikkhus, that bhikkhu, based on virtue, established upon virtue, develops seven factors of enlightenment, and thereby achieves achieves greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states." Sincerely, Scott. #96010 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:18 am Subject: Re: Pariyatti vs. philosophical understanding sukinderpal Hi Colette, Sorry I couldn't respond earlier. You wrote: > You say that you querstionded yourself. > > What is the self? :-) Yes, and I should have given more details but I chose to hide behind the conventional expression. =========== > Obviously I'm way out there in Yogacara and Hinahyana practices which > do not allow you to consider their existance. Sorry Colette, I know nothing about Yogacara and Hinahyana, so I don't know what you mean. =========== > WE are at the point where we can safely suggest that "we do not > know". This gives us a foundation of ignorance. You are gonna have to > produce the buddha as he was when he expired and you are gonna have > to produce the evidence that states that you have the exact words and > thoughts of the Buddha when he said these things. Knowing that we are full of ignorance is a level of understanding and this is good. But this is in relation to the Truth, exactly the 4NT. This makes sense to me as so many other things that have been recorded in the Pali cannon. I have no reason to seek further evidence to prove the rightness of what is stated there. ========== > Hark, do I hear the Buddha's homeland crying out? > > Are you suggesting that the Buddha'd doctrine were not carryied out > by his Hindu breathren when the Muslims invaded and torched the land > of people that did not believe in what they believed? <.....> > Yes, what is a self? > > DAre you to say that the Yogacara's and the Varjayana's et al are > mislead? <......> I have been exposed to other teachings, including other interpretations of the Dhamma / Dharma. All those I happily dropped not long after I came to DSG and began to appreciate this particular understanding. > Thank you for representing yourself. You are welcome. :-) I hope I have not misunderstood anything you've wanted to convey. I generally have difficulty with your style of expression. Metta, Sukinder #96011 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:24 am Subject: Response to Robert E. 1 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, I pick out some parts from here and there to comment on. I'll try to come in from a different angle, but I think overall I would only be repeating myself. This is therefore going to be my last response for now, hoping that you will understand. ************* Rob Ep: The issue is not one of questioning of little items, or just for the sake of it, but whether one is able to discern whether one's overall approach is one that is in touch with realities, moving towards being in touch with realities, or is of an intellectual nature, pointing at concepts in a subtle way, and missing the objects of discernment. Sukin: What do you mean "overall approach"? Perhaps what you have in mind is not the same as what I have in mind? One thing is clear, yours is to separate study from practice as activities to be done in time, and not only this, but also within the one, you distinguish between the study of Sutta from that of the Abhidhamma and commentaries as if they were essentially different. The emphasis on the Abhidhamma made by some of us is only in relation to the fact of clarity and precision got from its formulation / exposition. However with regard to the `message', all three Baskets and the commentaries are seen as being the same, namely the development of understanding about present moment realities. What you perhaps need to appreciate about Pariyatti is that it has the present moment experience as object of study, and it is exactly this pointing to the present moment, which when developed results in the direct study of characteristics, and this is Patipatti. Can you now see why separating pariyatti from patipatti in a way suggesting that one can arise in one situation and not another, would not be part of such kind of understanding? And far from having reason to question the `approach', I think indeed that there is no better conceptual understanding than this whereby insight could arise as a result. ************* Rob Ep: But I do think that the whole idea that I have heard several times, that intellectual knowledge is okay for the time being, because theoretical understanding is necessary before one can develop an akusala view of actual dhammas "in real life" is one that I cannot accept even theoretically. Sukin: First you'll need to change `theoretical' to `intellectual'. The former could suggest encouraging abstractions which would be quite far from the real purpose of study. Given what I wrote above, I think you can now see why pariyatti has nothing to do with choosing to accept or reject anything. If one sees no reason to be concerned about not having much understanding, *this is with a level of understanding* about the nature of the present moment. One may for example see how much more frequent ignorance and other akusala arise and what little understanding in between, is very weak. And this does not mean that direct experience is being discouraged; in fact it encourages it as no other understanding can! After all, the kind of panna insists on studying the present moment and not moving away from it. Unlike what you and others come in with, which then drives you to then sit and meditate, which imo does not reflect right understanding about the nature of realities and therefore not the right cause for the result aimed at. ************ Rob Ep: I think that intellectual knowledge is only corrected as it "takes turns" with practical knowledge, the actual experience of knowing something and seeing something through direct contact. If all the objects of discernment are lifetimes away from direct apprehension, I think the pariyatti thus left to itself is a serious problem. Sukin: That wouldn't be pariyatti then. If the `intellectual understanding' was something which needed to be corrected by direct understanding, then the latter must be caused by something else. And what would this be? `Intention' to practice? Again I think that this is because you fail to understand what pariyatti is, how this is rooted in the same mental factor, namely panna, as with patipatti. This mental factor, like all mental factors which are of kusala or akusala jati, arises and falls away while adding to the accumulations for the same. So regardless of whether there arises any higher level of understanding, pariyatti itself is good and wholesome and could never lead to anything bad. So it seems your objection is quite groundless. ************* Rob Ep: The simplicity of casting away extraneous concerns and understanding the primacy of the real moment is a beautiful and elegant ideal and I think we might - possibly, maybe - all be able to agree on that, if we don't specify further. :-) But that is not what is occupying the moment-to-moment attention of the average Abhidhammika. The system is so complicated that it will take an enormous amount of time and effort just to understand the classifications, let alone get around to actually seeing a dhamma. Sukin: Not just an ideal. You just create your own web and are caught in it. A closer look may reveal that just these experiences through the five senses and the mind are being referred to most of the time. to be continued.. Metta, Sukin #96012 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:26 am Subject: Response to Robert E. 2 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, Continuing. ************* Rob Ep: That is at least a feeling and a fear that I think is worth consideration for this type of endeavor. How can you have a goal so simple and a method that is more complex than anyother philosophical system in existence since the dawn of time? Do those two really go together? Sukin: The real problem is ignorance. It may be that one does not appreciate this that one then ends up trying to sort things out by way of concept, which would be as you suggest, missing the point. Abhidhamma was not taught for us to analyze and think over those details. It was taught so that there might be application in accordance to one's accumulations / level of understanding. One result of this application is the beginning of understanding about conditionality and anatta. And it is this understanding which may then be the driving force to hear more details, the result of which is greater appreciation of these same principles. So it is not about trying to experience all those things said. But there is confidence conditioned by some level of understanding which causes one to then approach those teachings, not with the aim to collect details, but having no reason to reject them either. Besides I think you will have noticed that most of the time here on DSG, the reminders are about just those experiences through the five senses and the mind like, seeing hearing, thinking and so on. Does this not indicate to you where the value is placed? ************* Rob Ep: Why not get on with it and discern nama and rupa and let them fall away. Do we really have to know exactly what nama is interacting with exactly what sense door-helper to work with exactly what cetasikas to discern which particular dhamma? Sukin: Given that one begins to have some appreciation about conditionality and anatta, why would one then think to `control'? How could one make `discerning nama and rupa' arise? But much wrong view has been accumulated and so there will be from time to time such thoughts. The kind of wrong view arises with regard to any and every experience, including sense door ones. So while we continue to have wrong ideas about these experiences, the details in the Abhidhamma point to the truth of what really goes on such that we may then begin to not feed those misunderstandings anymore. And isn't this good? ************** Rob Ep: I do not see, as you do, that intellectual acknowledgment gives a greater guarantee of identifying kusala with honesty than using the natural perceptual and mental capacities "in the field." Sukin: Though I've bee talking so much about the value of intellectual understanding, I must say that it is not easy to come by, at least for me. However, the kind of understanding itself, is one which points to the direction of more honesty. On the other hand, the uninstructed worldling's ideas about "in the field", is likely one which is the result of one or more of the three papanca dhammas, namely craving, conceit and view. to be continued.. Metta, Sukin #96013 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:27 am Subject: Response to Robert E. 3 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, Continuing.. ************* Rob Ep: Abhidhamma does talk about everyday life and discerning the natural namas and rupas as they arise, and I am in favor of that too, but I don't see what that has in common with excessive philosophical analysis. I think they are working in opposite directions after a certain point. Sukin: Would you rather go by those concepts which are the result of the uninstructed worldling's conceiving? What I'm saying is that avijja and tanha are familiar with certain concepts and resist those which point to the Truth, are you saying then that we encourage this to continue? Moreover, those conceivings often include `self view' which may then oversimplify the Dhamma while suggesting the need for `keeping things simple'. ************* Rob Ep: Why is it less honest to sit down with oneself and say "Well I am not very good at any of this and probably have little panna, but now I'm going to sit down and see what arises with my own eyes. Conditions will dictate what takes place." That seems just as "raw" and "looking at the moment" as discerning them in daily life, and much more so that looking for answers through philosphical analysis of every last citta and cetasika that have been identified by the sages. Sukin: Interest in hearing the Dhamma is conditioned by saddha. Can the same be said about meditation? I don't believe the Buddha taught anyone to do what is done in the name of `meditation'. You will think that he did and insist that your following it is conditioned by some degree of saddha. Saddha that is related to the Triple Gems must involve understanding and this begins with pariyatti. What is involved in ideas about meditation are stories about a self who acts in time, and following such scripts can't be due to any panna imo. If there is wrong understanding at the intellectual level, wrong practice follows and this can't be with any saddha whatsoever. So the question really is, not that you decide to meditate and what follows from there, but that you conceive of the idea at all. ************** Rob Ep: I do agree with your spirit which is expressed very beautifully in your last paragraph about being honest with yourself intellectually before going off to do things that you are not qualified to do in practice. Sukin: No, I'm not really saying that. What I'm saying is that there are different levels of understanding with regard to the Four Noble Truths. This is Pariyatti, Patipatti and Pativedha, or Suttamaya panna, Cintamaya panna and Bhavanamaya panna. Pariyatti is not *used* for patipatti, indeed it helps in steering one away from such ideas. We start with wrong view, but with the Dhamma there can be a beginning of right view arising. The latter works to gradually loosen the hold of the former. If patipatti is to arise later, it would be due to countless arising of pariyatti in relation to all experiences. So its not like you decide to meditate and hope that by continuing to also study, the `theory' will help correct or improve the overall practice. Rather it is that right practice won't arise if we continued to be moved by wrong understanding at the intellectual level and one such manifestation of this is the concept of meditation. If right understanding were to arise while meditating, this would be due to past accumulated right understanding, including of the pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the activity and not as a result of it. And this would lead to seeing the wrongness of the endeavor hence dropping it at some point. ************* Rob Ep; Perhaps you are right. However, I am not speaking theoretically, and maybe my pariyatti is not adequate to do so, but I am speaking in terms of what I know about theory and practice. I don't think it is a totally wrong analogy to say that sutta and abhidhamma are like the menu, or the instruction booklet, and that discerning realities in line with the Dhamma in life is the meal or the action. It would be silly to order a meal without reading and absorbing the menu. Sukin: One has a concept as object and the other a characteristic of a reality. But I think this is how far the comparison should apply. In terms of material food, no matter how long you `think' about it, the stomach does not receive anything, except ever more and more acids. ;-) The relationship between pariyatti and patipatti is however quite different in this regard. For one thing the mind never stops arising and falling away. Second, each arising accumulates as tendency, besides contact, volition and consciousness are considered mental nutriments. Third, pariyatti *is* a condition for patipatti. So the citta and accompanying mental factors perform their functions as they must, regardless of whether we think and wish otherwise. Pariyatti may not arise as often as we would like, but nothing can be done about this. However when it does, it increases the possibility of patipatti arising in the future. Indeed wanting to have the one in preference to the other, if this is a condition for anything to later arise, it would just be more wanting and perhaps some illusion of result. to be continued.. Metta, Sukin #96014 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:28 am Subject: Response to Robert E. 4 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, Continuing ************ Rob Ep: If you say that we read and absorb the ideas and then they are applied in daily life as we go through various activities and we naturally discern realities to the extent our panna allows at that time then I would say "that sounds like a good practice." Then I would ask do you actually have a possibility of perceiving what you are reading about? If the answer is that it is very long way off, so we have to keep reading and wait, then I will say maybe that is really the way it is, but it starts to make me a lot more uncomfortable. I don't think the Buddha said to understand sutta 100% in this lifetime and practice Right Practice, Right Livelihood, Right Intention, etc. in a subsequent lifetime. So it seems that pariyatti can only be part of the practice. Sukin: I agree with you, the Buddha couldn't have said such a thing. When I talk about patipatti following from pariyatti, I am not only talking about something which involves long-time-development, but also that all this is about the development of one particular mental factor, namely Panna. So it is not about waiting for one stage to be reached before endeavoring on another stage, nor does any of this involve `absorbing ideas'. One is not moved by a theory. The development of panna works not in a way we imagine it to. For example it is not about perceiving all those details that we read about. The end result is got not because we are now given a precision instrument, but rather it is from the accumulative effect of all those lower levels of understanding in the past. And btw, pariyatti and patipatti are conditioned by the same set of mental factors namely right view, right mindfulness, right concentration etc. This separation of the various path factors to mean different practices is yet another perversion of the Teachings. ********** Rob Ep: It seems like there is a sense here that there can be no development even while saying that development must take place. This idea that if you adopt a practice that it can never be kusala does not seem right to me. Each moment is unique and comes from and leads to various accumulations and tendencies. There is a certain fear it seems that once making a decision to do something and having any akusala understanding, it will go down the wrong path and never come back out. This does not seem correct to me. Sukin: Of course one can always come back out. But this would mean seeing the wrong view for what it is, namely that it takes one in a direction which makes it increasingly hard to get on the Path. You Rob, are insisting on the wrong path and trying to justify it by arguing that it is possible to have kusala arise even if in between there are akusala. This is actually wrong view (Mara) doing the talking, trying to perpetuate itself by use of logic and reason. There is development and practice of course, only not as Mara dictates. ;-) to be continued.. Metta, Sukin #96015 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:28 am Subject: Response to Robert E. 5 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, Continuing.. *********** Rob Ep: I think it is wrong to say that no one gives the mode of attention any care. There are countless indications as to what constitutes right practice or not, according to the specifications of the Buddha. And they are carried on by Theravada teachers. Sukin: Yes, right. There is "`no one' to give the mode of attention any care". Wrong view however convinces itself that it is right, and it is only with the arising of panna that this will be seen through. What did the Buddha say about right practice? I think understanding what Satipatthana is will give one a good idea what the Path is and that anything else must be wrong indeed. Regarding Theravada teachers, those who take upon themselves to be giving instructions and advise about the "practice", the phenomena to me is that of `the blind leading the blind'. :-/ ********* > Obviously it is not dana, sila nor samatha bhavana, Rob Ep: And who says it is not? > does this not leave akusala of one kind or another as being the only possibility? Rob Ep: If the assumption were correct, but why would it be? Sukin: Dana is the arising of non-attachment and manifests as giving. Sila is restraint and involves action towards others. Samatha bhavana has specific objects and involves a corresponding level of understanding. For example `breath', this is not the breath which any Tom, Dick and Harry conceives of. It requires a precise understanding of what it is that is being experienced from moment to moment, and also the subtleness of it as compared to other objects. *********** > And since some of it gives the impression of "knowing", would this > not in fact be due to "wrong view"? Rob Ep: If that were the case, but who says that it is? And on what basis? Sukin: Aren't experiences being `observed' and does not this impress as `knowing' what is going on? ******** Rob Ep: Where the matter comes down is to what is meditation? To me it is not separate from Dhamma, it is part of the Dhamma, and a means that Buddha included as part of the teachings. Therefore it cannot be left out. Sukin: You have not explained what meditation is here. But you have said something in another post where you gave descriptions of what is merely conventional. But just as `anger' can be precisely pointed out to in terms of characteristic, function and cause instead of descriptions in terms of outward manifestation, you have yet to acknowledge `bhavana' in these same terms. I think until this is done, we can't really be making a correct assessment of its place in the Teachings. ********* Rob Ep: Meditation as a formal activity is no more nor less real than a book that one reads. If you can read sutta you can sit and breathe. I understand what you say about breathing being an advanced object. However, Buddha did not say that it should not be attempted by beginners. Sukin: Do you expect the Buddha to have addressed all possible questions? ;-) One things is clear, the direct audience of the Buddha came to *listen* to the Teachings, and this too with great respect. People today like to hear only what they like to hear and often oversimplify. They come to conclusions such as that they need to read only a handful of Suttas after which they will rely on their own ability. This is conceit, and what a contrast it is from the other group. to be continued.. Metta, Sukin #96016 From: "Sukinder" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:30 am Subject: Response to Robert E. 6 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, Continuing. ********* Rob Ep: I think you make some interesting points about practicing where one is and not trying to imitate the advanced stages of others, but when you get to the end you make some leaps of logic that don't compute. To say it "obscures everything about the Dhamma including what practice is" seems too much to me. I think we can be cautious and proportional without overstating the case. Sukin: Perhaps. But one thing is sure; ignorance is the root of all akusala. Therefore when it comes to determining what the 4NTs are, one of which being the Path, if one's understanding is wrong here, it means that the other three Truths are not understood either. ********* Rob Ep: What is your source for this opinion? I mean this literally: I would like to know the source. I do not understand what is so restrictive about the basic meditation exercise for almost every culture. There is no one who does not breathe, no one who is not familiar with the sensation of the breath in the body. What you say does not make sense to me. The idea that *breathing,* the most basic natural activity, is the most advanced meditation object, is one of those instances which puts the logical upside-down. Sukin: Exactly this. That you refer to `breath meditation' as something taught in all culture and the fact of it being an activity common to all, is reflection of what I'd characterize as the uninstructed worldlings conceiving and proliferations. You are saying in effect that these other teachings are already on the Path more or less, regardless of whether they have heard or not the Dhamma and if so, agree or disagree. To me this is a reminder of how subtle the Dhamma is and how easy it is to go wrong with regard to the reading and interpretation. In the Visuddhimagga it is mentioned the breath being an object suitable only for Buddhas and the great disciples. ******** Rob Ep: Considering that you do not believe that Buddhism is prescriptive, you have an awful lot of warnings as to what others should *not* do. Why not let them do as their own accumulations direct them to do, when they hear about anapansati? If they were not ready for it, why would they be interested? I know plenty of people who think mediation is a great bore and can't understand why they'd want to do it at all. Sukin: Firstly, I'm not trying to stop anyone from doing anything. This is a discussion revolving around View, right and wrong. These two are leaders at any moment that we are making a statement about what is and what is not the Dhamma. Cautioning someone about `meditation' is of no use. When you state above, that if interest arises on hearing about Anapanasati, one should be allowed to follow one's accumulations, because this must reflect their being ready for it, you are taking `interest' as being indicative of accumulated understanding. Why should this be? Can't attachment and wrong view take on any object with interest? And when you say that some people find meditation boring, are you suggesting that this reflects lack of understanding? And should I allow you to follow your accumulations with all this? ;-) ********** Rob Ep: What is the source for saying that these activities were only for those in the audience at that time? Do you have anything other than deduction and speculation to support this view? Sukin: The commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta describes the setting to some extent. Metta, Sukin #96017 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:33 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs abhidhammika Dear Scott, Robert Ep, Jon, Sarah, Howard, James, TG, colette, Herman, Robert K, Nina, Alex, and all How are you? Bhikkhu Bodhi translated the following Pali passage by omitting important details: "Kathaca, bhikkhave, bhikkhu siilam nissaaya siile pati.t.thaaya satta bojjhange bhaavento satta bojjhange bahuliikaronto mahantattam vepullattam paapu.naati dhammesuuti? . .. Evam kho, bhikkhave, bhikkhu siilam nissaaya siile pati.t.thaaya satta bojjhange bhaavento satta bojjhange bahuliikaronto mahantattam vepullattam paapu.naati dhammesuu"ti." "...And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, develop the seven factors of enlightenment?" . .. It is in this way, bhikkhus, that bhikkhu, based on virtue, established upon virtue, develops seven factors of enlightenment, and thereby achieves achieves greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states." Suan add missing details: With due respect to Sayadaw Bhikkhu Bodhi, I add missing details with literal original syntax for Robert Ep and those who do not read Pali. "And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, achieve greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states by developing the seven factors of enlightenment, by repeatedly doing (bahuliikaronto) the seven factors of enlightenment? . . It is in this way, bhikkhus, that a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, achieves greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states by developing the seven factors of enlightenment, by repeatedly doing (bahuliikaronto) the seven factors of enlightenment." Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: Dear Jon, All, Regarding: MN 2, Sabbaasava ("All the Taints") Sutta, MLDB p.91 at par. 21: "What taints, bhikkhus, should be abandoned by developing? Here a bhikkhu, reflecting wisely, develops mindfulness enlightenment factor, which is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, and ripens in relinquishment. He develops the investigation-of-states enlightenment factor ... the energy enlightenment factor ... the tranquility enlightenment factor ... the concentration enlightenment factor ... the concentration enlightenment factor ... the equanimity enlightenment factor, which is supported by seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, and ripens in relinquishment. While taints, vexation, and fever might arise in one who does not develop these enlightenment factors, there are no taints, vexation, or fever in one who develops them. These are called the taints that should be abandoned by developing." SN 46:1, "The Himalayas" Sutta, CDB p.1567: "...And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, develop the seven factors of enlightenment? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness, which is based on seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. He develops the enlightenment factor of the discrimination of states ... the enlightenment factor of energy ... the enlightenment factor of rapture ... the enlightenment factor of tranquility ... the enlightenment factor of concentration ... the enlightenment factor of equanimity, which is based upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. It is in this way, bhikkhus, that bhikkhu, based on virtue, established upon virtue, develops seven factors of enlightenment, and thereby achieves achieves greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states." Sincerely, Scott. #96018 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:04 am Subject: Re: Subject: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Buddha epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: [...] Just so, monks, a monk supported by virtue, fixed in virtue, cultivating the seven limbs of wisdom and making much of them, wins to greatness and growth in conditions. {Comy refers to Kosala-Samyutta; S i 68-102; KS i 93ff}. [...] One who cultivates the seven limbs of wisdom.... So one cultivates? > A bit later the chapter talks about how "Just as this {cf Expos 204} body, monks, is supported by material food and stands in dependence on it, stands not without it, - even so, monks," the hindrances and seven limbs of wisdom; respectively fed in the manner of attention, 'unsystematic' and 'yoniso'. > > Then there is a sutta about how "when the seven limbs of wisdom are thus cultivated, cultivated, again. > When a monk, so dwelling aloof, remembers and turns over in his mind the teaching of the Norm, it is then that the limb of wisdom which is mindfulness is established {aaraddho} in that monk. When he > cultivates the limb of wisdom which is mindfulness, There he goes, cultivating again. Turning the teaching over in his mind, which is at least a practice of contemplation, not an "everyday arising" of dhammas, but a "turning over the teaching in his mind" over and over again - ie, a *practice.* > then it is that the monk's culture comes to perfection. So that's what does it. He practices and practices, turning the teaching over in his mind, and the outcome is that his "culture comes to perfection." Practice makes perfect. > Thus he, dwelling mindful, with full recognition {pa~n~naaya} investigates and applies insight {pavicarati} Uh-oh - now he's investigating and applying his insight. This does not seem natural to me. It seems like he has developed another "practice." What can be the result of all this "investigating and applying" but akusala notion of self doing the applying? to that teaching of the Norm and comes to close scrutiny of it. > Now, monks, at such time as a monk, dwelling thus mindful, with full recognition investigates and applies insight to that teaching of the Norm, then it is that the limb of wisdom which is Norm-investigation is established in that monk. Is is when he cultivates the limb of wisdom which is Norm-investigation that, In this paragraph he is scrutinizing, investigating, applying insight and cultivating. These are all verbs. All actions. All activities. All practices. None of them are stated as happening by themselves through natural arising, but through cultivation and practice. The results are also stated in the passive, showing that the more active statements are indeed ones of actions taken. as he comes to close scrutiny of it, by his culture of it, it comes to perfection. See, the above is the "result-language." But prior is the "cultivation language." Cultivation leads to certain results. > As with full recognition he investigates and applies insight to that Norm-teaching, then unshaken energy {asalliinam} is established in him. > >> Okay, he does the action: "He investigates and applies insight..." which leads to the result: "unshaken energy is established in him." It's cause and effect, also known as dependent arising. > the chapter also covers another 'method' is also discussed: (vi) Ku.n.dalii {One who wears ear-rings} > [...] Four stations of mindfulness, Ku.n.daliya, I highlight the segment below: >if cultivated and made much of,< If cultivated and made much of. How is something cultivated and made much of, I wonder? Sounds again like a systematic practice to me. > complete the seven limbs of wisdom. And that is how the seven limbs of wisdom are completed. Best, Robert E. =========================== #96019 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 7:07 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Buddha epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" > > Here, > we can find the Buddha reinforcing the expression `bhaavento' > > > (developing) with the expression `bahuliikaronto' (repeatedly > doing > > > developmental activities). > > > > > > And, before repeatedly doing these developmental activities, the > > > practitioner first firmly bases oneself on, and establishes > oneself > > > in, Theravada moral principles (Siila). > > > > > > Those above evidences are telling us that the Buddha was > explicitly > > > instructing us to undertake formal Theravada bhaavanaa. > > > > Thank you. That appears to be quite instructive, and may supply Jon > > with the ancient reference to meditation on the part of the Buddha > > which he requested of me. > > I'm afraid it doesn't. There's nothing in Suan's comment that helps > explain why these passages are to be understood in terms of > activities to be done. > > I suggest you have a look at the passages yourself and see if you > agree. Do you have access to the BB translations? > > Jon I don't personally have those translations. Where would they be contained? Thanks, Robert E. - - - - - - - #96020 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:09 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs scottduncan2 Dear Suan, Regarding: "And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, achieve greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states by developing the seven factors of enlightenment, by repeatedly doing (bahuliikaronto) the seven factors of enlightenment? "It is in this way, bhikkhus, that a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, achieves greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states by developing the seven factors of enlightenment, by repeatedly doing (bahuliikaronto) the seven factors of enlightenment." Scott: Development consists only and solely of the repeated arising and falling away of wholesome states according to conditions. This is clear. Bahuliikaronto refers only to this repeated arising and falling away of wholesome states. To suggest that 'a bhikkhu' is the entity which is 'repeatedly doing' is a superfluous attribution. There are only states and only conditions. I'll leave Jon and others to persist in this. Sincerely, Scott. #96021 From: "Robert" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:12 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud avalo1968 Hello Jon and all, I stop by DSG from time to time and can always rely on this topic being one under discussion. I am sure the question has been asked before, and so apologize for being redundant, but I am curious about one issue: Do those who adhere to the no-meditation position feel any unease about this position being so out of step with almost all modern Theravada teachers with the exception of Khun Sujin? I have been interested in Buddhism and trying to practice Buddhism for many years and there is always the question of interpreting the sources of the teachings and deciding how to actually put them into practice. Often there is disagreement among interpreters and translators, there are suttas and commentaries, some of which seem to stray quite far from the suttas they are commenting on, and there are modern teachers from Bhikkhu Bodhi to Khun Sujin, who also disagree in fundamental ways. So, I would be interested in the opinions of those who visit here on how one should decide - what are the teachings that should be followed? I have heard some express the opinion that one follows only what can be found in the suttas, but unless one is a Pali scholar, there is the problem of translation and interpretation by the translator. DSG is proof positive that the same sutta can be interpreted in radically different ways. At the same time, there is no reason to believe the commentaries express an understanding of the teachings of the Buddha, because they are someone else's interpretation of those teachings. I am happy there is no such thing as a Buddhist pope or catechism, for I do think that, in the end, everyone needs to decide for themselves, but would be interested in any suggestions as to the best way to do that. Thank you, Robert A. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" > > Here, > we can find the Buddha reinforcing the expression `bhaavento' > > > (developing) with the expression `bahuliikaronto' (repeatedly > doing > > > developmental activities). > > > #96022 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB r... upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Suan) - In a message dated 2/19/2009 11:10:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Bahuliikaronto refers only to this repeated arising and falling away of wholesome states. To suggest that 'a bhikkhu' is the entity which is 'repeatedly doing' is a superfluous attribution. There are only states and only conditions. ============================ It occurs to me that 'repeatedly doing' can refer to the repeated occurrence of willing leading to actions, with there being any need for a doer of a deed. With metta, Howard Emptiness *(From the Uraga Sutta) #96023 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 6:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB r... upasaka_howard Hi again, Scott & Suan - In a message dated 2/19/2009 2:19:09 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... meant to write: It occurs to me that 'repeatedly doing' can refer to the repeated occurrence of willing leading to actions, WITHOUT there being any need for a doer of a deed. ========================== With metta, Howard *(Anonymous) #96024 From: "colette" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:15 am Subject: Theravada Does Not Mean Commentaries Re: K.Sujin on meditation... ksheri3 THE FRIENDLY FINGER, no? Good Morning James, Okay, "pointing" requires something as being tangible or able to be visualized, in a certain direction. <...> Is Theravadan or Theravada, THEN equal to a "finger" pointing a person in the "right direction"? This is exactly the problem, IMO, that the Buddha was specifically working on when he made it clear that the Dharmas and Suttas themselves are transient and akin to or like a boat used to cross a river. It also clearly illucidates the conception of the transience of life since it means different things to each individual and arises and ceases at an extradorinary fast "blink of an eye", for lack of better terms. toodles, colette #96025 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:03 pm Subject: Re: Lukas questions. szmicio Dear Nina I am happy that i can support our friends here. Of course I will help answering. > Your questions were helpful to all of us, and we also profited from > Kh. Sujin's answers. L: I thought also about you when I asked them. > As to Conditions, I shall be grateful to Connie if she wants to > continue, she is very capable to do this. L: Yes I think the same. Don't work to hard,Nina. Take your time. My best wishes Lukas #96026 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 8:21 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object szmicio Dear Connie > CONDITIONS, Chapter 2 > When visible object is experienced through the mind-door it has fallen away. Also seeing can be object. Citta can through the mind- door experience another citta such as seeing which has just fallen away. It must have fallen away since only one citta at a time can arise. There may be, for example, a citta with understanding (pa) which realizes seeing as a conditioned nma which is impermanent. L: Can you say something about dhammaarammana? Can panna arise with citta which experience a concept? How many kinds of pa~n~na there is? ---- >Even during sleep, the life-continuum takes the object which was >taken in the dying process of the previous existence and is one of >three kinds: (1) past action (kamma), (2) sign of action (kamma >nimitta) and (3) sign of destiny (gati-nimitta). L: Can you explain it? My best wishes Lukas #96027 From: "szmicio" Date: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:52 pm Subject: RFC, Disp 204 and Vibhanga szmicio Dear Connie Dispeller states: "204.These too, at the time of reviewing the trainees'(sekha) and non- trainees(asekha) paths <63.5>, have the paths as object (maggaaramma.na). They have the paths as root-cause (maggahetuka) throught its being conascent root-cause at the time of the path. They have the path as predominance(maggaadhipati) through object predominance by giving weight to the path at the time of reviewing. And they have the path as predominance througt conascent predominance in one who develops the path with energy(viriya) foremost or investigation(viima.msaa) foremost. They should not be said to have such objects in one who develops [the path] with zeal(chanda) foremost or consiousness(citta) foremost." ------------------- L: I found it in Vibhanga, Analysis of Bases, Questionnaire(the last paragraph of the triplets): "Ten bases have no objects. Two bases sometimes have path as their object; sometimes have path as their cause;sometimes have path as their dominating factor; sometimes should not be said to have either, path as their object;path as their cause or path as their dominating factor" L: I think this point is very important to my further understanding, so we should stay here for a while. Ten bases are 5 internal and 5 external ayatanas. Two bases are mind base and ideational base. As i understand it is about reviewing past magga-cittas. This passage from vibhanga describes cittas of ariyans. They can review old moments of PATH and also have diffrent cittas which do not experience past magga-cittas!!?? -------------- "Two bases sometimes have path as their object; sometimes have path as their cause;sometimes have path as their dominating factor" L: So magga-citta as object for present citta reviewing it, is always past. That's what i really don't understand. How past, distant in time citta can be an object to present citta? Dispeller states it as: "204.These too, at the time of reviewing the trainees'(sekha) and non- trainees(asekha) paths <63.5>, have the paths as object " --------- Vibh: "..sometimes have path as their cause;" Dispeller: "They have the paths as root-cause (maggahetuka) throught its being conascent root-cause at the time of the path." L: Yeah but again, how past moments of PATH can be a cause(hetu) for present citta, which reviewing the PATH. I don't know such hetu like magga-hetu.Is it a 7th hetu? -------------- Vibh:"..sometimes have path as their dominating factor" Dispeller:"They have the path as predominance(maggaadhipati) through object predominance by giving weight to the path at the time of reviewing." L: I dont know such kind of condition as maggaadhipati. I know adhipati-paccaya. Can you explain it to me? ----------- Those two bases are mind base and indeational base. The pali terms for them are: manaayatana and dhammaayatana. Can you explain me what is a diffrence beetween them? That's really wonderful classification. It helps us to understand. My best wishes Lukas #96028 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:57 am Subject: Lukas Questions I, no 2. nilovg Dear Lukas, (continuation Q about present moment): N: I still keep on wondering about the difference between sati and thinking. They seem so close. Kh S: That is why there needs to be more understanding about non- self. Right now one can begin to understand the reality which appears, such as hardness. Understanding can become detached from thinkoing about it as some thing. Hardness cannot be anything else but hardness. One can begin to understand it as a reality. Nobody can control it, it has arisen and then fallen away. When there is understanding of a characteristic as a dhamma, understanding can grow. Sound appears and when we do not think much about it, it is just sound as usual. Sound is experienced by hearing, but there is no understanding of it as just a dhamma. One is not familiar with the characteristic of a dhamma. In order to understand what a dhamma is, we should remember that this is not merely a word, but a characteristic which appears. Without hearing, sound cannot appear. There must be a reality which experiences sound. Naama has no shape or form, but it can experience something, just like now. Just beginning to experience realities is better than reading a great deal about Dhamma subjects. Realities that are appearing now should be understood. If one has not heard Dhamma, one is blind from birth, one lives without any understanding. ******** Nina. #96029 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:20 am Subject: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 9. nilovg Dear friends, As we read in the Sutta, nanda said to Udyin with reference to seeing-consciousness, that the Buddha had explained that this is also without the self. nanda said to Udyin: 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. He repeated the same about the other sense-cognitions and the consciousness which experiences objects through the mind-door. This Sutta shows how beneficial it is that the Buddha explained the Dhamma completely and in all details. He explained about all types of citta, which are nma. If someone could realize the noble Truths by having only one kind of object of mindfulness, of what use would it be that the Buddha explained about all the other dhammas? He explained all about seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, the experience of tangible object, thinking, pleasant and unpleasant feeling, remembrance and other dhammas. He did so in order to help people to be mindful of these realities, to consider, study and clearly comprehend them. That is the way leading to the complete eradication of doubt and wrong view about nma and rpa. Someone may believe that, by knowing only one type of nma or one type of rpa, he can still realize the noble Truths. He pretends to be able to realize enlightenment, but he does not understand the characteristics of nma and rpa as they naturally appear, just as they are. Then he is sure to have doubt and uncertainty about the nma and rpa he believes he cannot know. It is evident that he in that way cannot attain enlightenment. *********** Nina. #96030 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 3:04 am Subject: Theravada Does Not Mean Commentaries Re: K.Sujin on meditation... buddhatrue Hi Colette, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > THE FRIENDLY FINGER, no? > Well, I suppose that's better than the unfriendly finger. :-) Metta, James #96031 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:26 am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner scottduncan2 Dear All, Continuing: The Path of Purification. "58. In directional pervasion, with twenty kinds of absorption in each of the directions beginning with 'all beings in the eastern direction' there are two hundred kinds of absorption; and with twenty-eight kinds in each of the directions beginning with 'all women in the eastern direction' there are two hundred and eighty kinds of absorption. Consequently all the kinds of absorption mentioned in the Pa.tisambhidaa amount to five hundred and twenty-eight." Path of Purity. "And as regards suffusion through the quarters: - 'All beings in the East,' and so forth, - in this way there are two hundred ecstasies, twenty being in each quarter. 'All women in the East,' and so forth, - in this way there are two hundred and eighty ecstasies, twenty-eight being in each quarter. There are thus four hundred and eighty ecstasies. In all there are five hundred and twenty-eight ecstasies mentioned in the Pa.tisambhidaa." Disaaphara.ne pana sabbe puratthimaaya disaaya sattaatiaadinaa nayena ekamekissaa disaaya viisati viisati katvaa dvesataani, sabbaa puratthimaaya disaaya itthiyotiaadinaa nayena ekamekissaa disaaya a.t.thaviisati a.t.thaviisati katvaa asiiti dvesataaniiti cattaari sataani asiiti ca appanaa. Iti sabbaanipi pa.tisambhidaaya.m vuttaani a.t.thaviisaadhikaani pa~nca appanaasataaniiti. Sincerely, Scott. #96032 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB r... scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: "It occurs to me that 'repeatedly doing' can refer to the repeated occurrence of willing leading to actions, WITHOUT there being any need for a doer of a deed." Scott: As long as the 'one doing' isn't replaced by the 'one willing'. Cetanaa is impersonal and serves its function along with the given citta with which it shares an arising and an object. And cetanaa arises with every moment of consciousness. Sincerely, Scott. #96033 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 9. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/20/2009 5:21:11 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear friends, As we read in the Sutta, Ånanda said to Udåyin with reference to seeing-consciousness, that the Buddha had explained that this is also without the self. Ånanda said to Udåyin: “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. “ ========================= Thanks for pointing this out, Nina. It is excellent. I think it is very useful to see that whatever arises in dependence on conditions is anatta. With metta, Howard Emptiness *(From the Uraga Sutta) #96034 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB r... upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/20/2009 7:38:32 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: "It occurs to me that 'repeatedly doing' can refer to the repeated occurrence of willing leading to actions, WITHOUT there being any need for a doer of a deed." Scott: As long as the 'one doing' isn't replaced by the 'one willing'. ------------------- Indeed! ------------------- Cetanaa is impersonal and serves its function along with the given citta with which it shares an arising and an object. And cetanaa arises with every moment of consciousness. ------------------- Yes, an impersonal, conditioned phenomenon. ------------------ Sincerely, Scott. ============== With metta, Howard Emptiness *(From the Uraga Sutta) #96035 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:20 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs abhidhammika Dear Scott, Howard, Robert Ep, Jon, Sarah, James, TG, colette, Herman, Robert K, Nina, Alex, and all How are you? Scott, thank you for posting Bhikkhu Bodhi's translation of Pali passages from Sabbaasava Suttam and Himavanta Suttam. Scott wrote: "Development consists only and solely of the repeated arising and falling away of wholesome states according to conditions. This is clear." Suan replies: If that is clear, Scott, can you elaborate on the above statement? For example, what might be specific conditions for wholesome states to arise repeatedly? And, are those conditions immune to repeated arising? Are those conditions static and external to those wholesome states? Scott wrote: "Bahuliikaronto refers only to this repeated arising and falling away of wholesome states. To suggest that 'a bhikkhu' is the entity which is 'repeatedly doing' is a superfluous attribution. There are only states and only conditions." Suan replies: If a bhikkhu's repeated doing (bahuliikaronto) was a superfluous attribution, the Buddha would not have included it in his instructions in this Suttam. In the context of this Suttam, the Buddha chose to not discuss contemplation of arising and vanishing of dhammas (udayabbayo) as the main theme. Scott, do you believe that bahuliikaronto refers only to this repeated arising and falling away of wholesome states? Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #96036 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:35 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs jonoabb Hi Scott Many thanks for posting these extracts. Very helpful for the discussion. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Jon, All, > > Regarding: > > MN 2, Sabbaasava ("All the Taints") Sutta, MLDB p.91 at par. 21: > > "What taints, bhikkhus, should be abandoned by developing? ... > > SN 46:1, "The Himalayas" Sutta, CDB p.1567: > > "...And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon > virtue, develop the seven factors of enlightenment? #96037 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. jonoabb Hi Robert E > What I'm still confused about is the idea that studying Abhidhamma, > etc. is not "a practice." Or even discerning realities in everyday > life once having read about that in the commentaries or modern > teachers' talks. If one thinks this is "the path" then when one does > it, it is "a practice." Would you not agree with that? Yes, I'd agree with the notion that if one thinks when doing something that "this is the path", then what one is doing is "a practice". And to my understanding, there would necessarily be wrong view involved in that doing. As regards studying the texts, it is not my understanding that the doing of this as an activity is the development of the path. The factors spoken of in the texts are the hearing of the true Dhamma and useful reflection on that, and so on. The reading of suttas undertaken as an activity cannot be equated with "hearing the true Dhamma". > And do you > think it is possible to be "unintentional" about the path so that it > is allowed to arise completely on its own? I would agree that one could not be "unintentional" about the path if the path is understood to be the doing of any particular activity. However, as I have explained before, none of the factors for the development of the path are of that nature, to my understanding. Jon #96038 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. jonoabb Hi Robert E > I guess this makes the subject a bit more clear, and I would disagree > with you on this. I can't imagine why anyone would read a sutta if > they did not believe it was developing the path for them. Are they > reading it for fun? For general interest? I doubt it. If a person were to read a sutta for the reason that he thought that by doing so there would be more moments of panna than otherwise, then that would be wrong view, I'd say. > That is fun, but respectfully, doesn't really answer the question, of > which I am sincerely interested. Is serious study of Abhidhamma and > commentary for serious students *not* done in the understanding that > "it is developing the path?" If not, then what is the purpose? Doing something with a purpose (i.e., intentionally) is not necessarily the same as doing something as a practice, which implies that it is the very doing of the act that constitutes the fulfilment of the purpose (in the present context, bringing about the arising of panna). Jon #96039 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 6:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. jonoabb Hi Robert E > I will try to stick around long enough - though I may lose my job, > marriage, etc. in the meantime. Just kidding..... .-)) I am fortunate in being married to a fellow member of the lunatic-fringe ;-)) Jon #96040 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:00 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud jonoabb Hi Robert A Nice to see you again. > I stop by DSG from time to time and can always rely on this topic being one under > discussion. I am sure the question has been asked before, and so apologize for being redundant, but I am curious about one issue: Do those who adhere to the no-meditation > position feel any unease about this position being so out of step with almost all modern > Theravada teachers with the exception of Khun Sujin? I of course do not see myself in terms of holding to a "no- meditation" position, nor of being out of step with the rest of the modern Buddhist world, but I can understand why others would see me in those terms ;-)) My concern, like yours, is to understand correctly the meaning of the Buddha's teaching, and most particularly his teaching on the development of insight. I understand that teaching to be referring to insight into the true nature of dhammas, and that such insight arises from the development of awareness of any presently arising dhamma, including at moments like now while posting to or reading from the list, and that there is the possibility of a level of such awareness occurring, given the appropriate intellectual understanding and other conditions. I am inclined to think, however, that the possibility of awareness occurring would be precluded by a view to the effect that awareness can only arise at times of, or in consequence of, a dedicated "practice", so to that extent I am indeed out of step with modern Theravada teachers ;-)) The reason why this does not perturb me is that some of the basics that we talk about here, such as the 2 different kinds of dhammas, different objects appearing through the different doorways, dhammas as mere impersonal elements, of dhammas as not-self, etc, have gained more meaning for me over the years, so that on the whole it could be said that dhammas are better understood. So to that (admittedly minor) extent, what has been heard has been verified. > So, I would be interested in the opinions of those who visit here on how one should > decide - what are the teachings that should be followed? There is of course no easy answer to this. But one thing I do think is important is that passages from one part of the texts must be read in the light of what is found in other parts of the texts. And if there's one thing that can be said for the commentarial explanation, it is that it is entirely consistent with the text of the Tipitaka. In the case of SN 46:1 referred to by Suan, the crux of the message (to my way of thinking) lies in the passage that comes between the "How does ..." and the "In this way ..." parts which contain the reference to "bahuliikaronto" (whatever that may mean). That passage reads as follows (see full text at foot of this post): "Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness, which is based on seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. "He develops the enlightenment factor of the discrimination of states ... the enlightenment factor of energy ... the enlightenment factor of rapture ... the enlightenment factor of tranquility ... the enlightenment factor of concentration ... the enlightenment factor of equanimity, which is based upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release." What are being described here are mental states of a high degree of kusala ("enlightenment factors"). I do not see how the doing of any specific activity is implied here. > I am happy there is no such thing as a Buddhist pope or catechism, for I do think that, in > the end, everyone needs to decide for themselves, but would be interested in any > suggestions as to the best way to do that. No real suggestions from me, as I don't think there is a particular "way" ;-)) But hoping this has given a different perspective for you to consider. Jon *************************************** SN 46:1, "The Himalayas" Sutta, CDB p.1567: "...And how does a bhikkhu, based upon virtue, established upon virtue, develop the seven factors of enlightenment? "Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu develops the enlightenment factor of mindfulness, which is based on seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. He develops the enlightenment factor of the discrimination of states ... the enlightenment factor of energy ... the enlightenment factor of rapture ... the enlightenment factor of tranquility ... the enlightenment factor of concentration ... the enlightenment factor of equanimity, which is based upon seclusion, dispassion, and cessation, maturing in release. "It is in this way, bhikkhus, that bhikkhu, based on virtue, established upon virtue, develops seven factors of enlightenment, and thereby achieves greatness and expansiveness in [wholesome] states."> *************************************** #96041 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:41 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Buddha truth_aerator Hello Suan, Scott and all. Bhaveti is present active verb. It is NOT passive verb. Karoti (does, acts, makes, builds) is present active verb. manasikaroti is present active verb. More over Buddha has often said "Jhayatha ma pamada..." . Jhayatha is is ACTIVE IMPERATIVE VERB! jhayatha Ananda, ma pamadattha. Meditate Ananda! Don't be negligent! MN152 With best wishes, Alex #96042 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:44 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs scottduncan2 Dear Suan and Alex, Thank you for your replies. I'll not be pursuing the discussion further in an active sense, although I'll read with interest the discussion as it unfolds with others. Sincerely, Scott. #96043 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:51 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs scottduncan2 Dear Jon, Regarding: J: "Many thanks for posting these extracts. Very helpful for the discussion." Scott: You're welcome. I'll enjoy a passive participation in this discussion. Sincerely, Scott. #96044 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:05 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs truth_aerator Hello Scott and all, Here is an interesting thing to investigate: see how often did the Buddha use active verbs and how much times he used passive verbs. Also in Pali it is impossible to say "does, acts, makes" that is causative-passive. This refutes the conception of does without a [conventional] someone who does. karapiyati is the only form of causative-passive finite verb of Karo, does. IT IS NEVER USED IN PALI!!!! I've just checked. As I am checking the conjugated finite verb forms, they ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS involved SUBJECT or subjects. There is no doing in PALI that doesn't have (I do, he does, they do). If there is please tell me. Bhavati DOES NOT EXIST in passive or causative-passive finite verbs! It is impossible in PALI. With metta, Alex #96045 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:29 am Subject: Re: Response to Robert E. 1 epsteinrob Hi Sukin. I'm afraid we are still in conflict, but for the sake of the Dhamma, I'm sure we're both willing to cooperate! :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Rob Ep, > > I pick out some parts from here and there to comment on. I'll try to > come in from a different angle, but I think overall I would only be > repeating myself. This is therefore going to be my last response for > now, hoping that you will understand. As much as I enjoy our dialogue, I am slightly relieved, because I am way behind on "the things of this earthly life" as a householder, Dad and occasional husband to my wife; so I will forgive you. :-))) I don't even have time to go into third jhana these days. ;-)) > ************* > Rob Ep: > The issue is not one of questioning of little items, or just for the > sake of it, but whether one is able to discern whether one's overall > approach is one that is in touch with realities, moving towards being > in touch with realities, or is of an intellectual nature, pointing at > concepts in a subtle way, and missing the objects of discernment. > > Sukin: What do you mean "overall approach"? Perhaps what you have in > mind is not the same as what I have in mind? One thing is clear, > yours is to separate study from practice as activities to be done in > time, and not only this, but also within the one, you distinguish > between the study of Sutta from that of the Abhidhamma and > commentaries as if they were essentially different. I think it is possible to make sensible distinctions and to look at what people are actually doing, without necessarily seeing them as completely separate or compartmentalized. But we should be able to talk sensibly about one's philosophical approach, set of beliefs, and yes, practices, in the sense of what someone actually does. If someone spends most of their spare time on studying sutta, or if they spend their time when they have it on translating commentary, or if they spend their time on sitting meditation, obviously those activities may have some different sets of cittas and cetasikas that arise in association with them. It is not altogether nonsensical to talk about someone who believes that the commentaries are the most important source of information and inspiration, while someone else may think that the silent discernment of realities is more important. People do have values, they have things they care about and are involved with. To speak as if everyone is doing the same thing would be to ignore the actuality of what people believe and are involved with. It is not out of line to suggest that there may be an alternative to dhamma theory, or single citta theory. These may come from reliable sources but they may also be questioned. > > The emphasis on the Abhidhamma made by some of us is only in relation > to the fact of clarity and precision got from its formulation / > exposition. However with regard to the `message', all three Baskets > and the commentaries are seen as being the same, namely the > development of understanding about present moment realities. That is a view. It is a particular view. When you talk about realities as as plural you are already espousing a philosophy as opposed to "reality," a way of seeing that sees things more clearly. The idea that the important work of discernment is to see clearly what a particular nama or rupa consists of, or a specific sequence of nama and rupa, is a particular view of panna. To one who has adopted this as their only view of the message of the Tipitaka, who sees everything through this lens, it is very difficult to talk about any alternative way of interpreting the suttas or Abhidhamma. Abhidhamma itself does not talk about "paramatha dhammas" in the way that the commentaries do. It is a further extrapolation by later sages. The sense of realities that exist in the Abhidhamma itself from what I have been able to glean - and I admit I am a beginner in this - is that it was much more a sense of the state of mind that was important - in other words, seeing the world through panna - rather than the particular little nuggets that come down the line. Buddha teaches that the world of form is anicca and anatta. Undue emphasis on the specifics of the world of samsara can become an obsession. The idea that seeing the specific little dhammas in their exactness is the key to achieving nibbana is not the thrust of the suttas or, from the little I can see, the Abhidhamma. Rather it is seeing enough of the three characteristics in realities that one becomes disenchanted with them and stops clinging. Is it really necessary to be able to taste every ingredient in the soup in order to understand whether it tastes good or bad [kusala or akusala?] Or is it most important to develop the panna to understand what the "flavor" of the soup is? We are not trying to cook a better samsara, but to get out of the boiling pot. Buddha said that one does not inquire into the source of the arrow when one has an arrow in one's chest. One focuses on getting it out. Inspecting every last sequence of rupas in fine particularity seems like it may be more in the "inspecting the origin of the arrow" class of activity. The Abhidhamma can have another purpose: it can be there to show the way reality holds together and how the mind organizes it, so that one can see the pathway out. But that does not mean it is meant to cause overinvolvement with the things of this world, even if it is broken down to its most ultimate particularity. > > What you perhaps need to appreciate about Pariyatti is that it has > the present moment experience as object of study, No it does not. It has the *idea* of the present moment as it's object of study. One cannot read about the present moment and experience the present moment at the same time. Pariyatti can lead to an understanding of patipatti, but it can also become a substitute for actual discernment. One can get great satisfaction out of reading about the properties of dhammas and the discernment thereof, without actually doing it. and it is exactly > this pointing to the present moment, How does it point to *this* present moment? It is preparing you for a future present moment, when you are not reading. Are you experiencing the moment of reading while you are reading about the discernment of the moment? Or are you engaging with the concepts you are reading about? which when developed results in > the direct study of characteristics, The direct study of characteristics is the direct study of characteristics. It is not "reading about" them. You cannot do both at the same time. It is important to study the menu, but then you have to stop and eat the meal and taste it. and this is Patipatti. Can you stop doing intellectual understanding of the principles of dhammas long enough to actually experience one? Can you > now see why separating pariyatti from patipatti in a way suggesting > that one can arise in one situation and not another, would not be > part of such kind of understanding? I understand that you appear to have them confused with each other. Reading is not discernment. Reading is reading. Study is study. Intellectual understanding is not discernment. I agree that one can lead to each other the way the menu focuses you on the components of the meal, but if you never eat, you are in big trouble, if you just keep reading the menu over and over again and thinking you are getting fed. And far from having reason to > question the `approach', I think indeed that there is no better > conceptual understanding than this whereby insight could arise as a > result. How and when will insight arise as a result of conceptual understanding? How is this conversion going to take place ever? Insight into what? What you are reading? Where is the real dhamma in all this? What has happened to the present object while you are reading and conceptualizing? Where is it? If you want to take the dhamma theory seriously, then understand what you have read and then be present to the actual arising moments. Your real experience is something like "reading reading reading reading, scratching eyebrow, glance to side, cough, hunger pang, sadness, thought of past, person comes into room is perceived as body, thought of taking nap, reading reading reading reading, shopping list. All of these break down into many different dhammas, many different cittas with accompanying cetasikas. To do the real work of discerning such, one would be looking at these, not at the book the concept, the com. Sure there is room for reading, but only to understand a bit more, then stop reading and look around the room and see what is really happening in "real life," including the dhammas that arise in reading the book in the first place. The real dhammas in the reading are not the concepts of the cittas and rupas; it is "eye door/eye object/idea of book, asngle of book/hardness/scanning of words on page/concept/thought of concept/thought of application of concept/hardness of page/turning of page/see words in eye door/eye processing through nama/new citta; and of course even that is just a gross gloss of all the cittas arising in the act of reading and all the dhammas; but at least one would really be following the dhamma theory and really looking at the dhammas instead of concept/concept/concept/concept and more concept; more menu, more thoughts about dhammas, without acknowleding the real dhammas that are right in front of one's nose. > ************* > Rob Ep: > But I do think that the whole > idea that I have heard several times, that intellectual knowledge is > okay for the time being, because theoretical understanding is > necessary before one can develop an akusala view of actual dhammas "in > real life" is one that I cannot accept even theoretically. > > Sukin: First you'll need to change `theoretical' to `intellectual'. > The former could suggest encouraging abstractions which would be > quite far from the real purpose of study. Given what I wrote above, I > think you can now see why pariyatti has nothing to do with choosing > to accept or reject anything. If one sees no reason to be concerned > about not having much understanding, *this is with a level of > understanding* about the nature of the present moment. What I am concerned about is confusing the difference between concepts "about the nature of the present moment" as opposed to "actually discerning *this* present moment" for real. One is indeed lost in theoretical understanding if one is never looking at the actual present dhammas with one's present cittas. The cittas are lost in a cloud of theory *about* the nature of dhammas, not *this one now.* One may for > example see how much more frequent ignorance and other akusala arise > and what little understanding in between, is very weak. How about seeing what is there in life, and not in a book? > And this does not mean that direct experience is being discouraged; > in fact it encourages it as no other understanding can! When does this direct experience take place? When? It seems like everything is about study, concept and principal, no time for reality. After all, > the kind of panna insists on studying the present moment and not > moving away from it. Well there is no present moment in a discussion in a book, unless one is looking at the nature of the reading instead of reading about it. You can't do both at the same time. Unlike what you and others come in with, which > then drives you to then sit and meditate, which imo does not reflect > right understanding about the nature of realities and therefore not > the right cause for the result aimed at. Of course, "Imo," because you are dealing with set concepts and your mind is already made up. You think you know what others are practicing. For all you know they may be sitting in meditation and having panna arise like a wild flood of direct seeing. How do you know? > ************ > Rob Ep: > I think that intellectual knowledge is only corrected as it "takes > turns" with practical knowledge, the actual experience of knowing > something and seeing something through direct contact. If all the > objects of discernment are lifetimes away from direct apprehension, I > think the pariyatti thus left to itself is a serious problem. > > Sukin: That wouldn't be pariyatti then. If the `intellectual > understanding' was something which needed to be corrected by direct > understanding, then the latter must be caused by something else. And > what would this be? `Intention' to practice? How about actual discernment of any kind? Doing what you are reading about? I don't care how you do it. But for God's sake do it! Don't just read and talk about it, use your cittas and discern a real living dhamma and see what it is. > Again I think that this is because you fail to understand what > pariyatti is, I'm quite sure that it is not discerning the present object, whatever else it may be doing. how this is rooted in the same mental factor, namely > panna, as with patipatti. Can you have panna in a vaccuum? Can you have panna with concept of dhamma as its object? Well, probably can if you are aware it is a concept and not focused on what you think the concept is "about." This mental factor, like all mental factors > which are of kusala or akusala jati, arises and falls away while > adding to the accumulations for the same. But do you see what is actually arising and falling away or are you distracted by the content of the concept? So regardless of whether > there arises any higher level of understanding, pariyatti itself is > good and wholesome and could never lead to anything bad. So it seems > your objection is quite groundless. I think the above statement is not justified. But I can see you have a self-supportive formula there so I guess it seems fine to you. Is it true that by definition pariyatti can only be kusala? Well if it takes you away from real object I guess it's not real pariyatti. But even if it is kusala pariyatti and you are studying the true principles of what makes up discernment of a dhamma with panna, if you are not applying it, it is very limited. You have to look at real objects at some point and not be thinking about theory all the time, as kusala as the theory may be. What you are dismissing as meditation is just looking at what is there, which is supposed to be what dhamma theory is about. It seems safer to you for some reason to think and read about then to actually do it. Look at a dhamma. See what it is. > > ************* > Rob Ep: > The simplicity of casting away extraneous concerns and understanding > the primacy of the real moment is a beautiful and elegant ideal and I > think we might - possibly, maybe - all be able to agree on that, if we > don't specify further. :-) But that is not what is occupying the > moment-to-moment attention of the average Abhidhammika. The system is > so complicated that it will take an enormous amount of time and effort > just to understand the classifications, let alone get around to > actually seeing a dhamma. > > Sukin: Not just an ideal. You just create your own web and are caught > in it. A closer look may reveal that just these experiences through > the five senses and the mind are being referred to most of the time. If only I believed that. I would like to hear anyone around here talk about what they actually discerned while "referring to those actual experiences" instead of theory, theory, theory, which seems to occupy all the attention most of the time. If a real dhamma could get a word in edge-wise,what would it say I wonder? Best, Robert E. ================================== #96046 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:56 am Subject: typo correct -- BB refs truth_aerator > Hello Scott and all, > >As I am checking the conjugated finite verb forms, they ALWAYS >ALWAYS ALWAYS involved SUBJECT or subjects. There is no doing there is no "does" in PALI that > doesn't have (I do, he does, they do). If there is please tell me. > > > Bhavati DOES NOT EXIST in passive or causative-passive finite verbs! > It is impossible in PALI. Another thing: Jhayati does NOT even have passive finite/infinite forms. With best wishes, Alex #96047 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:28 am Subject: Re: Response to Robert E. 2 epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Rob Ep, > > Continuing. > ************* > Rob Ep: > That is at least a feeling and a fear that > I think is worth consideration for this type of endeavor. How can you > have a goal so simple and a method that is more complex than anyother > philosophical system in existence since the dawn of time? Do those > two really go together? > > Sukin: The real problem is ignorance. It may be that one does not > appreciate this that one then ends up trying to sort things out by > way of concept, which would be as you suggest, missing the point. > Abhidhamma was not taught for us to analyze and think over those > details. It was taught so that there might be application in > accordance to one's accumulations / level of understanding. One > result of this application is the beginning of understanding about > conditionality and anatta. And it is this understanding which may > then be the driving force to hear more details, the result of which > is greater appreciation of these same principles. > > So it is not about trying to experience all those things said. But > there is confidence conditioned by some level of understanding which > causes one to then approach those teachings, not with the aim to > collect details, but having no reason to reject them either. Besides > I think you will have noticed that most of the time here on DSG, the > reminders are about just those experiences through the five senses > and the mind like, seeing hearing, thinking and so on. Does this not > indicate to you where the value is placed? I do think there is some mention of discernment in daily life, and of course that is how it is to be realized; but most of the actual conversation is about the details of dhamma theory, the different roles of different types of cittas, etc. A lot of theory, and no discussion at all about how actual dhammas arise to be discerned in people's real life. Perhaps it is not considered appropriate to talk about personal experiences, but they are not even mentioned most of the time as a general category. > > ************* > Rob Ep: > Why not get on with it and discern nama and > rupa and let them fall away. Do we really have to know exactly what > nama is interacting with exactly what sense door-helper to work with > exactly what cetasikas to discern which particular dhamma? > > Sukin: Given that one begins to have some appreciation about > conditionality and anatta, why would one then think to `control'? How > could one make `discerning nama and rupa' arise? Not necessary, they are arising all the time. If I say "there is a picture on tv, take a look," can you not look? Why not look at what is arising already, rather than seeing that suggestion as a type of control? > > But much wrong view has been accumulated and so there will be from > time to time such thoughts. The kind of wrong view arises with regard > to any and every experience, including sense door ones. So while we > continue to have wrong ideas about these experiences, the details in > the Abhidhamma point to the truth of what really goes on such that we > may then begin to not feed those misunderstandings anymore. And isn't > this good? Not if it doesn't really happen. Yes, if it does. > > ************** > Rob Ep: > I do not see, as you do, that intellectual acknowledgment gives a > greater guarantee of identifying kusala with honesty than using the > natural perceptual and mental capacities "in the field." > > Sukin: Though I've bee talking so much about the value of > intellectual understanding, I must say that it is not easy to come > by, at least for me. However, the kind of understanding itself, is > one which points to the direction of more honesty. On the other hand, > the uninstructed worldling's ideas about "in the field", is likely > one which is the result of one or more of the three papanca dhammas, > namely craving, conceit and view. Well all three are present in any case. It is a question of how one deals with samsara, not a failure to acknowledge it. Robert E. =========================== #96048 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:19 am Subject: Re: Response to Robert E. 3 epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > Hi Rob Ep, > > Continuing.. > ************* > ************** > Rob Ep: > I do agree with your spirit which is expressed very beautifully in > your last paragraph about being honest with yourself intellectually > before going off to do things that you are not qualified to do in > practice. > > Sukin: No, I'm not really saying that. > What I'm saying is that there are different levels of understanding > with regard to the Four Noble Truths. This is Pariyatti, Patipatti > and Pativedha, or Suttamaya panna, Cintamaya panna and Bhavanamaya > panna. Pariyatti is not *used* for patipatti, indeed it helps in > steering one away from such ideas. > > We start with wrong view, but with the Dhamma there can be a > beginning of right view arising. Well if you develop "dry" right view to the max, and understand the nature of dhammas perfectly clearly, will that in itself allow you to view actual dhammas as they are and see the three characteristics? Or do you have to be in life discerning the continually shifting succession of dhammas with sati? Are they the same thing? Can you get 'all the way' on pariyatti? The latter works to gradually loosen > the hold of the former. If patipatti is to arise later, it would be > due to countless arising of pariyatti in relation to all experiences. Well you have faith that continuous repetitions of pariyatti will yield paripatti all by itself. Is that stated somewhere, and if so where? It does not seem to me that this would be the case. > So its not like you decide to meditate and hope that by continuing to > also study, the `theory' will help correct or improve the overall > practice. Rather it is that right practice won't arise if we > continued to be moved by wrong understanding at the intellectual > level and one such manifestation of this is the concept of > meditation. The problem is that you believe right understanding itself is an intellectual property and I don't. I don't think that understanding the menu teaches you how to cook the meal. If right understanding were to arise while meditating, > this would be due to past accumulated right understanding, including > of the pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the > activity and not as a result of it. That is a skewed opinion. I think the prejudice about what is possible due to meditation is extremely ingrained, but it is not correct. And this would lead to seeing the > wrongness of the endeavor hence dropping it at some point. Well that makes it perfectly clear. I will have to go and tell the Buddha that you have decided that all the talk he gave to the advanced monks about developing satipatthana within anapanasati was based on wrong view. Because all meditation is akusala and cannot lead to sati or panna. Buddha was mistaken about this. Buddha was wrong, and you are correct. I will make a note of this. More later. Best, Robert E. =================================== #96049 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:05 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs truth_aerator Dear Scott, Suan and all Another PALI line from AN ...viriya.m, aarabhati citta.m pagga.nhAAti padahati aarabhati= present active finite verb 1. begins; starts; 2. kills; tortures. pagganhati= active present finite verb. holds up; takes up; supports; favours; stretches forth. padahati= active present finite verb. strives; takes up; confronts. Begins to hold, strives and energetically exerts the mind... [for the non arising of unwholesome qualities and arising of wholesome qualities]. DOES NOT SAY THAT ONE passively sees some states arise and some fall. I honestly do not see how one can reasonably explain & eel wriggle out of " arabhati, pagganhati, padahati" and similiar ACTIVE PRESENT finite verbs (who do not have passive or passive-causative grammatical forms in PALI) With best wishes. Alex #96050 From: "connie" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:30 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object nichiconn Dear Lukas, > CONDITIONS, Chapter 2 > When visible object is experienced through the mind-door it has fallen away. Also seeing can be object. Citta can through the mind- door experience another citta such as seeing which has just fallen away. It must have fallen away since only one citta at a time can arise. There may be, for example, a citta with understanding (pa) which realizes seeing as a conditioned nma which is impermanent. L: Can you say something about dhammaarammana? Can panna arise with citta which experience a concept? How many kinds of pa~n~na there is? c: Here is my understanding: When we say dhammaarammana, we know it impinges on the heart-basis, so we rule out the physical objects of the pasada rupas or first five sense bases. Basically, dhammaarammana is just 'thought object' - as opposed to physical sense object - so it includes cittas, cetasikas, all concepts, Nibbaana, the subtle rupas and, i believe, the pasada rupas. It's tricky because we also think about the impressions of those other five-fold objects but the heart-basis does not have the same kind of "sense ability" as the pasada rupas so the impressions of the physical objects at those other physical bases can't quite appear at the heart-basis but appear at the mind-door instead. I think we have to study the two kinds of thought processes more... and yes, conditions, too. Maybe we should start with a review of the CMA? For pa~n~na or amoha, I think it must be able to know anything; definitely it would have to understand the difference between concept and ultimate reality. I don't know how many ways it is classified but I'm sure we could start with saying it's all one kind by being of the nature of correct knowledge and then break it down from there considering different degrees or strengths and other aspects of it. ---- >Even during sleep, the life-continuum takes the object which was >taken in the dying process of the previous existence and is one of >three kinds: (1) past action (kamma), (2) sign of action (kamma >nimitta) and (3) sign of destiny (gati-nimitta). L: Can you explain it? c: I wonder why that seems to be the most common example we read about past objects. I think it's because we're supposed to consider that really, there's no difference in the mechanics of the process whether it's the conventional death of a being or the momentary death of each citta during a lifetime... unless of course, it's the final consciousness of an arahat, which is where proximity relation finally ends. Does it make sense to say that proximity does not have to do with the time of the object but with the following consciousness, which might have a different object? In the other quote above, when seeing / citta was the object, the visible object had fallen away, leaving only nimitta. peace, connie #96051 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:25 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object truth_aerator Dear Connie, Lucas and all, > "connie" wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > > > CONDITIONS, Chapter 2 > > When visible object is experienced through the mind-door it has > fallen away. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? > Also seeing can be object. Citta can through the mind- > door experience another citta such as seeing which has just fallen > away. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? >It must have fallen away since only one citta at a time can > arise. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? > There may be, for example, a citta with understanding (pa) > which realizes seeing as a conditioned nma which is impermanent. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? > L: Can you say something about dhammaarammana? > > Can panna arise with citta which experience a concept? > How many kinds of pa~n~na there is? > > c: Here is my understanding: > When we say dhammaarammana, we know it impinges on the heart-basis, >so we rule out the physical objects of the pasada rupas or first >five sense bases. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? >Basically, dhammaarammana is just 'thought object' - as opposed to >physical sense object - so it includes cittas, cetasikas, all >concepts, Nibbaana, the subtle rupas and, i believe, the pasada >rupas. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? >but the heart-basis does not have the same kind of "sense ability" >as the pasada rupas so the impressions of the physical objects at >those other physical bases can't quite appear at the heart-basis but >appear at the mind-door instead. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? >I think we have to study the two kinds of thought processes more... >and yes, conditions, too. Maybe we should start with a review of the >CMA? How about verifying for oneself the ultimate realities that are The Ultimate, The Realities. > For pa~n~na or amoha, I think it must be able to know anything; Do you personally and directly see & experience this? >definitely it would have to understand the difference between >concept and ultimate reality. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? > > ---- > >Even during sleep, the life-continuum takes the object which was > >taken in the dying process of the previous existence and is one of > >three kinds: (1) past action (kamma), (2) sign of action (kamma > >nimitta) and (3) sign of destiny (gati-nimitta). Do you personally and directly see & experience this? > L: Can you explain it? > >c:that really, there's no difference in the mechanics of the process >whether it's the conventional death of a being or the momentary >death of each citta during a lifetime... Do you personally and directly see & experience this? >unless of course, it's the final consciousness of an arahat, which >is where proximity relation finally ends. So now you are talking about Arahats. > In the other quote above, when seeing / citta was the object, the >visible object had fallen away, leaving only nimitta. Do you personally and directly see & experience this? Hopefully you will understand what I am trying to say. With lots of metta, Alex #96052 From: "connie" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:03 pm Subject: RFC, Disp 204 and Vibhanga nichiconn Dear Lukas, Is it possible that the other processes mentioned along with reviewing could also be considered when Dispeller states: "204.These too, at the time of reviewing the trainees'(sekha) and non-trainees(asekha) paths <63.5>, have the paths as object (maggaaramma.na). They have the paths as root-cause (maggahetuka) through its being conascent root-cause at the time of the path. ? What other paths would there be, other than those four? And what difference can it make When? if path was-is-will be the object of citta, citta had-has-would have path(as)object. impossible not to. what's funny about time is that it's another abstract concept. and you know what they say about concepts, nibbaana and time as object. but what is "hetu"? I think this word is also used in different ways, but as 'root-cause': Ledi Sayadaw: There is not a single class of consciousness or mental property, which arises without the causal relation of arammana (object). The same holds good as regards the remaining causal relations of anantara, samanantara, sahajata and so on. Eight relations only--hetu, adhipati, purejata, asevana, vipaka, jhana, magga and vippayutta--are common to some mental states. Of these, the relation of hetu is common only to the classes of consciousness conditioned by hetu; the relation of adhipati is also common only to the apperceptions (javanas) coexisting with dominance (adhipati); the relation of purejata is common only to some classes of mind; the relation of asevana is common only to apperceptive classes of moral, immoral, and inoperative consciousness; the relation of vipaka is also common only to the resultant classes of mind; the relation of jhana is common to those classes of consciousness and mental concomitants which come under the name of elements of apprehension and comprehension; the relation of magga is common to the classes of mind conditioned by hetu; the relation of vippayutta is not common to the classes of mind in arupaloka. Only one particular relation of pacchajata is common to material qualities. c: so what do you think... once path has been object, that realization and everything that goes with it, from self-view on up, fundamentally changes "everything" for that being from that moment on. but you know that. but here are a couple 'dhammayatana' quotes from LS's Niyama Dipani: 1. Let me invite your reference to the classification of ayatana and dhatu. Of the twelve kinds of ayatana and eighteen kinds of dhatu, the last of each is called dhammayatana and Dharmadhatu, and each claims to include anything not included in the previous ones. According to the definition "sabhavam-dhareti ti dhammo", every kind of ayatana and dhatu is a Dhamma and yet each kind stands in co-ordinate rank with the last one. And the dhammayatana [100] cannot include them as they have got their special name (laddha-nama-visesa). Here the connotation of the Dhamma is limited and in Pali such a term is known as "pasiddha-ruthi" and it has no right to extend its sphere of nomenclature over other terms of laddha-nama-visesa. You may as well see that in classification of six vinnanani (see Abhidammattha-sangaha, chapter IV.) the last division is called mano-vinnanam, and mano, though it is a common term for all classes of consciousness or thought (citta), cannot claim to include the five kinds of consciousness previously enumerated, such as cakhuvinnanam, etc., for each of which has its special name, but it is applicable only to any other citta not included in the previous classes. So also is the same in our case. The Dhamma-niyama cannot claim to include the above four niyama though each is really a Dhamma or a thing within the legitimate sphere of its definition, but it is limited to include only what are not included in one to four. And the first four have a right to stand coordinately in rank with the last, and hence you need not also call them the pancaka-dhamma-niyamo. 2. Moreover, among the six kinds of objects, the dhamma-rammana stands last. So also dhammayatana and Dharmadhatu stand last in the categories of twelve ayatana and eighteen dhatu respectively. Here also the denotation of each should be understood according to the method of word description just as in the fivefold niyama. We will reproduce here a few lines from the books of Yamaka, which will serve as a means to obtain a clear knowledge of the method of word-description. Dhammo dhammayatanam? ti. Dhammayatanam thapetva, avaseso dhammo dhammo, na dhammayatanam: dhammayatanam dhammo-c'eva dhammayatanan ca. Dhammdyatanam hammo? ti. Amanta. Ayatana-Yamaka. Dhammo dhamma-dhatu? ti. Dhamma-dhatum thapetva, avaseso dhammo dhammo, an Dharmadhatu; Dharmadhatu dhammo-c'eva dhamma-dhatu ca. Dhamma-dhatu dhammo? ti. Amanta. Dhatu-Yamaka. Is dhammo a dhammayatana? Excluding the dhammayatana, the remaining dhammo is dhammo and not dhammayatanam; but dhammayatanam is both dhammo and dhammayatanam. Is dhammayatanam a dhammo? Ay. Is dhammo a dhamma-dhatu? Excluding the dhamma-dhatu, the remaining dhammo is dhammo, and not dhamma-dhatu; but dhamma-dhatu is both dhammo and dhammadhatu. Is dhamma-dhatu a dhammo? Ay. peace, connie #96053 From: "colette" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:34 pm Subject: Re: Pariyatti vs. philosophical understanding ksheri3 Hi Sukinder, I'm glad you took the time to reply to my "babble". ;) I'm also glad that we can dispel with misconceptions of things so calmly and easily, thank you. > > You say that you querstionded yourself. > > > > What is the self? > > :-) Yes, and I should have given more details but I chose to hide > behind the conventional expression. > > =========== colette: I, in my typical routine, was actually placing those questions out there as "rhetorical" implying also, that they are good "concepts" to medidtate on particularly since the Self is a major topic and position withing the Madhyamaka. --------------------------------- > =========== > > WE are at the point where we can safely suggest that "we do not > > know". This gives us a foundation of ignorance. You are gonna have > to > > produce the buddha as he was when he expired and you are gonna have > > to produce the evidence that states that you have the exact words > and > > thoughts of the Buddha when he said these things.\ ****** > > Knowing that we are full of ignorance is a level of understanding and > this is good. But this is in relation to the Truth, exactly the 4NT. colette: you narrowed the the field of "ignorance" quiet a bit by placing the 4 Noble Truths as the most important. Certainly, when purifying the mind an adherence to the 4 Noble Truths will lead to faster and easier forms of enlightenment. Since mathematical problems can be solved in reverse where the answer is given and the need is to find the starting point of the equation and problem we aren't really working from a RESULTANT CONSCIOUSNESS by begining with the 4 Noble Truths and thus I consider that the aspirant or participant that begins here will find a more pleasurable abiding. ------------------------------ > This makes sense to me as so many other things that have been > recorded in the Pali cannon. colette: yes, it actually speaks to you. I agree. ---------------- I have no reason to seek further > evidence to prove the rightness of what is stated there. > colette: THERE, the Abhidharma stops for you. In the works by Abraham Maslow he speaks of achieving a "platuea" where the operator or aspirant can achieve and acustom, acclimate, their "self" to such as the breathing reequired to scale the Himillayas. Altitude Sickness is very dangerous and easily plays with the consciousness. > ========== > > Hark, do I hear the Buddha's homeland crying out? > > > > Are you suggesting that the Buddha'd doctrine were not carryied out > > by his Hindu breathren when the Muslims invaded and torched the land > > of people that did not believe in what they believed? <.....> > > Yes, what is a self? > > > > DAre you to say that the Yogacara's and the Varjayana's et al are > > mislead? <......> > > I have been exposed to other teachings, including other > interpretations of the Dhamma / Dharma. All those I happily dropped > not long after I came to DSG and began to appreciate this particular > understanding. > colette: if you imply or mean that the ignorance that plagues you is that of the long process of 'discovery' and the actuality of the practice of 'experience' as being a type of alert mechanism to your practices then I agree if it is because you cognize the cognition of the ignorance as being through your association with the kind people here at DSG, then there's really no problem with that since it is a sign of alertness to the surroundings and to the occurances in that surrounding. There's nothing wrong with your actual expertise on cognizing your lack of something which you feel can and will help you in your aspirations of enlightenment. > > Thank you for representing yourself. > > You are welcome. :-) > > I hope I have not misunderstood anything you've wanted to convey. I > generally have difficulty with your style of expression. > colette: YES, I have no problems with others having difficulty with their ability to grasp or visualize the abstractions and alchemy I constantly apply. I easily understand this form of IGNORANCE and accept that it is part of the world that constantly manifests my own ignorance. Thank you for expressing that emotion with clarity and focus not judging it to be 'good', 'bad' or 'indifferent'. The confusion is nothing more than a tool which can help us in our search. toodles, colette #96054 From: "colette" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 1:57 pm Subject: Past Thoughts = Conceptions? ksheri3 Hi Group, I've really begun to unearth some excellent material and lines of analysis. I just ran into two concepts: Patisandhi and Punabbhavn both dealing with "re-birth consciousness" and I can see that I question some of the little I've had a chance to read so far but appears to rely WAY TOO HEAVILY on base assumptions almost vulgar assumptions if we are to view the world through the lens, POV, of dealing with an exclusive predetermined obsession with the "survival" instinct of the group through the actions of sex from individuals. I'm looking forward to opening up several of the "googles" that returned a few of Nina's posts and views on those two topics, conceptions. toodles, colette #96055 From: "connie" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 4:28 pm Subject: RFC - Dispeller 205; object nichiconn dear alex, (the Master said) [29] 'Brother Saariputta, in the religion the talk of two bhikkhus on the Abhidhamma, each asking and answering the other without faltering, is in accord with the Dhamma. Now such a bhikkhu, brother Saariputta, might enhance the beauty of the Gosi"nga Saala Forest.'{M i 218} The Teacher, far from saying that bhikkhus, who knew Abhidhamma, were outside his religion, lifted his drum-like neck and filling (with breath) his mouth, fraught as the full-moon with blessings, emitted his godlike voice congratulating Moggallaana thus: 'Well done, well done, Saariputta! One should answer rightly as Moggallaana has done; Moggallaana is indeed a preacher of the Dhamma.' And tradition has it that those bhikkhus only who know Abhidhamma are true preachers of the Dhamma; the rest, though they speak on the Dhamma, are not preachers thereof. And why? They, in speaking on the Dhamma, confuse the different kinds of Kamma and of its results, the distinction between mind and matter, and the different kinds of states. The students of Abhidhamma do not thus get confused; hence a bhikkhu who knows Abhidhamma, whether he preaches the Dhamma or not, will be able to answer questions whenever asked. He alone, therefore, is a true preacher of the Dhamma. To this the Teacher referred when he approving said, 'Moggallaana has well replied to questions.' He who prohibits (the teaching of) Abhidhamma gives a blow to the Wheel of the Conqueror, denies omniscience, subverts the Teacher's knowledge full of confidence, deceives the audience, obstructs the path of the Ariyas, manifests himself as advocating one of the eighteen causes of dissension in the Order, is capable of doing acts for which the doer is liable to be excommunicated, or admonished, or scorned (by the Order), and should be dismissed after the particular act of excommunication, admonition, or scorn, and reduced to living on scraps of food. - expositor. Hopefully you will understand what I am trying to say. peace, connie #96056 From: "Alex" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 5:02 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object truth_aerator Dear Connie, and all. > "connie" wrote: > > dear alex, > >(the Master said) [29] 'Brother Saariputta, in the religion the >talk of two bhikkhus on the Abhidhamma, Which one? Sutta teachings COULD be classified as Abhi-Dhamma. Considering that pre-mahayana schools had their own Abhidhamma, the passage doesn't prove whose Abh they were talking about. In fact some scholarly research say it doesn't prove that they were talking about Abhidhamma at all! >each asking and answering >the other without faltering, is in accord >with the Dhamma. Note the mode of Abhidhamma: Personal. Answer & question. But this isn't the point that I wish to emphasise. They were Arahants. What is true of Arahants is not true for us. >And tradition has it that those bhikkhus only who know Abhidhamma Which Tradition? Didn't the Buddha tell us not to follow something just because "The tradition" says so? Again, Sandaka, a certain teacher goes by hearsay and takes it as the truth. To a teacher who goes by hearsay, the tradition becomes the truth. He may have heard it correctly or may not have heard it correctly. It becomes the truth to him, the truth may be something else. Sandaka, a wise man should reflect. This teacher goes by hearsay. He preaches what has reached him by tradition and hearsay. What he has heard may be the truth or not. I, should know and turn away from that holy life as unsatisfactory. Sandaka, this is the second holy life, the Blessed One who knows, sees, is perfect and rightfully enlightened has declared as unsatisfactory and should not be lived. The wise man if possible does not live and even if he lives is not convinced, that it is merit. http://www.mettanet.org/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/076-sa\ ndaka-e1.html >are true preachers of the Dhamma; the rest, though they speak on the >Dhamma, are not preachers thereof. This smells like pure Dogma. "Our interpretation of Buddha's teaching is THE right one". The various miraculous stories about the origin of Abhidhamma (and whose version?) do not seem convincing to me... And Nagarjuna has recovered the teachings of the Buddha from a Naga Realm ... Why does one chose to believe one and disbelieve the other? With loving kindness and best wishes to you, Alex #96057 From: "connie" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:22 pm Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner nichiconn Loved this line, Scott: "Is it going too far to recall that there are no 'persons' living in the empty village?" -- thanks! Ledi Sayadaw: perceptions arise simply through the dual cause of sense-bases and sense objects. the ultimate truth of materiality and mentality disproves the existence of a person. When, however, evil objects of thought or other causes impinge on the six sense-doors, the anusaya-ditthi is disturbed and begins to make itself manifest in the mind-door, or in the plane of the pariyutthana through the function of volition. If at that time the manifestations can be suppressed by good doctrines, they disappear from the pariyutthana plane and return to the anusaya plane and reside there as latent natural tendencies. If they cannot be suppressed, they continue to manifest themselves as developing volitions. If they are further disturbed (in the pariyutthana plane), they manifest themselves in the vitikkama plane in the form of evil speech or evil acts. So long as the realm of sakkaya-ditthi (personality-belief), which has been continuously established in our personalities throughout the past infinite samsra, is not destroyed, the defilements such as lobha (greed), dosa (hatred), and moha (delusion), remain keen, numerous and strong. As such they may be said to be permanent native inhabitants resident within our bodies. In such circumstances, sla (morality), samdhi concentration) and pa (wisdom), which are the enemies of these defilements, are like occasional alien visitors. Their visitation resembles the trespassing of enemy aliens into the kingdom of the ogre Alavaka, inhabited by wild and powerful ogres. Before long, these alien invaders become the food of these ogres, and their alien settlements are destroyed. On one occasion, five hundred Isis with jhana attainments came from the Himalaya regions to the mansion of Alavaka, but the ogres seized them one by one by their legs and threw them across the river Ganges. And thus the five hundred Isis were destroyed. the only existing things are the psychical and physical facts and conditions classed as 'name-and-form'. Through nescience hallucination {vipallasa} arises and through hallucination fantasy {mannana} arises. Adosa, or amity in its ethical sense means inclination of mind in the direction of its bject, or purity of mind. It is also called Abyapada (peace of mind), and Metta (loving-kindness). avyapada-sankappa, connie #96058 From: "Raghunath Awachar" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 7:43 pm Subject: does buddhism accept the concept of Hell and Heaven? raghunath_aw... I would like to know what Buddhism says about life after death. What happens after death? Does one go to hell or heaven? What is exact meaning of rebirth? If there is no God,how are there devatas? who are they? regards #96059 From: "Robert" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 9:47 pm Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud avalo1968 Hello Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > My concern, like yours, is to understand correctly the meaning of the > Buddha's teaching, and most particularly his teaching on the > development of insight. > Is this a somewhat limiting view of the Buddha's teachings? What of his teachings on virtue, his teachings on generosity, or his teachings on patience? Regards, Robert A. #96060 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:03 pm Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 abhidhammika Dear Jon, Sarah, Nina, Sukin and KS Folks How are you? I discovered the following statement made by Sukin while reading Robert Ep's response to Sukin's message. Sukin wrote: "If right understanding were to arise while meditating, this would be due to past accumulated right understanding, including of the pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the activity and not as a result of it." Suan asks: Does the above statement of Sukin represent K Sujin's understanding of Theravada meditation? Do other KS folks also share Sukin's understanding of Theravada meditation? Thanking you in advance, Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Epstein" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sukinder" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob Ep, ________________________________ Sukin wrote: If right understanding were to arise while meditating, > this would be due to past accumulated right understanding, including > of the pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the > activity and not as a result of it. ____________________________ That is a skewed opinion. I think the prejudice about what is possible due to meditation is extremely ingrained, but it is not correct. And this would lead to seeing the > wrongness of the endeavor hence dropping it at some point. Well that makes it perfectly clear. I will have to go and tell the Buddha that you have decided that all the talk he gave to the advanced monks about developing satipatthana within anapanasati was based on wrong view. Because all meditation is akusala and cannot lead to sati or panna. Buddha was mistaken about this. Buddha was wrong, and you are correct. I will make a note of this. More later. Best, Robert E. #96061 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:27 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object szmicio Dear Connie Thanks for your explanations. >c: I think we have to study the two kinds of thought processes >more... and yes, conditions, too. Maybe we should start with a review >of the CMA? L: Any idea, where should i start to read CMA? > For pa~n~na or amoha, I think it must be able to know anything; >definitely it would have to understand the difference between concept >and ultimate reality. I don't know how many ways it is classified >but I'm sure we could start with saying it's all one kind by being of >the nature of correct knowledge and then break it down from there >considering different degrees or strengths and other aspects of it. L: And what about pa~n~na of samatha and pa~n~na of vipassana? Where can I find something to read about them? > Does it make sense to say that proximity does not have to do with >the time of the object but with the following consciousness, which >might have a different object? L:Yes. My best wishes Lukas #96062 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 10:49 pm Subject: Re: RFC, Disp 204 and Vibhanga szmicio Dear Connie > Is it possible that the other processes mentioned along with >reviewing could also be considered when Dispeller states: "204.These >too, at the time of reviewing the trainees'(sekha) and non- >trainees(asekha) paths <63.5>, have the paths as object >(maggaaramma.na). They have the paths as root-cause (maggahetuka) >through its being conascent root-cause at the time of the path. > ? > What other paths would there be, other than those four? L: There are only 4 magga-cittas. So when arahat rewiews sekha and asekha paths it must be always those 4 magga-cittas. > what's funny about time is that it's another abstract concept. and >you know what they say about concepts, nibbaana and time as object. L: I like it. My best wishes Lukas #96063 From: "szmicio" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:17 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object szmicio Dear Alex > > > When visible object is experienced through the mind-door it has > > fallen away. > > Do you personally and directly see & experience this? L: Only pa~n~na can experience it. None of us can. I remember those Ajhan words: "Develop understanding of elements, Not self" That's what we actually do with connie. It's not just reading. We can learn more and more about just elements in our life. Not Self. It will lead to more understanding in the future. It's so important to feel less Self. Just dhatus. My best wishes Lukas #96064 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:44 pm Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 kenhowardau Hi Suan, ---- <. . .> > Suan asks: > > Does the above statement of Sukin represent K Sujin's understanding > of Theravada meditation? > > Do other KS folks also share Sukin's understanding of Theravada > meditation? --- Sukin was not talking about Theravada meditation (bhavana), he was talking about certain rituals (pannatti-bhavana) that are commonly practised in the mistaken notion (wrong understanding) that they are Theravada. Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "abhidhammika" wrote: > > Dear Jon, Sarah, Nina, Sukin and KS Folks > > How are you? > > I discovered the following statement made by Sukin while reading > Robert Ep's response to Sukin's message. > > Sukin wrote: > > "If right understanding were to arise while meditating, this would > be due to past accumulated right understanding, including of the > pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the > activity and not as a result of it." > #96065 From: han tun Date: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:49 pm Subject: Heart or Brain? hantun1 Dear Sarah, I was looking for hadaya vatthu in DSG Useful Posts and I came across your message http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/72468 where you gave the following English and Pali Texts. English text: "Depending on this matter (i.e. heart-base), mind-element and mind-consciousness element arise; that matter is related to mind-element and mind-consciousness element and their associated states by dependence condition." Pali: "ya.m ruupa.m nissaaya manodhaatu ca manovi~n~naa.nadhaatu ca vattanti, ta.m ruupa.m manodhaatuyaa ca manov~n~naa.nadhaatuyaa ca ta.m sampayuttakaana~nca dhammaana.m nissaya paccayena paccayo." I also found many other messages supporting the idea of the heart as the base for mind-element and mind-consciousness element, especially by Robert and Nina. Now, I think you must have read “The Biology of Belief” in February 23 issue of Time magazine. In that cover story, under the sub-heading of “It's All in Your Head” you will find the following passage. Quote: [When people engage in prayer, it's the frontal lobes that take the lead, since they govern focus and concentration. During very deep prayer, the parietal lobe powers down, which is what allows us to experience that sense of having loosed our earthly moorings. The frontal lobes go quieter when worshippers are involved in the singular activity of speaking in tongues — which jibes nicely with the speakers' subjective experience that they are not in control of what they're saying. Pray and meditate enough and some changes in the brain become permanent. Long-term meditators — those with 15 years of practice or more — appear to have thicker frontal lobes than nonmeditators. People who describe themselves as highly spiritual tend to exhibit an asymmetry in the thalamus — a feature that other people can develop after just eight weeks of training in meditation skills. "It may be that some people have fundamental asymmetry [in the thalamus] to begin with," Newberg says, "and that leads them down this path, which changes the brain further."] End Quote. You will find other passages where the research studies show that mental activities bring about changes in the brain. With these findings in view, I would like to know your personal opinion regarding the heart as the base for mind-element and mind-consciousness element. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Han #96066 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:23 am Subject: Re: bikkhu bodhi on abhidhamma and meditation jonoabb Hi Robert E > > Can you suggest a better word to use? > > Well...how about occurrence? If it is not something that "is > developing" and represents a process of development, then I think what > you are saying really is just that "it happened." Development > certainly seems to indicate that it's part of an ongoing process. The arising of insight/panna is more than just an occurrence, because on each arising it accumulates. Since that accumulation is of great value, it may be regarded as a development. > Of course, certain conditions arose to cause it to happen, but it > would get rid of the confusion if occurrence were used instead of > development. It seems to me that the existence of the word bhavanga > or "mental development" or what-have-you, seems to strongly indicate > that you are talking about "working on something to develop it" or at > the very least that a series of events have transpired to cause > something to reach a more mature stage. There are numerous instances in the suttas of the use of conventional expressions that, to my understanding, do not carry their ordinary conventional meaning. These include references to persons exerting effort and the like (as mentioned by Alex in a recent post). In the end, it comes down to a question of one's understanding of the whole context of the teachings, rather than to an analysis of the Pali syntax. > You're sending me on another research project. I am thrilled that you > want to take final authority from sutta. I will do my best - may take > some time - to find an early enough reference to make the discussion > interesting. Well I didn't mean to set extra work for you! I was simply asking for the basis for the assertions contained in your last post, about historical usage of terms. If you don't have anything to hand, that's fine. > It may come down to me learning Pali and figuring out what the > Abhidhamma is *really* saying. :-) What the Abhidhamma is really saying is, to my understanding, exactly the same as what the Suttas are really saying. (Of course, being correct in one's understanding of what the teachings are really saying, and knowledge of Pali, are two different things ;-)) Jon #96067 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] does buddhism accept the concept of Hell and Heaven? sarahprocter... Dear Raghunath, --- On Sat, 21/2/09, Raghunath Awachar wrote: >I would like to know what Buddhism says about life after death. What happens after death? Does one go to hell or heaven? What is exact meaning of rebirth? If there is no God,how are there devatas? who are they? .... S: I think that we'll only ever understand these questions and their answers by understanding more about life and death at this moment. Just as now, one moment of consciousness follows another and there are moments of seeing, hearing and thinking about these experiences, so life continues in samsara. The last moment of this life will be followed by another moment in just the same way due to the root causes of ignorance and attachment. So, rebirth refers to a moment of consciousness and in this sense, there is 'rebirth' now at each moment. We read about devas, devatas and people, but in the absolute sense, all that exists now are only ever namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena). Does this make any sense? Where do you live? Metta, Sarah p.s Pls remember to make it clear who is being addressed in messages, even if it's 'All' and to sign off with your (real) name you like to be addressed by. ========== #96068 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Heart or Brain? sarahprocter... Dear Han, Thanks for kindly raising this issue. I'm so behind with other replies, but wish to quickly get back to you! I remember some of your messages before on the subject of science and medicine, so I'm aware of how you feel about this topic. Let me go through your points and let's reflect further on them together" --- On Sat, 21/2/09, han tun wrote: >I was looking for hadaya vatthu in DSG Useful Posts and I came across your message http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/message/ 72468 where you gave the following English and Pali Texts. English text: "Depending on this matter (i.e. heart-base), mind-element and mind-consciousness element arise; that matter is related to mind-element and mind-consciousness element and their associated states by dependence condition." Pali: "ya.m ruupa.m nissaaya manodhaatu ca manovi~n~naa. nadhaatu ca vattanti, ta.m ruupa.m manodhaatuyaa ca manov~n~naa. nadhaatuyaa ca ta.m sampayuttakaana~ nca dhammaana.m nissaya paccayena paccayo." .... S: As you know, the commentaries make this clear that it is haddaya-vatthu (heart-base) that is being referred to and I have no reason to doubt this. At the same time, if we just say it is rupa, different from the rupa of eye-base and so on, that's also fine with me. I don't think it's very important to know exactly where it's located and in any case, we immediately introduce our concepts about 'heart', 'brain' and so on. This is because it's not directly known. However, I do have great confidence in what was taught by the Buddha and other arahats as passed down at the Great Councils, so I follow this detail. ... >Now, I think you must have read “The Biology of Belief” in February 23 issue of Time magazine. In that cover story, under the sub-heading of “It's All in Your Head” you will find the following passage. >Quote: [When people engage in prayer, it's the frontal lobes that take the lead, since they govern focus and concentration. During very deep prayer, the parietal lobe powers down, which is what allows us to experience that sense of having loosed our earthly moorings. The frontal lobes go quieter when worshippers are involved in the singular activity of speaking in tongues — which jibes nicely with the speakers' subjective experience that they are not in control of what they're saying. >Pray and meditate enough and some changes in the brain become permanent. .... S: I read this as simply saying that cittas (along with kamma, temperature and nutriment) condition different rupas in various ways. As another article Suan linked to on this indicated, similar results of thickened parts of the brain were found in rats injected with some substance. I don't find any particular significance in it or any relevance to the Path the Buddha taught, do you? It very much reminds me of some of the research and experimentation we used to conduct when I studied behavioural Psychology and split-Brain studies etc. At the end, I'd ask what the relevance of it all was. What is the goal? ... >You will find other passages where the research studies show that mental activities bring about changes in the brain. With these findings in view, I would like to know your personal opinion regarding the heart as the base for mind-element and mind-consciousness element. ... S: I don't find any conflict. The Abhidhamma is referring to elements and haddaya-vatthu as the base, the element necessary for most cittas to arise. The scientific studies are discussing various parts of the body in conceptual terms (i.e not dhatus) and discussing how these are affected by mental states. For example, if we're angry, our faces may be flushed. Clearly the 'flush' is conditioned by the angry states. I don't see that this proves that the anger is based or supported by the rupas of the body-sense where the flush occurs. Similarly, when we're happy, we may smile. I don't see that this means that the rupas at the corners of the mouth are the base for cittas rooted in lobha. Instead I see those particular rupas as conditioned by the angry or happy cittas. How about you? I'm glad you've raised this topic and look forward to your further comments. Metta, Sarah p.s I was so glad to hear your strong voice in Bangkok briefly and to hear you sounding in such good form. I do understand that your family no longer permit you to drive long distances! ======= #96069 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:09 am Subject: Right effort ptaus1 Hi all, In light of recent discussions on `formal' meditation and practice, I'd like to ask if someone can explain how is Right effort (samma vayamo) to be understood in practical terms. From SN45.8 translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi: "And what, bhikkhus, is right effort? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu generates desire for the nonarising of unarisen evil unwholesome states; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. He generates desire for the abandoning of arisen evil unwholesome states He generates desire for the arising of unarisen wholesome states He generates desire for the maintenance of arisen wholesome states, for their nondecay, increase, expansion and fulfillment by development; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. This is called right effort." In my understanding, this translates into practice like this (using conventional language): 1. I keep in mind the goal (desire) to eradicate greed, hatred and delusion (unwholesome states) and develop wholesome states. 2. As often as I can, I try to remember to bring my attention to the present moment and determine if my current mental state is wholesome or not, regardless of whether it is during washing dishes, during reading, or during sitting meditation. (in paramattha language, that would be something like conditioned by previous accumulations, sati remembers that this should be done, cetana decides to do it, manasikara does it, panna discerns it). 3.This coming back to the present is usually enough by itself to dispel any unwholesome stuff that may be there at the moment, though of course, it doesn't last long and pretty soon I fall back into some unwholesome distraction, etc. But the good news is that this remembering to come back to the present moment gradually happens more and more often, what would mean that wholesome states are increasing. If you understand Right Effort differently in practice, I'd appreciate it if you could share your understanding. Thanks pt #96070 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:20 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud jonoabb Hi Robert A > > My concern, like yours, is to understand correctly the meaning of the > > Buddha's teaching, and most particularly his teaching on the > > development of insight. > > > > Is this a somewhat limiting view of the Buddha's teachings? What of his teachings on virtue, > his teachings on generosity, or his teachings on patience? The teachings on other kinds of kusala (other than satipatthaana/ insight) are also important, and are by no means excluded in my comment. But the teaching on satipatthaana/development of insight is particularly important because that is the teaching that is unique to a Buddha, and that leads out of samsara. Also, it is noticeable in the suttas that once a person becomes interested in the teachings he/she also becomes interested in observing sila and developing other levels of kusala, and this is borne out by my own observation and experience. So the fact that there is less discussion about these other levels does not mean they are not of interest ;-)) What are your own thoughts on this? Jon #96071 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:22 am Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 jonoabb Hi Suan > Sukin wrote: > > "If right understanding were to arise while meditating, this would > be due to past accumulated right understanding, including of the > pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the > activity and not as a result of it." > > Suan asks: > > Does the above statement of Sukin represent K Sujin's understanding > of Theravada meditation? > > Do other KS folks also share Sukin's understanding of Theravada > meditation? I agree with KenH, in that I take Sukin to be referring to a form of wrong practice rather than to the development of the path in accordance with the teachings. I notice you use the expression "Theravada meditation". I'd be interested to know what you mean by it. Is it from the texts? Jon #96072 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Theravada Does Not Mean Commentaries Re: K.Sujin on meditation... sarahprocter... Hi James & Suan, Thanks for your discussion on 'Theravada' I would have also thought that the 'teaching of the Theras' and the 'teaching of the Arahants' amounted to the same. You may also be interested in the following on the meaning of Theravaada: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/45717 Ven Dhammanando's suggestion for the use of Theravaada: "…we simply follow the nomenclature used in Pali sources like the Kathaavatthu Atthakathaa, and the Va.msa texts. "Theravaadin" will then be used just as the Pali Buddhist tradition uses it: to denote the keepers of the flame of the Saddhamma through all the Indian and Sri Lankan sangaayanaas through to the establishment of the Mahaavihaara, through to the present-day living traditions of Sri Lanka and SE Asia." S: In the introduction to the Kathaavatthu Attakathaa (commentary to the Kathaavatthu, last book of the Abhidhamma Pitaka), it refers to the 11 schools which 'fell off' from 'the Theravaadins' and how along with six schools of the Mahaasa"nghikas, 18 schools arose in the third century, known as the 18 sects. "Of these (eighteen), seventeen schools are to be understood as being schismatic, the Theravaadins being non-schismatic." The text also quotes from the Diipavamsa on how the Vajjiputtakas who had been excommunicated by the orthodox Theras (Elders), held their own Great Recital and "settled a doctrine contrary (to the true faith)." In this, they moved suttas around, destroyed the "(true) meaning and doctrine (dhamma)" in the Vinaya and Suttas. They rejected various passages, composed alternative versions which just had the appearance of the originals. They rejected the Parivaara (contents of the Vinaya), six sections of the Abhidhamma, the Patisambhida, the Niddesa and parts of the Jataka, composing alternatives again, changing names and details. Eventually, of course, after 7 years without Uposotha and Pavarana ceremonies, Elder Tissa, Moggalii's son gathered with a large number of Theras held a council and purged the heretics. To avert the future heresy, the Kathavatthu was spoken according to the Mattika as laid down by the Buddha who had foreseen all this and incorporated into the Abhidhamma Pitaka. All three Pitakas were recited at this Third Council by 1000 (arahat) monks. The text says the "salient feature" of the Kathavatthu "was the crushing of all dissentient views." Anyway, I think the important thing is to understand what the teaching, preserved by these Theras/Arahats, points to at this very moment. What can be tested and proved now? Metta, Sarah ======= #96073 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 4:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: K.Sujin on meditation.... and confrontation. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, Glad to see you're hanging in there... ... >If Theravada refers most directly to the commentaries, why is it then used for the overall name of the teachings that include the entire Tipitaka. ... S: I understand it to refer to the Tipitaka and ancient commentaries as handed down by the Theras in accordance with the word and meaning of the Buddha's teachings. ... >It seems to me it cannot have both meanings at the same time, unless Buddha is included as one of the elders, in which case one would be saying that it is the "word of the Buddha + the word of whoever else has high authority as an elder" and would then be a fairly inclusive umbrella. In that case, what commentaries are included, and which are excluded? .... S: The commentaries included are those which were passed down by the Great Councils comprised of arahats. Here's a quote by I.B.Horner (the past president of the PTS) which I've given before in her Preface to the commentary of the Buddhavamsa: "Through enemies and friends alike deleterious change and deterioration in the word of the Buddha might intervene for an indefinite length of time. The commentaries are the armour and protection agains such an eventuality. As they hold a unique position as preservers and interpreters of true Dhamma, it is essential not only to understand them but to follow them carefully and adopt the meaning they ascribe to a word or phrase each time they comment on it. They are as 'closed' now as is the Pali Canon. No additions to their corpus or subtractions from it are to be contemplated, and no commentary written in later days could be included within it." ... >Another point raised by the Dhammanando article is that there appear to be not only commentaries to the Abhidhamma but to the suttas as well, and that they appear to be necessary to understand the meaning of some of the suttas. Are these sutta commentaries available? And do most sutta students know about them? .... S: The commentaries to the suttas have always been available in Pali and I believe in Burmese and Singhalese. They are all available now in Thai, but in English very few are available. Again, B.Bodhi has done a great job in making some available in some of the wonderful BPS publications, such as on the Brahmajala Sutta and commentaries. I remember how sensational this was when it was first published, because there is so little of its kind or quality. In his various translation texts of SN, for example, he includes useful summaries and brief quotes from the commentaries, which is better than nothing. I think the few sutta commentaries I have access to are very useful. Masefield has translated beautiful editions of the Udana with commentaries and his first volume of Itivuttaka with commentary has recently come out. Of course, you'll probably remember Soma's transl. of the Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries from our old India days in the 70s! Metta, Sarah ======= #96074 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:07 am Subject: Re: Right effort szmicio Dear Pt, See Bhante Dhammadhara "Be here now". It will help. http://www.dhammastudy.com/behere.html My best wishes Lukas #96075 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: K.Sujin on meditation.... and confrontation. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep, --- On Mon, 16/2/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >> S: Oh well, some research would suggest that's a good thing:-). >R:Ha ha, yes I could feel my brain thickening with pride as I read about that! :-) .... S: Ah, but I'm not sure that that kind of pride-swelling-brain is the one to be cultivated (or the one to cultivate, Alex, to stick to the active tense). What do you think? ... >> S: Fine, it all depends on the cittas and what is meant by 'meditating' as some of us have stressed. ... >Yes, it seems to be quite an issue as to what "meditation" is. I always thought it was a pretty simple idea, at least the practice itself if not the fine tuning - that is, to sit in a fairly balanced upright position, turn the attention towards the breath, and focus with one's awareness or attention on whatever arises in the moment. .... S: As you've been finding in your discussions, "meditation" as taught by the Buddha is not 'a simple idea' at all. If it were, we'd all have been enlightened long ago. ... >I think that within that, one can take the approach of just discerning whatever comes up and not trying to control either the practice or the result, or one can have a more "formal" approach and focus on one or another of the foundations, such as "following thoughts" or "following sensations." I would take it that if one were bold enough to practice *anything,* that most here would think that no plan and no particular choice of foundation of mindfulness would be most potentially kusala, since there would be no controlling authority. However, I don't think even that would be "open and uncontrolled" enough for most here, since it would still involve a decision to sit and meditate at all. .... S: Exactly! Any idea of doing anything in order to have sati, takes us off-track. It's a question of understanding, not of doing, as I see it. .... >I can also stretch the definition of meditation to include a meditative approach to the moments of daily living. This may also seem to involve too much of a plan, but to simply pay attention to what arises does not seem to be too much of a plan to me. .... S: There's still the idea of self paying attention behind it all, though:-). .... >Let's say you read that one who develops sati can develop satipatthana and panna and after reading this one is inclined to take on the approach of sati: that is, to merely pay attention mindfully to what is happening with nama and rupa at the moment. It would seem to me that this would be in line with what Buddha taught, but perhaps there is something in that which is 'too much,' even there. ... S: Yes, still self, still desire for having mindfulness behind it...:-)) ... >Any form of bhavana, even if the word "meditation" or sitting down to "practice" never comes into it, is going to have some thought or intention of development in it. ... S: I think that when there is bhavana (development with rt. understanding), whether of samatha or satipatthana, there is no thought or intention of doing/developing it. Simply, there are the conditions for right understanding, effort, awareness, concentration and so on to arise and then fall away. No self involved in anyway. ... >My only problem is all the warnings against meditation. If there are no rules, then why not sit if one is so inclined? ... S: Well, we're sitting now and we'll sit many other times during the day! It all comes down to the understanding of the realities, not getting hung up on particular concepts about postures or activities. .... >Then you do not warn against meditation? That has been my main alarm about this subject. Statements like: "It is impossible to have a kusala moment in formal meditation." .... S: I'm a lot more interested in understanding the realities which make up my day. As we've discussed, whether doing yoga, sitting cross-legged in 'formal meditation' or doing the dishes, it all comes down to the various cittas involved. In the end, we can only know for ourselves what these are. ... >I can understand a warning on the other hand against *wrong view.* That is another matter. ... S: Yes, and this is the warning that's being given. It's a strong warning too. If someone has the idea that sitting concentrating on an object, any object, is the way to follow the Path, it's wrong, because there's no understanding of conditioned dhammas. It just leads to more wrong view. .... >> S: If people 'just want to have samma samadhi' or just want to have anything, it's attachment, not detachment. ... >How does one guard against this in Abhidhamma study? Do these warnings apply as well, and are folks concerned that they may be studying commentary or learning Pali or discussing teachings with attachment? Or does this not seem to be an equal worry? Just wondering what the playing field is..... .... S: Good questions and I think that if someone reads the Abhidhamma, wanting to have samma samadhi, samma ditthi or anything else, it's also attachment and the wrong path. The same applies to learning Pali or anything else. Wrong view is of course the most serious and perhaps this is more likely to arise when one has an idea of the activity as the means in itself as Jon and others have been pointing out. The common ordinary attachment we're likely to have, such as now, won't send us off-track. ... >I never hear anyone say "And when you are translating and studying the meaning of the commentaries, make sure to do this without attachment or you will cloud the meaning with lobha and moha." ... S: Again, it's good to have warnings about attachment, but the wrong view is most serious. Of course, there can be wrong view arising when translating commentaries too. ... >By the way, although I seem to be argumentative on these topics, my interest in Abhidhamma has increased, not decreased. But I think it would be a mistake to follow a predetermined interpretation of anything. ... S: I'm glad to see your interest and I think you're raising good questions. The answers will be in the understanding of the realities involved when they are experienced, but the reflecting on them in the meantime is a condition for such direct understanding. Thx for all your helpful comments which encourage us all to reflect and understand further! metta, Sarah ===== #96076 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:23 am Subject: Lukas Questions I, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Lukas Q. 4. Why is it that akusala arises so often? Kh S:Without conditions nothing can arise. N: Akusala arises because of ignorance. Kh S: Befeore thinking about ignorance one should know that there must be conditions for anything to arise. N: Lukas worries about akusala. Kh S: All conditions are not known yet. Even the reality that has arisen is not known yet. We have to begin at the beginning and know that what appears now is a characteristic of a reality. N: For some people it may be hard to see akusala as just a dhamma. People have aversion. Kh S: I think that although someone may say that akusala is a dhamma, he may not understand why it is a dhamma. Is there now a characteristic appearing? We can call that a dhamma. Akusala has conditions to arise, we can call it a dhamma. It is not yours, it does not belong to anyone at all. N: You often say that we cling so much to names, instead of understanding realities. Kh S: We do not have to name what is appearing now, we do not need to call it by any name. Instead of trying to know whether it is called by this or that name we can have more understanding of the characteristic that is appearing. -------------- Q. 7. Can you say more about doubts. What is the characteristic of doubt? Kh S: At that very moment nobody else can know this better than oneself. There are not enough words to explain when it is there. Jon: What is the condition for doubt to arise? Even someone who has a good intellectual understanding may have doubt. Kh S: Whenever there is doubt there is ignorance, avijjaa. ********* Nina. #96077 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:28 am Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 abhidhammika Dear Sukin, Jon, Ken H, Sarah, Nina and KS Folks How are you? Sukin, you wrote: "If right understanding were to arise while meditating, this would be due to past accumulated right understanding, including of the pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the activity and not as a result of it." Suan asked: What do you mean by meditating? By it, did you mean Theravada meditation in the sense of formal development of satipa.t.thaaana in line with the Buddha's instructions in Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam? Thanking you in advance. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #96078 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:44 am Subject: Right effort is always with right understanding. szmicio Dear Pt, Sarah and all friends. Right effort is always with right understanding. "And what, bhikkhus, is right effort? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu generates desire for the nonarising of unarisen evil unwholesome states; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. He generates desire for the abandoning of arisen evil unwholesome states… He generates desire for the arising of unarisen wholesome states… He generates desire for the maintenance of arisen wholesome states, for their nondecay, increase, expansion and fulfillment by development; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. This is called right effort." "And what, bhikkhus, is right effort?" L: Do we know characteristic of right effort? "Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu generates desire for the nonarising of unarisen evil unwholesome states; he makes an effort, arouses energy, applies his mind, and strives. He generates desire for the abandoning of arisen evil unwholesome states…" L: Suttas are so good reminders, they encourage us and also condition right understanding. Hearing and reading Dhamma can condition right understanding. ------------------- L: Here are some examples of right effort from daily life: 1) We can fight(quarell) with our friends and family, we can have so many dosa. And then there can be a few moments of understanding on account of past dosa. Then there is right effort. It has it's own characteristic. --- 2) We can be involved in akusala all the day, and then there can be a few moments of kusala with right understanding, then there is right effort. We can say then: "He generates desire for the abandoning of arisen evil unwholesome states… He generates desire for the arising of unarisen wholesome states…" We should constantly remember that there is no Self which can choose, applay something or change what has arisen. All realities arise on its own conditions. ------- I have also a question in this wonderful topic. Can we say that there is right effort, when there is development of kusala, but there is no pa~n~na? I belive that there is just effort with dvi-hetuka-kusala citta, and right effort with right understanding. #96079 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:51 am Subject: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 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 Papa~ncasdn, 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. #96080 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:58 am Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 abhidhammika Dear Jon, Sukin, Ken H, Sarah, Nina and KS Folks How are you? Jon wrote and asked: "I notice you use the expression "Theravada meditation". I'd be interested to know what you mean by it. Is it from the texts?" Suan replies: Jon, Theravada meditation can be defined in light of Theravada Suttas in Pali Tipi.taka. For example, Theravada meditation is formal development of the Noble Eightfold Path in light of Dhammacakkapavattana Suttam. Similarly, Theravada meditation is formal development of sati in line with the Buddha's instructions in Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam. Similarly, Theravada meditation is formal development of seven awakening components (sambhojjangaa) in light of Himavanta Suttam and Sabbaasava Suttam I posted in the thread "History of Bhaavanaa as Formal Theravada Meditation". Jon, please remember that the term `bhaavanaa' refers to formal development in the context of the Pali Suttas I mentioned above. In fact, I can refer to Suttam after Suttam from the Five Pali Nikkaayas. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #96081 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - Respectfully, I disagree with your interpretation of the point of this sutta. The point, it seems to me, is not that of not grasping at a "whole," but of realizing that there is no core of permanence and substance to be found anywhere in anything. This is true not only of macro-objects, but also of all namas and rupas within the five khandhas. This sutta presents a metaphor akin to the peeling of an onion metaphor - close examination shows the absence of core/self. As stated in the Phena sutta about rupas and namas: Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately. With metta, Howard Emptiness *(From the Uraga Sutta) #96082 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right effort is always with right understanding. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 21-feb-2009, om 14:44 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > I have also a question in this wonderful topic. Can we say that there > is right effort, when there is development of kusala, but there is no > pa~n~na? > I belive that there is just effort with dvi-hetuka-kusala citta, and > right effort with right understanding. ------- N: Apart from right effort, it is already very difficult to know when kusala citta arises with pa~n~naa and when without. There may be some moments with pa~n~naa closely followed by moments without pa~n~naa. Just typing out your next Q and Kh Sujin answered a question by Ann who wanted to know when there is di.t.thi: She stressed very often that we may know only words. I think that for bhaavanaa there must be pa~n~naa, be it samatha or vipassanaa, and thus also right effort. But I hesitate to pinpoint, we cannot know precisely without sati and pa~n~naa. Nina. #96083 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:14 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud scottduncan2 Dear All, In the Both Goals Sutta, Itivuttaka, 23: "...One thing, monks, when brought into being, when made much of, remains fully achieving both goals - not only that goal pertaining to these seen conditions, but also that pertaining to the hereafter. What is that one thing? Diligence where things skilled are concerned..." ...Ekadhammo , bhikkhave, bhaavito bahuliikato ubho atthe samadhigayha ti.t.thati " di.t.thadhammika~nceva attha.m samparaayika~nca. Katamo ekadhammo? Appamaado kusalesu dhammesu... Scott: And from the Commentary: "'When brought into being, when much is made of' is said - but how is this diligence to be brought into being [since] there is no separate specific practice (bhaavanaa, literally 'bringing into being') known as the bringing into being of diligence (appamaadabhaavanaa). For all such activity as involves that which is meritorious and all such activity as involves that which is skilled is to be understood simply as the bringing into being of diligence. But the bringing into being of diligence is to be understood to be, in particular, the bringing into being of all that is skilled, the bringing into being of all that is blameless, viz. the bringing into being of all morality, the bringing into being of all concentration, the bringing into being of all insight, beginning with the going for refuge as a foundation for the absence of the cycle plus bodily and verbal restraint..." Scott: This is not to be understood as indicating anything whatsoever about a 'formal practice'. In fact, 'practice' of any kind, as understood by the moderns, is clearly shown to be non-existent. Sincerely, Scott. #96084 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 7:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 nilovg Hi Howard, Op 21-feb-2009, om 15:17 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > 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. > =========================== > Respectfully, I disagree with your interpretation of the point of this > sutta. The point, it seems to me, is not that of not grasping at a > "whole," > but of realizing that there is no core of permanence and substance > to be found > anywhere in anything. ---------- N: The Phenasutta is very clear: all nama and rupa are empty, devoid of self. When we only think of the plaintain tree and fail to see that there are actually only elements the emptyness of all phenomena cannot be understood. The same is true in the case of seeing a person. Through eyes only visible object appears, through touch hardness or heat. These are only elements. A whole can be thought of, but it is not a reality that can be directly experienced. Nina. #96085 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:24 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud scottduncan2 Dear All, Also from the Commentary: "...When brought into being (bhaavito): when given rise to and developed. When made much of (bahuliikato): when repeatedly performed..." Scott: Again, not as the moderns think. 'Performed' does not imply a 'performer' and this refers simply to repeated arising and no more. Sincerely, Scott. #96086 From: "Robert" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 8:29 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud avalo1968 Hello Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > The teachings on other kinds of kusala (other than satipatthaana/ > insight) are also important, and are by no means excluded in my > comment. > > But the teaching on satipatthaana/development of insight is > particularly important because that is the teaching that is unique to > a Buddha, and that leads out of samsara. > > Also, it is noticeable in the suttas that once a person becomes > interested in the teachings he/she also becomes interested in > observing sila and developing other levels of kusala, and this is > borne out by my own observation and experience. So the fact that > there is less discussion about these other levels does not mean they > are not of interest ;-)) > > What are your own thoughts on this? > > Jon > I think it is not emphasized enough that sila and qualities such as generosity, patience, renunciation, and lovingkindness are not merely the fulfillment of satipattana, but also its foundation and support. I would like to ask you a question about this passage from the Anapanasati Sutta: "In this Sangha of bhikkhus there are bhikkhus who abide devoted to the development of loving-kindness...of compassion... of appreciative joy...of equanimity...of the meditation on foulness...of the perception of impermanance-such bhikkhus are there in this Sangha of Bhikkhus. I this Sangha of Bhikkhus there are Bhikkhus who abide devoted to the development of mindfulness of breathing." The question is: what is meant by the phrase like "abide devoted to the development of loving-kindness"? How does one abide devoted to the development of a particular quality of mind? Thanks, Robert A. #96087 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:59 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation -- BB refs truth_aerator Hi Scott, all > Scott wrote: > > "Bahuliikaronto refers only to this repeated arising and falling > away of wholesome states. To suggest that 'a bhikkhu' is the entity > which is 'repeatedly doing' is a superfluous attribution. There are > only states and only conditions." Bahulikaroti is a present active infinite VERB. There is NO passivity implied! If the Buddha used passive or passive causative verbs then you could be right. But He seems to talk with very active verb forms... With Metta, Alex #96088 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:10 am Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205; object truth_aerator Hello Lucas and all, What I've wrote wasn't the critique of the teaching, but the blind adherence to them and without putting them into practice. If a sick patient worships medicine and studies every single medical article WITHOUT actually taking the pills or doing something about the disease - then, what for? It is one thing to claim "NO SELF! NO SELF!" (or any other truth). But do YOU practice that or is it just (true) but empty (as in not-experienced) words? To me it seems to be a pinnacle of absurdity to talk about that "nothing can be done", "there is no doing", "don;t meditate as this implies a doer" and yet one surfes the waves, meets other people, reads books, types these messages and goes to the airport to catch a flight to Bangkok. Theory without practice is blind-faith, something that a good Buddhist should avoid. Sure the theory found in the suttas is VERY important. But up to a point. There are 5,500+ pages of suttas, no need to jump to Abhidhamma (which itself may be that long)... There is enough suttas and if something isn't said in them, it is porbably because the Buddha didn't feel it was neccesery. Remember the handful of leafs similie? You can't learn to swim by being on dry land and watching instructional videos. You can't eat the menu... Only with metta, Alex #96089 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:27 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud truth_aerator Dear Scott and all, >"Scott" wrote: > > Dear All, > > Also from the Commentary: > > "...When brought into being (bhaavito): bhaavito is from bhaavi = ACTIVE aorist verb of bhavati. There is NO causative passive verb of any kind for bhavati in any kind. The only passive verb is present participle bhUUta. So the Buddha IS talking re: development in active manner. With Metta, Alex #96090 From: "connie" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 11:17 am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner nichiconn Dear Scott, I mostly want to point out xiv 9-10 below from the Path of Discrimination: 7. It is lovingkindness (mettaa) since it treats kindly (mettayati) in these eight aspects, namely: by rejecting in the case of all beings their oppression for their non-oppression, by rejecting their injury for their non-injury, by rejecting their disappointment for their non-disappointment, by rejecting their deprivation for their non-deprivation, by rejecting their harrassment for their non-harrassment [with the thought] 'Let all beings be free from enmity and not inimical, have pleasure and not pain, have bliss in their hearts and not pain in their hearts'. It is will (ceto) since it wills that (cetayati). It is deliverance (vimutti) since it is delivered (vimuccati) from all obsession by ill-will. Lovingkindness (mettaa) and will (ceto) and deliverance (vimutti): these are deliverance of will by lovingkindness. 8. When he resolves with faith thus 'Let all beings be free from enmity, safe and blissful', then deliverance of will by lovingkindness is fortified with the faith faculty. When he exerts energy thus 'Let all beings be free from enmity, safe and blissful', then deliverance of will by lovingkindness is fortified with the energy faculty. When he establishes mindfulness thus 'Let all beings be free from enmity, safe and blissful', then the deliverance of will by lovingkindness is fortified with the mindfulness faculty. When he concentrates cognizance thus 'Let all beings be free from enmity, safe and blissful', then deliverance of will by lovingkindness is fortified with the concentration faculty. When he understands with understanding thus: 'Let all beings be free from enmity, safe and blissful', then deliverance of will by lovingkindness is fortified with understanding. 9. These five faculties are the repetition (cultivation) of deliverance of will by lovingkindness: the deliverance of will by lovingkindness is repeated (cultivated) by means of these five faculties. These five faculties are the development of deliverance of will by lovingkindness: deliverance of will by lovingkindness is developed by means of these five faculties. These five faculties are the making much of deliverance of will by loving kindness: deliverance of will by lovingkindness is made much of by means of these five faculties. These five faculties are the adornment of deliverance of will by lovingkindness: deliverance of will by lovingkindness is well adorned by means of these five faculties. These five faculties are the safeguarding requisite of deliverance of will by lovingkindness: deliverance of will is safeguarded by these five faculties. These five faculties are the equipment of deliverance of will by lovingkindness: deliverance of will by lovingkindness is well equipped by means of these five faculties. 10. These five faculties are deliverance of will by lovingkindness's repetition (cultivation), development, adornment, safeguarding requisite, equipment, perfection; they accompany it, are conascent, conjoined, and associated with it; they are the entering into (launching out into) it, the acquisition of confidence in it, the steadying of it, and its delivering; they are the seeing of it that 'This is peaceful'; they are made its vehicle, made its foundation, established; consolidate it, properly undertake it (bring it to very sameness), well develop it; well steady it, well set it up, and well deliver it; they generate it, illumine it, light it up. Then 8-10 are given in similar fashion for the five powers, seven enlightenment factors and eight path factors. peace, connie #96091 From: "connie" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:41 pm Subject: Re: RFC - Dispeller 205 nichiconn Dear Lukas, L: Any idea, where should i start to read CMA? Ledi Sayadaw: A thorough knowledge of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (a resume of all the essential doctrines of the Abhidhamma) amounts to abhinnasiddhi (completion of or perfection in acquiring special knowledge in those things in which special knowledge should be acquired). c: Start wherever you like, of course, but they say the monks have to memorize the whole root text before they even begin to be instructed in it. Lucky us, with CMA we get some explanations right off the bat. Btw, it turns out the "copy" I thought I downloaded is really just a glorified link. I hope you'll be able to read it on-line or come up with another copy somewhere. I'll let you know if I come up with anything else. L: And what about pa~n~na of samatha and pa~n~na of vipassana? Where can I find something to read about them? Ledi Sayadaw: Samadhindriya and pannindriya may be defined similarly. Samadhindriya dispels the restlessness of the mind when it is applied in the work of Satipatthaana on an object, such as out-breath and in-breath; pannindriya dispels confusion and laziness. if the samatha road be taken, samadhindriya becomes the eight Samapatti, while pannindriya becomes the five abhinna (higher spiritual powers), such as iddhividha (supernormal powers); if the vipassana road is taken, samadhindriya becomes sunnata-samadhi (emptiness-concentration), animitta-samadhi (condition less- concentration), appanihita-samadhi (desireless-concentration), and pannindriya becomes the five pa~n~naa-visuddhi beginning with ditthi-visuddhi, the three anupassana-nana, the ten vipassana-nana, the four magga-nana, the four phala-nana, and the nineteen paccavekkhana-nana. Kattha pannindriyam datthabbam? Catusu ariyasaccesu ettha annindriyam datthabbam. (Where should one look for pannindriya? One should look for it in the Four Noble Truths). The antithesis of pa~n~naa is the akusala kamma of sammoha. It consists of ignorance, lack of clarity, mistiness, and absence of light of the mind. It is the darkness that surrounds the mind. This sammoha cannot be dispelled by pakati-pa~n~naa, nor by pariyatti-pa~n~naa, which may comprise a knowledge of the whole of the Ti-Pitaka. It is only bhaavanaa-pa~n~naa that has set up kayagata-sati, which can gradually dispel sammoha. c: Kayagata-sati was just the example for the setting up, etc. of any of the four foundations of mindfulness. Also, speaking of bhavanaa, I forgot to mention when i posted it to the Mettaabhaavanaaa corner that #96090 talks about repetition condition, "which brings about acute faculties of knowledge, effort and so forth" (Naarada). peace, connie #96092 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 1:58 pm Subject: Re: bikkhu bodhi on abhidhamma and meditation epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > > Can you suggest a better word to use? > > > > Well...how about occurrence? If it is not something that "is > > developing" and represents a process of development, then I think > what > > you are saying really is just that "it happened." Development > > certainly seems to indicate that it's part of an ongoing process. > > The arising of insight/panna is more than just an occurrence, because > on each arising it accumulates. Since that accumulation is of great > value, it may be regarded as a development. I understand what you are saying, but it does cause confusion. Development as a noun can be something that has come to pass, but it almost always implies an ongoing process rather than a single stage of accomplishment. The sense in which an occurence appears with its accumulations and adds something to the pile is a rather static sense of development, which I find interesting. It is as if there is no actual organic process but things just pop up with the next stage, then do so again, as if each occurrence happens in isolation. > > > Of course, certain conditions arose to cause it to happen, but it > > would get rid of the confusion if occurrence were used instead of > > development. It seems to me that the existence of the word bhavanga > > or "mental development" or what-have-you, seems to strongly indicate > > that you are talking about "working on something to develop it" or > at > > the very least that a series of events have transpired to cause > > something to reach a more mature stage. > > There are numerous instances in the suttas of the use of conventional > expressions that, to my understanding, do not carry their ordinary > conventional meaning. That is fine, but my problem is that I think that the word development may imply something other than a series of static moments. > > These include references to persons exerting effort and the like (as > mentioned by Alex in a recent post). Well, we can always argue about whether the Buddha meant what he said, or whether he was just talking down to beginners, but such speculation will never provide good evidence. > > In the end, it comes down to a question of one's understanding of the > whole context of the teachings, rather than to an analysis of the > Pali syntax. Yes, and it also comes down to what one's understanding is based on, and whether it is correct or not. Hard to prove, as there are competing philosophies extant. I guess we could each say 'each to his own interpretation' but that would probably not be satisfying. > > > You're sending me on another research project. I am thrilled that > you > > want to take final authority from sutta. I will do my best - may > take > > some time - to find an early enough reference to make the discussion > > interesting. > > Well I didn't mean to set extra work for you! I was simply asking > for the basis for the assertions contained in your last post, about > historical usage of terms. If you don't have anything to hand, > that's fine. > > > It may come down to me learning Pali and figuring out what the > > Abhidhamma is *really* saying. :-) > > What the Abhidhamma is really saying is, to my understanding, exactly > the same as what the Suttas are really saying. But not necessarily the reverse - as the Suttas, I think you are saying, often mispeak the truth by using conventional instead of ultimate language. > > (Of course, being correct in one's understanding of what the > teachings are really saying, and knowledge of Pali, are two different > things ;-)) That is also true! But it probably doesn't hurt to have some understanding of how the words were used in their original context, something that I will probably never know. Best, Robert = = = = = = = = #96093 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: K.Sujin on meditation.... and confrontation. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. Thank for all the info below. It is quite interesting, and I may look into some of the Sutta commentaries - the few that are in English, at some point when I can. Thank you for encouraging me to "hang in there." I do appreciate it. Although I suspect that your encouragement may be part of a plot to torture poor Sukin. I apologize for giving him a hard time. One more comment below... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob Ep, > > Glad to see you're hanging in there... > >Another point raised by the Dhammanando article is that there appear > to be not only commentaries to the Abhidhamma but to the suttas as > well, and that they appear to be necessary to understand the meaning > of some of the suttas. Are these sutta commentaries available? And > do most sutta students know about them? > .... > S: The commentaries to the suttas have always been available in Pali and I believe in Burmese and Singhalese. They are all available now in Thai, but in English very few are available. Again, B.Bodhi has done a great job in making some available in some of the wonderful BPS publications, such as on the Brahmajala Sutta and commentaries. I remember how sensational this was when it was first published, because there is so little of its kind or quality. In his various translation texts of SN, for example, he includes useful summaries and brief quotes from the commentaries, which is better than nothing. I think the few sutta commentaries I have access to are very useful. Masefield has translated beautiful editions of the Udana with commentaries and his first volume of Itivuttaka with commentary has recently come out. Of course, you'll probably remember Soma's transl. of the Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries from our old India days in the 70s! I didn't have the pleasure of yet being involved with the Dhamma in the 70's but this would be very interesting to see! Best, Robert E. ==================== #96094 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:40 pm Subject: Re: K.Sujin on meditation.... and confrontation. epsteinrob Hi Sarah! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: However, I don't think > even that would be "open and uncontrolled" enough for most here, since > it would still involve a decision to sit and meditate at all. > .... > S: Exactly! Any idea of doing anything in order to have sati, takes us off-track. It's a question of understanding, not of doing, as I see it. How about doing what you're doing *with* right understanding? Or does right understanding preclude sitting *at all?* Obviously it was okay for the monks that the Buddha addressed in the Anapanasati Sutta, even if one grants that they were "specially qualified." > .... > >I can also stretch the definition of meditation to include a > meditative approach to the moments of daily living. This may also > seem to involve too much of a plan, but to simply pay attention to > what arises does not seem to be too much of a plan to me. > .... > S: There's still the idea of self paying attention behind it all, though:-). Then how does one distinguish a worldling who will make no progress because of just following the ordinary logic of samsara which leads to the continued cycle of rebirth, and one who escapes the cycle by developing the 8-fold path? If no one is allowed to do anything, does it just happen totally at random? > .... > >Let's say you read that one who develops sati can develop satipatthana > and panna and after reading this one is inclined to take on the > approach of sati: that is, to merely pay attention mindfully to what > is happening with nama and rupa at the moment. It would seem to me > that this would be in line with what Buddha taught, but perhaps there > is something in that which is 'too much,' even there. > ... > S: Yes, still self, still desire for having mindfulness behind it...:-)) > ... > >Any form of bhavana, even if the word "meditation" or sitting down to > "practice" never comes into it, is going to have some thought or > intention of development in it. > ... > S: I think that when there is bhavana (development with rt. understanding), whether of samatha or satipatthana, there is no thought or intention of doing/developing it. Simply, there are the conditions for right understanding, effort, awareness, concentration and so on to arise and then fall away. No self involved in anyway. > ... > >My only problem is all the warnings against meditation. If there are > no rules, then why not sit if one is so inclined? > ... > S: Well, we're sitting now and we'll sit many other times during the day! It all comes down to the understanding of the realities, not getting hung up on particular concepts about postures or activities. > .... > >Then you do not warn against meditation? That has been my main alarm > about this subject. Statements like: "It is impossible to have a > kusala moment in formal meditation." > .... > S: I'm a lot more interested in understanding the realities which make up my day. As we've discussed, whether doing yoga, sitting cross-legged in 'formal meditation' or doing the dishes, it all comes down to the various cittas involved. In the end, we can only know for ourselves what these are. That would make sense, but doesn't seem to be the universal view... > ... > >I can understand a warning on the other hand against *wrong view.* > That is another matter. > ... > S: Yes, and this is the warning that's being given. It's a strong warning too. If someone has the idea that sitting concentrating on an object, any object, is the way to follow the Path, it's wrong, because there's no understanding of conditioned dhammas. It just leads to more wrong view. > .... > >> S: If people 'just want to have samma samadhi' or just want to have > anything, it's attachment, not detachment. > ... > >How does one guard against this in Abhidhamma study? Do these > warnings apply as well, and are folks concerned that they may be > studying commentary or learning Pali or discussing teachings with > attachment? Or does this not seem to be an equal worry? Just > wondering what the playing field is..... > .... > S: Good questions and I think that if someone reads the Abhidhamma, wanting to have samma samadhi, samma ditthi or anything else, it's also attachment and the wrong path. The same applies to learning Pali or anything else. Wrong view is of course the most serious and perhaps this is more likely to arise when one has an idea of the activity as the means in itself as Jon and others have been pointing out. The common ordinary attachment we're likely to have, such as now, won't send us off-track. Why is that? > ... > >I never hear anyone say "And when you are translating and studying the > meaning of the commentaries, make sure to do this without attachment > or you will cloud the meaning with lobha and moha." > ... > S: Again, it's good to have warnings about attachment, but the wrong view is most serious. Of course, there can be wrong view arising when translating commentaries too. And is this less likely? Why would that be? Wouldn't the idea arise pretty easily that "by reading sutta in the original I will make much better progress in developing panna." Don't you think that's just as common [in the back of one's mind] as it is in meditation or any other Dhamma-related action? > ... > >By the way, although I seem to be argumentative on these topics, my > interest in Abhidhamma has increased, not decreased. But I think it > would be a mistake to follow a predetermined interpretation of anything. > ... > S: I'm glad to see your interest and I think you're raising good questions. The answers will be in the understanding of the realities involved when they are experienced, but the reflecting on them in the meantime is a condition for such direct understanding. That is a hopeful note, thanks. > > Thx for all your helpful comments which encourage us all to reflect and understand further! Well, you are very encouraging. I hope that others don't feel that you are instigating me to torment them further with my incessant complaints. Best, Robert E. ====================== #96095 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 2:51 pm Subject: Re: bikkhu bodhi on abhidhamma and meditation truth_aerator Hello Jon, Robert and all, I do not believe that Buddha's words should be misinterpreted to fit one's whims. It is very convinient to believe that "don't do any effort! Don't strain! Don't even try! Its wrong view". Very often the Buddha has used ACTIVE VERBS that signify that action has to be performed. If the Buddha would use passive verbs, then we could talk about things just happening, enlightenment just happening, and wisdom falling from the empty sky... > That is fine, but my problem is that I think that the word >development may imply something other than a series of static >moments. vyamati= (active present verb) strives; endeavors. HAS NO GRAMMATICAL PASSIVE FORMS. Karoti = active present verb does, acts, makes Bhavati = active present finite verb. THERE AREN'T passive or causative passive forms of this verb except for verbal noun bhUUta which Buddha used as what is seen "Yathabhuta nana dassana" from samadhi. pagganhati = active present finite verb without ANY passive finite verbs possible at all. holds up; takes up; supports; favours; stretches forth. ========== "And what, monks, is right effort? [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [ii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. [iii] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. [iv] "He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort." SN 45.8 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html With best wishes, Alex #96096 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:13 pm Subject: Re: effort. truth_aerator Hello all, "When things become manifest To the ardent meditating brahman, All his doubts then vanish since he understands Each thing along with its cause. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.01.irel.html "Yada have patubhavanti dhamma Atapino jhayato brahmanassa,Athassa kankha vapayanti sabba Yato pajanati sahetudhamman-ti." -Ud 1.1 Atapino = dat.gen.Sg ARDENT STRENUOUS Jhayato = dat.gen.Sg. present active participle of jhayati. Meditative Pajanati = active present verb. "Knows clearly" The choice of active verbs imply that things don't just fall out of the blue sky no matter how we wish things to be otherwise. And what about famous line found in MN152 and other suttas. "jhayathananda, ma pamadattha." Meditate Ananda! Don't be heedless! Jhayatha = 2nd plural verb that is active or imperative. Again, the choice of words show that effort must be done. Meditation isn't some passive thing that "just happens" With metta, Alex #96097 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 3:49 pm Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud truth_aerator Dear Scott and all, >"Scott" wrote: > > Dear All, > > In the Both Goals Sutta, Itivuttaka, 23: > > "...One thing, monks, when brought into being, when made much of, > remains fully achieving both goals - not only that goal pertaining >to > these seen conditions, but also that pertaining to the hereafter. > What is that one thing? Diligence where things skilled are >concerned..." > > ...Ekadhammo , bhikkhave, bhaavito bahuliikato ubho atthe >samadhigayha > ti.t.thati " di.t.thadhammika~nceva attha.m samparaayika~nca. >Katamo > ekadhammo? Appamaado kusalesu dhammesu... > > Scott: And from the Commentary: > > "'When brought into being, when much is made of' is said - but how >is > this diligence to be brought into being [since] there is no separate > specific practice (bhaavanaa, literally 'bringing into being') known > as the bringing into being of diligence (appamaadabhaavanaa). For >all > such activity as involves that which is meritorious and all such > activity as involves that which is skilled is to be understood >simply > as the bringing into being of diligence. But the bringing into >being > of diligence is to be understood to be, in particular, the bringing > into being of all that is skilled, the bringing into being of all >that > is blameless, viz. the bringing into being of all morality, the > bringing into being of all concentration, the bringing into being of > all insight, beginning with the going for refuge as a foundation for > the absence of the cycle plus bodily and verbal restraint..." > > Scott: This is not to be understood as indicating anything >whatsoever > about a 'formal practice'. In fact, 'practice' of any kind, as > understood by the moderns, is clearly shown to be non-existent. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. And these things "just arise" on their own and without effort, right? I can see why some cherish this idea so much. I'd love to believe it to and have it as The Truth... "If, on reflecting, he realizes that there are evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by him that would be an obstruction for him were he to die during the day, then he should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head, in the same way the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.020.than.html With best wishes, Alex #96098 From: "colette" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The speed of cittas ksheri3 Good Morning Herman, My, how surprised I was to find that as I searched the DSG, initially, your name came up in reference to the Bhavanga-citta. Well, lets begin this prossess with you then. > > 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. > > It is my understanding that the Buddha did not teach a complex theory > of perception, as the scholastics have done. His teaching is simply > this: "When, ....., for you in the seen is merely what is seen... in > the cognized is merely what is cognized, then, ......, you will not be > 'with that.' When, ........, you are not 'with that,' then, ......, > you will not be 'in that.' When, ......, you are not 'in that,' then, > ......., you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two. > Just this is the end of suffering." ------------------------------- colette: I just read a portion of Alberto's post and realized how much there is on this topic/thought/conception. I will still focus on your reply to him. "Seeing is believing", a trite little way of avoiding details. And just what criminal wants to get caught up in the details. Unfortunately, the Abhdidharma requires us to dispel with the details. My dilema came when I read your interpretation of what the Buddha had said. I asked myself IF what is seen is the same as what is COGNIZED? You and I can see the exact same thing but do we both have the same cognition of what it is? IF the sight and the cognition are not the same from one person to another person THEN they cannot be speaking of the same dharmas. This messes with my head since I am totally focused on foundational material giving rise to "higher" thought/wisdom i.e. you cannot have a penthouse if the foundation cannot support the weight of the structure supporting the penthouse. Where is the "common denominator" if the conversation between two people is about two completely different dharmas? Relatively we are immersed in a CASTE SYSTEM OF STRATIFICATION but ILTIMATELY the caste system is rubbish, refuse, et al. You'll have to pardon my incomplete post here since I was/am working some "stuff" in a Dzogchen context in another sight and when I began replying to your post here I've had an influx of data that I cannot deal with AND GUESS WHAT, talk about Karma, I look to my immediate left and find Willaim S.Waldron's paper on the Alaya-vijnana opened to an underlined part that says, in my writing, "VERY IMPORTANT" where it points to: "The anusaya describes the essential conncetion between ordinary sensations and feelings (vedana) and the ill-fated reactions elicited by them, and as such are, like vijnana crucial to the Buddhist explanation of samsaric continuity." Auspicous, I believe, is the word. toodles, colette <...> #96099 From: han tun Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 5:25 pm Subject: Re: Heart or Brain? hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your quick response. ------------------------------ > Sarah: Thanks for kindly raising this issue. I'm so behind with other replies, but wish to quickly get back to you! I remember some of your messages before on the subject of science and medicine, so I'm aware of how you feel about this topic. Let me go through your points and let's reflect further on them together" Han: I am satisfied with your replies, and what I am going to write just now will not need any further response from you. Therefore, please take up other replies. ------------------------------ > > Han: I was looking for hadaya vatthu in DSG Useful Posts and I came across your message http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/message/ 72468 where you gave the following English and Pali Texts. English text: "Depending on this matter (i.e. heart-base), mind-element and mind-consciousness element arise; that matter is related to mind-element and mind-consciousness element and their associated states by dependence condition." Pali: "ya.m ruupa.m nissaaya manodhaatu ca manovi~n~naa. nadhaatu ca vattanti, ta.m ruupa.m manodhaatuyaa ca manov~n~naa. nadhaatuyaa ca ta.m sampayuttakaana~ nca dhammaana.m nissaya paccayena paccayo." .... > Sarah: As you know, the commentaries make this clear that it is haddaya-vatthu (heart-base) that is being referred to and I have no reason to doubt this. At the same time, if we just say it is rupa, different from the rupa of eye-base and so on, that's also fine with me. I don't think it's very important to know exactly where it's located and in any case, we immediately introduce our concepts about 'heart', 'brain' and so on. This is because it's not directly known. However, I do have great confidence in what was taught by the Buddha and other arahats as passed down at the Great Councils, so I follow this detail. Han: I also have great confidence in what was taught by Lord Buddha. If Lord Buddha had specifically said that the heart is the base for mind-element and mind-consciousness element, I would not raise this issue however much the modern medical science may point out otherwise. But Lord Buddha had said only [ya.m ruupa.m] which can be any ruupa. I also agree with you that [I don't think it's very important to know exactly where it's located and in any case, we immediately introduce our concepts about 'heart', 'brain' and so on. This is because it's not directly known.] It does not really matter whether it is brain or heart. I will not insist that it is the brain, but at the same time, I will not be happy if someone insists that it is the heart, because I cannot find any passage in the books where Lord Buddha specifically said it is the heart. It is possible, though, that my knowledge is limited and the books I am reading do not cover the entire scope of the Teachings of Lord Buddha. ------------------------------ > > Han: Now, I think you must have read The Biology of Belief in February 23 issue of Time magazine. In that cover story, under the sub-heading of It's All in Your Head you will find the following passage. > Quote: [When people engage in prayer, it's the frontal lobes that take the lead, since they govern focus and concentration. During very deep prayer, the parietal lobe powers down, which is what allows us to experience that sense of having loosed our earthly moorings. The frontal lobes go quieter when worshippers are involved in the singular activity of speaking in tongues ”which jibes nicely with the speakers' subjective experience that they are not in control of what they're saying. >Pray and meditate enough and some changes in the brain become permanent. .... > Sarah: I read this as simply saying that cittas (along with kamma, temperature and nutriment) condition different rupas in various ways. As another article Suan linked to on this indicated, similar results of thickened parts of the brain were found in rats injected with some substance. I don't find any particular significance in it or any relevance to the Path the Buddha taught, do you? It very much reminds me of some of the research and experimentation we used to conduct when I studied behavioural Psychology and split-Brain studies etc. At the end, I'd ask what the relevance of it all was. What is the goal? Han: I agree with you that cittas (along with kamma, temperature and nutriment) condition different ruupas in various ways, and that it has no particular significance or any relevance to the Path the Buddha taught. ------------------------------ > > Han: You will find other passages where the research studies show that mental activities bring about changes in the brain. With these findings in view, I would like to know your personal opinion regarding the heart as the base for mind-element and mind-consciousness element. ... > Sarah: I don't find any conflict. The Abhidhamma is referring to elements and haddaya-vatthu as the base, the element necessary for most cittas to arise. The scientific studies are discussing various parts of the body in conceptual terms (i.e not dhatus) and discussing how these are affected by mental states. For example, if we're angry, our faces may be flushed. Clearly the 'flush' is conditioned by the angry states. I don't see that this proves that the anger is based or supported by the rupas of the body-sense where the flush occurs. Similarly, when we're happy, we may smile. I don't see that this means that the rupas at the corners of the mouth are the base for cittas rooted in lobha. Instead I see those particular rupas as conditioned by the angry or happy cittas. How about you? I'm glad you've raised this topic and look forward to your further comments. Han: I do not have any difficulty in accepting what you have written above. But I maintain the same position that I had stated above, i.e., [I will not insist that it is the brain, but at the same time, I will not be happy if someone insists that it is the heart, because I cannot find any passage in the books where Lord Buddha specifically said it is the heart.] For example, please look at the translation that you had quoted: [Depending on this matter (i.e. heart-base), mind-element and mind-consciousness element arise] You will see that the translator had inserted the word (heart-base) within brackets, and so it is not the word of Lord Buddha. ------------------------------ > Sarah: p.s I was so glad to hear your strong voice in Bangkok briefly and to hear you sounding in such good form. I do understand that your family no longer permit you to drive long distances! Han: Yes, I cannot now drive, and they do not want me to go far from our house. Although I feel better than last year, the medicine that I am taking for prostate lowers my blood pressure and makes me dizzy. It also weakens my muscles. My leg muscles get easily tired while walking, and even my jaw muscles get tired while chewing the food. Well, nothing in this world is free and there is always a price to pay! with metta and deepest respect, Han #96100 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 6:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Nina), Butting in if I may: -------- <. . .> H: > Respectfully, I disagree with your interpretation of the point of this sutta. The point, it seems to me, is not that of not grasping at a "whole," -------- As I understand the term "grasping at a whole" it refers to the function of ignorance (avijja) whenever it experiences a conditioned dhamma. Instead of seeing that conditioned dhamma as a single, momentary phenomena, it prefers to see it as a whole - or permanent - thing. In other words, avijja prefers to see conventional reality in every object. ---------------- H: > but of realizing that there is no core of permanence and substance to be found anywhere in anything. ---------------- By "permanence and substance" I think you mean "permanence and absolute reality" which are two very different things. Everyone here will agree there is no permanence, but no Abhidhamma student will agree with you that a conditioned dhamma lacks absolute reality. ------------------------------------- H: > This is true not only of macro-objects, but also of all namas and rupas within the five khandhas. This sutta presents a metaphor akin to the peeling of an onion metaphor - close examination shows the absence of core/self. As stated in the Phena sutta about rupas and namas: -------------------------------------- As I will never tire of telling you, anatta means 'no self' - no permanent entity or whole. Anatta does not mean 'no absolute reality.' Ken H #96101 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: The > factors spoken of in the texts are the hearing of the true Dhamma and > useful reflection on that, and so on. The reading of suttas > undertaken as an activity cannot be equated with "hearing the true > Dhamma". What then would be an example of "hearing of the true Dhamma?" Thanks, Robert E. ==================== #96102 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > I guess this makes the subject a bit more clear, and I would > disagree > > with you on this. I can't imagine why anyone would read a sutta if > > they did not believe it was developing the path for them. Are they > > reading it for fun? For general interest? I doubt it. > > If a person were to read a sutta for the reason that he thought that > by doing so there would be more moments of panna than otherwise, then > that would be wrong view, I'd say. > > > That is fun, but respectfully, doesn't really answer the question, > of > > which I am sincerely interested. Is serious study of Abhidhamma and > > commentary for serious students *not* done in the understanding that > > "it is developing the path?" If not, then what is the purpose? > > Doing something with a purpose (i.e., intentionally) is not > necessarily the same as doing something as a practice, which implies > that it is the very doing of the act that constitutes the fulfilment > of the purpose (in the present context, bringing about the arising of > panna). I hate to say this, Jon, but that fine distinction seems like hair-splitting and evasion of the fact that the purpose of studying Abhidhamma is to understand and facilitate the path, whether it is directly or indirectly, otherwise no one would bother to read it. It is no less direct or indirect than the various intentions one may have for formal meditation. One person may think "Well the path is meditation" and be more direct about it; another may think "Well I doubt I will get directly enlightened just by sitting, but it is one of the things the Buddha talked about as part of practice, so I will do it" and have a much more indirect sense of it, just as with study. It can vary just as much. I don't think there's any principled argument that can say that studying sutta and Abhidhamma and com is less a practice than meditating or any other activity that one feels is *associated* in whatever way with the Dhamma. Best, Robert E. ========================== #96103 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 9:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > I will try to stick around long enough - though I may lose my job, > > marriage, etc. in the meantime. Just kidding..... > > .-)) I am fortunate in being married to a fellow member of the > lunatic-fringe ;-)) > > Jon That is very sweet and I appreciate your humor. Have no doubt, my wife is also a fellow lunatic, just of a slightly eclectic variety like myself. I know the feeling of having this sort of companionship and I acknowledge you for having such a nice set-up. :-) As for losing my job, I am self-employed, but plan to fire myself for sloth and torpor and related offenses in the near future. Best, Robert E. ================================== #96104 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, I've been appreciating your careful consideration of the Pali terms recently, as in: --- On Sun, 22/2/09, Alex wrote: "When things become manifest To the ardent meditating brahman, All his doubts then vanish since he understands Each thing along with its cause. http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ kn/ud/ud. 1.01.irel. html "Yada have patubhavanti dhamma Atapino jhayato brahmanassa, Athassa kankha vapayanti sabba Yato pajanati sahetudhammanuu -ti." -Ud 1.1 .... S: For context, from the same link: "This being, that is; from the arising of this, that arises. "That is: "with ignorance as condition, volitional activities come to be; with volitional activities as condition, consciousness comes to be; with consciousness as condition, name-and-form comes to be; with name-and-form as condition, the sixfold base comes to be; with the sixfold base as condition, contact comes to be; with contact as condition, feeling comes to be; with feeling as condition, craving comes to be; with craving as condition, grasping comes to be; with grasping as condition, being comes to be; with being as condition, birth comes to be; with birth as condition, aging-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair come to be. This is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. "Then, on realizing its significance, the Lord uttered on that occasion this inspired utterance: "When things become manifest To the ardent meditating brahman, All his doubts then vanish since he understands Each thing along with its cause. .... S: So here the Buddha is giving his teaching on D.O. When we understand how each dhamma arises by conditions (and not by any self willing it, for example), then no more doubts about dhammas arise. .... >Atapino = dat.gen.Sg ARDENT STRENUOUS Jhayato = dat.gen.Sg. present active participle of jhayati. –Meditative Pajanati = active present verb. "Knows clearly" The choice of active verbs imply that things don't just fall out of the blue sky no matter how we wish things to be otherwise. ... S: You're correct, "things don't just fall out of the blue sky no matter how we wish things to be otherwise." However, dhammas do all rise by particular conditions. Any wishing is a condition for more wishing of the same. Trying to have particular dhammas arise with an idea of Self making an effort is a condition for more wrong view to arise in future. From the commentary to this Udana, (transl. by Masefield, PTS): " Appear (paatubhavanti): arise, things (dhammaa): things in the form of the four ariyan truths, its being energy in the sense of burning up of defilements that is spoken of as "ardour" (aataapo). To the ardent (aataapino): to the one possessing energy in the form of the (four) right efforts. Meditating (jhaayato): meditating (jhaayantassa, alt. grammatical form) on account of meditating on an object and on account of meditating on a characteristic. Brahmin (braahma.nassa): one in whom evil has been ousted, one in whom the aasavas have been destroyed. Then do all doubts on his part vanish (ath' assa ka"nkhaa vapayanti dabbaa): then do all those doubts on his part, on the part of him to whom things have so appeared - viz. those doubts with respect to the (twelve-numbered) mode of conditions, that were spoken of after the method of " 'Who is it, Lord, that contacts?' - 'The question is not one that is proper' said the Lord" (Sii 13) and so on, (and) after the manner of " 'What, Lord, is old age and dying? And for whom, moreover, is there this old age and dying?' - 'the question is not one that is proper' said the Lord" (Sii 60) and so forth; and, on account of that same (twelve-numbered) mode of conditions not having been perceived, those sixteen doubts that are handed down by way of "Did I exist, I wonder, at some period in the past?" (Mi 8; Sii 26) - vanish, depart, cease. Why? Because he discerns the thing to have root-cause (yato pajaanaati sahetudhamma.m); since he discerns, has understood, has pierced, this thing, this mass consisting of the formations and so forth, that is sheer dukkha, to have root-cause by way of the root-cause of ignorance and so on." S: A lot more detail is given. It's a gold-mine of detail, actually! ... A:>And what about famous line found in MN152 and other suttas. "jhayathananda, ma pamadattha." Meditate Ananda! Don't be heedless! Jhayatha = 2nd plural verb that is active or imperative. >Again, the choice of words show that effort must be done. Meditation isn't some passive thing that "just happens" ... S: As in the above text, this is referring to the development of samatha and vipassana ["Meditating (jhaayato): meditating (jhaayantassa, alt. grammatical form) on account of meditating on an object and on account of meditating on a characteristic."] Yes, there must be right effort, there must be the 'burning' of defilements and ignorance. The question, however, is according to the Buddha's teachings, inc. D.O. (as given above in brief), what are the causes of unwholesome dhammas, such as defilements and ignorance and what are the causes of wholesome dhammas, such as all the right factors to arise? Does right effort come about by Self or by conditions? Metta, Sarah ====== #96105 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:31 am Subject: Lukas Questions, I, 4. nilovg Dear friends, Questions Lukas I, 4. Lukas Q 5. When there is moha there is no understanding. Is it correct? Kh S: It is correct. Ann: What is the characteristic of di.t.thi ? Kh S: We may try very hard to know di.t.thi, but we do not know the actual moment of di.t.thi. When awareness arises with pa~n~naa, one knows when it is there. If there is no awareness one only knows words. ----------- Lukas Q 1: < 1. Can pa~n~na know concept when it impinge on mind- door? Do concepts have any characteristic? When I lead my normal life there are some moments of understanding of concept which impinge on mind-door.> Kh S: This is thinking, thinking of concepts about realities. Understanding can understand theoretical knowledge. Ann: There are different levels of understanding. Kh S: There can be understanding but no direct awareness yet. A moment of direct awareness is different. There are different levels of sati. Nobody should hope to have sati without there being conditions for its arising. When pa~n~naa is not strong enough it cannot condition awareness of areality. ------ Lukas Q. 8: < I find in my life that i have so many moments of mana. Is it correct? There is also a lot of thinking on account of mana, and I feel a lot of regrets about it.> N: Each object can be a condition for maana, also when we are not comparing. Kh S:When one studies Dhamma one thinks that one should know everything. We should start to learn what dhamma is from this very moment. In the beginning one does not know anything at all about dhamma, the reality that is appearing now. When one listens one can begin to see that what arises and appears at this moment is dhamma; one can understand it as dhamma. One can understand the characteristic of dhamma instead of thinking about the story of dhamma. --------- L Q 6: -------- Kh S: Does one know the reality of citta? Just begin. N: We do not know our own citta. ******** Nina. #96106 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:37 am Subject: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 11. 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 concepts, 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 concepts in ones life, there is no peace. 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. ************************************* Nina. #96107 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:44 am Subject: Re: Right effort ptaus1 Hi Lukas (and all), Thanks for your reply and the link. The text by Ven.Dhammadhara is inspiring. There's one thing I don't understand yet since the text seems to indicate that it is not necessary to generate desire for wholesome states mentioned in the sutta: Ven.Dhammadharo: "So, if you have not got as much awareness as you would like there is nothing that you can do about it. Do you want more? You can't have more because of your wish." This is understandable in terms of conditionality that Venerable then discusses, but I don't understand what then is the place of generating desire for wholesome states. From my experience, the moment I start forgetting to constantly reinforce this desire, other desires very soon take its place desires to engage in sensual pleasures, buy things I don't need, etc. So very soon unwholesome states start to increase. So, I'm wondering how does one go about generating desire for wholesome states in the right way, or maybe the sutta is wrong, or the translation is wrong, or I'm misunderstanding thingsI don't know. (Apologies for talking in conventional terms, I'm not very good with paramattha expressions yet). Thanks pt --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear Pt, > > See Bhante Dhammadhara "Be here now". It will help. > > http://www.dhammastudy.com/behere.html > > > My best wishes > Lukas > #96108 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud nilovg Dear Robert A, Op 21-feb-2009, om 17:29 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > "In this Sangha of bhikkhus there are bhikkhus who abide devoted to > the development of > loving-kindness...of compassion... of appreciative joy...of > equanimity...of the meditation > on foulness...of the perception of impermanance-such bhikkhus are > there in this Sangha > of Bhikkhus. I this Sangha of Bhikkhus there are Bhikkhus who abide > devoted to the > development of mindfulness of breathing." > > The question is: what is meant by the phrase like "abide devoted to > the development of > loving-kindness"? How does one abide devoted to the development of > a particular > quality of mind? -------- N: In knowing that it is not self who does so. All these good qualities arise because of conditions and right understanding of realities is the main condition. That is, right understanding that it is a kind of naama that develops these qualities. They are developed together with satipa.t.thaana, so that they are known as non-self. Nina. #96109 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:20 am Subject: Re: Right effort - Bhante Dhammadhara sermon szmicio Dear Pt There is another sermon of Bhante Dhammadhara. I hope it'll clear some of your present doubts. I found last paragraph very important. "When one comes to learn more about realities of this moment, one does not discover something new and different, but there comes to be some understanding of what one has been familiar with: of what one has always taken for 'self', for people, places and things. The development of understanding must be very gradual and very natural, just at this moment. We cannot force right understanding to arise and perform its function. When the conditions are there, there can be a moment of right understanding. But there is no signal, no warning, nothing to tell you , 'Now right understanding is going to arise and know something about the present moment.' Still, it arises and something is learnt about the reality at this moment. Right understanding brings detachment and this can lead, one day, to complete and final eradication of all this ignorance which causes us to see the present moment other than it is. It causes us to see things as attractive, lasting, worth while, important. All these ways of seeing the present moment are false, treacherous, dangerous and useless. There is not enough understanding of the true nature of the present moment; in the beginning understanding is very weak. There can just be some moments of understanding from time to time. In between such moments anything can happen. Don't fool yourself that, because you heard Dhamma and you are in good company, defilements, perhaps quite strong, can't arise and surprise you, that you are beyond that. Anything can happen according to conditions, according to your accumulations, and it is a test of one’s understanding whether there can be some mindfulness even of those as it were surprising moments. When defilements arise there are conditions for them. It is of no use being disappointed or surprised about them. There is only one way to cope with them: have more understanding of whatever has arisen. There should not be forgetfulness of lobha. It is with us nearly all the time in some form or other. It is like an enemy with the appearance of a friend, very hard to detect. It is like a friend who speaks nicely, waits upon us, smiles at the right time. Who would know that that very pleasant, confortable and secure feeling we have is really an enemy, the cause of all suffering, the cause of the arising of realities from moment to moment, one after the other. We may even cling to kusala. Although it brings pleasant results, it is still impermanent, it is still dukkha. It is anatta, nothing abiding, nothing lasting, nothing substantial. Remind yourself again and again of what the goal is. Don’t be negligent. When it is time for dana, give! Even when it is not time for dana, perhaps it can be made into time for dana. Don’t be negligent as to sila. If one neglects sila, who knows what could happen. All sorts of bad deeds of the past might have an opportunity to give bad results, they might cause one to be in a situation where one cannot hear Dhamma anymore. Don't be negligent as to calm, the moments one is free from lobha, dosa and moha. We should have metta towards other people, instead of seeing them as objects of competition, objects to be jealous of, objects to run down. Above all, most important, dont be negligent to study the present reality. Dont forget to be aware of rupa, of the different types of rupa that arise and appear through the senses. Be aware of visible object that appears from morning to night, arising and passing away unnoticed. The present reality should be studied in order to get rid of ignorance which caused us to be born and which will cause us to go on being born again and again if there is no development of right understanding. May you all be well and happy with right understanding!" (It's form Nina's Pilgrmage to Sri Lanka, excellent reminder) My best wishes Lukas #96111 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 1:52 am Subject: Re: cornerstone sarahprocter... Hi Connie & Lukas, Back to book-worm-land... ... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > c: can you help me with this one then? > > Asl 225 (p304): Of the three Paths, the Path of one emerging by means of impermanence is the Signless; that of one emerging by means of ill is the Undesired; that of one emerging by means of soullesness is the Empty. Thus by the Suttanta expositions it has brought out and shown. But (to object:) what has insight leading to emergence for its object? The three characteristics. ... S: So far, clear. Right Understanding and the other factors have one of the 3 characteristics of a dhamma as object just prior to the arising of the magga citta. .... >What is called a characteristic is the same as a concept, and it is not a state that can be said to be limited or sublime, etc. ... S: This is not clear. The Pali has: "lakkha.na.m naama pa~n~nattigatika.m na vatabbadhammabhuuta.m." Rather than "...is not a state that...", let's try "....cannot be classified as...." or "..not to be said to be....' Isn't this like Lukas's question on the reviewing cittas following magga and phala cittas? Dispeller, class. of aggregates, 203; ".....they have boundless objects (appamaa.naaramma.na) in one who reviews through being instigated by paths, fruitions and nibbaana. At the time of reviewing a concept they should not be said to have [such] objects (na vattabbaaramma.naa)." S: Again, I'm not quite sure of the translation. In other words, as I understand, the reviewing (paccavekkhana) cittas experience the reality, nibbaana, but by way of "na vattabba", cannot be classified. This is like the way the mind door process experiences visible object following the eye-door process. The v.o. has fallen away, but its characteristic appears exactly the same. ... >And whoso discerns the three characteristics as impermanence, ill, soullessness, to him the five aggregates become like a corpse tied to his neck. Knowledge, having the complexes as its object, emerges from them. So a bhikkhu, desirious of buying a bowl, might see one brought by a bowl-merchant, and glad and delighted would think, 'I will take it.' On examining it he might see holes, whereupon he loses all attachment, not for the holes, but for the bowl. Similarly, noting the three characteristics [the student] has no further attachment for conditioned things. He transcends any such thing by means of knowledge, having such thing as object. .... S: May we all find the holes in the bowls and appreciate the khandhas as corpses tied to our necks.... Metta, Sarah ====== #96112 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:16 am Subject: Re: A Vinaya question sarahprocter... Dear Ven Aggacitto & Chuck, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "reverendaggacitto" > wrote: > > > The rule against somebody joining the Sangha who is not complete in > all 32 body parts how did this come about?The rule against joining > while one still has debts? I've seen it portrayed(the 32 bodly parts > rule)as something cold hearted on the part of Ven.Gotama i can figure > how > this probally came about but would rather make sure if possible. > > Where would i find this in the Vinaya? ... S: I was just looking in "The Entrance to the Vinaya", pub. in Bangkok about the "four fulfilling conditions (Sampatti)". Amongst the first (vatthu-sampatti (i.e of personal qualities), it says to be avoided are those who have deformed limbs or chronic disease such that they cannot carry out the duties of a bhikkhu. Debtors have to have paid off their debts to be allowed upasampadaa. The consideration then (as now)was for the preservation of the Sangha and the Teachings. Metta, Sarah ======== #96113 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right effort nilovg Dear pt and Lukas, Op 22-feb-2009, om 9:44 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > So, I'm wondering how does one go about generating desire for > wholesome states in the right way, or maybe the sutta is wrong, or the > translation is wrong, or I'm misunderstanding things -------- N: I am glad rereading the quote from Ven. Dhammadara's sermon: The last sentence may answer your question. When the citta is akusala it is accompanied by moha and lobha, or by moha and dosa or it may be rooted in moha and be accompanied by doubt, or be accompanied by restlessness. When the citta is kusala it is accompanied by alobha (detachment) and adosa or by pa~n~naa as well. When you say: generating desire for wholesome states, we should consider the citta, there is no person who generates such or such state. ******* Nina. #96114 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:32 am Subject: Re: The Introduction of New Terms and Expressions. sarahprocter... Dear Connie, Alex, Rob Ep & all, Always good to hear more of the 'Buddha vaccana' or Buddha's word: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > I don't think the texts have to say "the Buddha himself said" but think Sakka was onto something when he said: << 'It is marvellous, it is wonderful, sir, how truly this has been said by the venerable Uttara: "Whatsoever be well spoken, all that is the word of the Exalted One, arahant, the fully awakened One, wholly based thereon is what we and others say"!' >> (GS: Bk of Eights, Ch.1, viii). ... S: And as we read in the introduction to the Atthasaalinii, (PTS transl): "... 'Bhikkhus, learned is Mahaakaccaana, profoundly wise is Mahaakaccaana. If you had asked me the same question, I would have answered exactly as he has done.' Thus since the time when the Teacher gave his approval, the whole Suttanta became the word of the Buddha. And it is the same with the Suttas expounded by Aananda and others. "Thus in teaching the seven books, when he came to the Kathaavatthu the Buddha laid down the table of contents in the way mentioned above. In doing so he foresaw that two hundred and eighteen years after his death, Tissa, Moggalii's son, seated in the midst of one thousand bhikkhus, would elaborate the Kathaavatthu as is stated above. And Tissa, Moggalii's son, expounded the book not by his own knowledge but according to the table of contents laid down, as well as by the method given, by the Teacher. Thus the Abhidhamma consists of seven books inclusive of the Kathaavatthu." Metta, Sarah ========== #96115 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 2:43 am Subject: Re: Greetings sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, (late replies coming!) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > S: If there were no visible object to be seen, eye-consciousness > couldn't arise to experience it. What's really important is to > understand the different characteristics of visible object and > eye-consciousness in order to eradicate the idea of Self that sees. > > L: The right understanding cannot arise with seeing consiousnes. It > always arises with javana-cittas of sense doors. Can it arise also > with javana-cittas of mind-door later on? .... S: Right understanding of seeing consciousness can only arise with the javana cittas of the mind-door. Right understanding of visible object can arise with the javana cittas of the sense door or mind door processes, but initially it must be with the mind door cittas. .... > When javana-cittas arise, the seeing consiousnes has fallen away. > How can it be an object for javana-cittas? It's no longer there when > javana-cittas arise and experience their object. ... S: Its characteristic still appears (by 'na vattabbaaramma.naa' as I just referred you to). See more on this term in U.P. Great questions and responses to others, as usual! Metta, Sarah ======== #96116 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:00 am Subject: Re: Reminder sarahprocter... Dear Lukas (& Ann), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma friends > > In our daily life there is a lot of concepts involved. We think a > long stories about people and things. We're constantly chasing > vedanas. We are so blind. so blind. moha is so deep rooted. > > But there are also moments of understanding which arise so naturally > and so rare. There is no need to do anything. no need to sit or > develop "Jhana". There is no Self. What we call development > acctually last 7 moments of citta. and no one can control it. Just > condtitioned dhammas. > > I know it's hard to even think in such way, but it is the only > Truth ******** S: Yes!! ... > > Dear Sarah can we disscuss more in this matter? > > I have so many moments of akusala in my life. and never known what > will be next, maybe some moments of satipatthana arise or maybe I > kill anyone I dont know. But all can happen, according to contitions .... S: It's true and the only real protection is the development of right understanding. When the study is really firm, satipatthana develops and gradually there will be less and less chance of any violation of the precepts, especially the extreme akusala kamma patha you refer to. The Cula sotapanna (at the second stage of insight) can no longer perform deeds which will lead to an unhappy rebirth, as I understand. This is because there is no more doubt about conditioned dhammas - they are clearly understood as anatta. There is no person thought to harm us anymore. ... > Those moments of understandig arise so naturally. No one can induce > it, no matter how hard he tries. It's conditioned and we cannot make > it arise by "sitting". It's not possible. Not in this world, not in > this Dhamma. ... S: And isn't that a great relief? Life is very simple and easy-going when one doesn't need to search for answers or try to do anything for right understanding to develop. One knows it all comes back to the understanding of whatever dhamma is appearing now by conditions already. There's no need to look for it! Does this make us lazy? No, it's a condition, I find, to really consider and reflect more on the teachings and appreciate the value of them throughout the day. At moments of dana, sila or bhavana, right effort is there already. ... > I'll be gald if we can talk more in this matter. Because I also have > a lot of doubt whether I am going in good direction. doubts are so > strong. ... S: And you know the answer:-) Clinging to Self and ignorance. "What about me that is so important?" "Where is this big me going?" "Which way is best for me?" :-)) ... It reminds me of a letter which has done the rounds before, sent by Jon to Ann in 1976 which Ann kindly shared with me at the time: "......I got the impression you may be worried about making the right decision, or doing the right thing. In fact, of course, there is no 'right' decision or thing to do, nor in any absolute sense is there a 'better' decision or thing to do. Decisions are made according to our accumulations. We can, however, appreciate the importance of having kusala citta at any moment and of developing sati at any moment. Worry is akusala, so is fear, regret and all shades of uncertainty and unease. No doubt you have in mind that you would like to be sure that what you do will be the best for your study and practice of Dhamma (as well as suiting/satisfying other less noble purposes). But how do you know what circumstances may eventuate? How can you make that situation happen? We cannot foresee the long-term course of events that our past kamma will condition as result. In fact we cannot even know the more immediate plans that our kamma has for us. In ignorance we wonder about what will be the result if...? Not realizing that next month's or next year's vipaka is the result of action already performed, not the result of today's decisions. We forget the importance of developing understanding of the realities of the present moment. How valuable it is to have just a moment of sati, to see just for a momet a little more clearly one of the realities of this moment. Do you remember the sutta when the Buddha talks about a fingersnap of awareness? We spend a lot of time wondering about what we should be doing, or thinking about what we would like to do, or worrying about what we are not doing, but we have no understanding of what is actually happening at the present moment....seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching and a lot of mind-door activity. The decisions we make are just another moment of thinking, conditioned by our accumulations to do many other things too. Then we may act, but this is quite another moment, with a different moment of intention, and different realities appearing." (end Jonothan's letter) **** Metta, Sarah p.s Ann, hoping you've had a safe trip back to Canada. Lovely seeing you and sharing more discussions recently in Bkk. ======= #96117 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:20 am Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 jonoabb Hi Suan > Jon, Theravada meditation can be defined in light of Theravada > Suttas in Pali Tipi.taka. > > For example, Theravada meditation is formal development of the Noble > Eightfold Path in light of Dhammacakkapavattana Suttam. > > Similarly, Theravada meditation is formal development of sati in > line with the Buddha's instructions in Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam. > > Similarly, Theravada meditation is formal development of seven > awakening components (sambhojjangaa) in light of Himavanta Suttam > and Sabbaasava Suttam I posted in the thread "History of Bhaavanaa > as Formal Theravada Meditation". > > Jon, please remember that the term `bhaavanaa' refers to formal > development in the context of the Pali Suttas I mentioned above. In > fact, I can refer to Suttam after Suttam from the Five Pali > Nikkaayas. Thanks for this explanation. You are using "Theravada meditation" to refer generally to the different kinds of development spoken of in various suttas. That of course is fine (but the expression itself has no basis in the texts). I'm not sure what the significance of the term "formal", as appended to every reference to "development", is. Does it have an equivalent in the texts, or is it your own gloss on things? Jon #96118 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:24 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud jonoabb Hi Robert A > I think it is not emphasized enough that sila and qualities such as generosity, patience, > renunciation, and lovingkindness are not merely the fulfillment of satipattana, but also its > foundation and support. I agree with the general sentiment you express here. I would only wish to add a caveat against the notion that a certain level of sila or other kusala qualities are a prerequisite to the development of satipatthaana at the beginning level. On the question of the development of sila, generosity, patience, renunciation and loving-kindness generally, I find it helpful to be reminded that there are opportunities for these throughout the day. Take loving-kindness, for example. For much of the day there are other persons in our presence or at least in our thoughts, and at such times the mental states will either be wholesome (in which case, metta) or unwholesome (attachment or aversion). There are no ethically neutral mental states in the javana process. > I would like to ask you a question about this passage from the Anapanasati Sutta: > > "In this Sangha of bhikkhus there are bhikkhus who abide devoted to the development of > loving-kindness...of compassion... of appreciative joy...of equanimity...of the meditation > on foulness...of the perception of impermanance-such bhikkhus are there in this Sangha > of Bhikkhus. I this Sangha of Bhikkhus there are Bhikkhus who abide devoted to the > development of mindfulness of breathing." > > The question is: what is meant by the phrase like "abide devoted to the development of > loving-kindness"? How does one abide devoted to the development of a particular > quality of mind? Thanks for bringing up the passage. To my understanding (and without checking the commentary), "he abides" ("viharati") refers to the repeated arising of a kusala mental state in the person being spoken of. As regards the "devoted to the development of" part, the things mentioned in the passage are all "kammatthaana", the 38 (or 40) objects of samatha development. So I would take the passage to refer to monks whose lives involve the development of samatha to the level of jhana; thus to monks who lead a particular kind of lifestyle, since that level of samatha generally requires the absence of certain hindrances. Hoping this makes sense. Jon #96119 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:26 am Subject: Re: bikkhu bodhi on abhidhamma and meditation jonoabb Hi Robert E > > The arising of insight/panna is more than just an occurrence, because > > on each arising it accumulates. Since that accumulation is of great > > value, it may be regarded as a development. > > I understand what you are saying, but it does cause confusion. > Development as a noun can be something that has come to pass, but it > almost always implies an ongoing process rather than a single stage of > accomplishment. The sense in which an occurence appears with its > accumulations and adds something to the pile is a rather static sense > of development, which I find interesting. It is as if there is no > actual organic process but things just pop up with the next stage, > then do so again, as if each occurrence happens in isolation. The way in which panna "develops" has no exact parallel in the conventional world, so for any term used to describe it there is inevitably a sense in which that usage can be seen as inapposite ;-)) > > These include references to persons exerting effort and the like (as > > mentioned by Alex in a recent post). > > Well, we can always argue about whether the Buddha meant what he said, > or whether he was just talking down to beginners, but such speculation > will never provide good evidence. I'm not suggesting the Buddha meant something other than what he said, but that what he said needs to be understood in the context of other parts of the Tipitaka. (Sorry, but I have no idea what you mean by your comment about talking down to beginners.) > > What the Abhidhamma is really saying is, to my understanding, exactly > > the same as what the Suttas are really saying. > > But not necessarily the reverse - as the Suttas, I think you are > saying, often mispeak the truth by using conventional instead of > ultimate language. No, that's not what I'm saying at all! In the Suttas the description of the way things truly are is often (but not always) given in conventional language; same truths but different way of explanation. So the reverse of the comment in my last post is also true, that is, that what the Suttas are saying is exactly the same as what the Abhidhamma is saying. > > (Of course, being correct in one's understanding of what the > > teachings are really saying, and knowledge of Pali, are two different > > things ;-)) > > That is also true! But it probably doesn't hurt to have some > understanding of how the words were used in their original context, > something that I will probably never know. I'm sure most Pali scholars would disagree, but in my view a good feeling for the language can be picked up through constant exposure of the kind we have on this list. Jon #96120 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 3:27 am Subject: Re: bikkhu bodhi on abhidhamma and meditation jonoabb Hi Alex > I do not believe that Buddha's words should be misinterpreted to fit > one's whims. It is very convinient to believe that "don't do any > effort! Don't strain! Don't even try! Its wrong view". Perhaps you misunderstand me. Let me explain, using the passage you have helpfully quoted from SN 45.8: > ========== > "And what, monks, is right effort? > > [i] "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, > activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the > non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. To my understanding, this refers to, for example, a kusala moment of restraint from performing an unwholesome act. Now that moment of restraint may occur spontaneously, or it may occur only after much pondering or agonising. But it is only the kusala moment or moments that are accompanied by the mental factor of right effort, not any akusala moments that may have preceded it/them. Any disagreement here? Jon #96121 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 12:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/21/2009 9:35:45 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and Nina), Butting in if I may: -------- <. . .> H: > Respectfully, I disagree with your interpretation of the point of this sutta. The point, it seems to me, is not that of not grasping at a "whole," -------- As I understand the term "grasping at a whole" it refers to the function of ignorance (avijja) whenever it experiences a conditioned dhamma. Instead of seeing that conditioned dhamma as a single, momentary phenomena, it prefers to see it as a whole - or permanent - thing. In other words, avijja prefers to see conventional reality in every object. -------------------------------------------- I didn't understand that to be what Nina was pointing out, but if she was, then I consider it to be an interesting take, though I don't see that as at all explicit in the sutta. In any case, this grasping at a nama or rupa "as a whole," in the sense of a lasting and indeoendent entity, is, indeed, in my view, a result of ignorance, and I think it is an important point that you raise. Even the most fundamental elements of experience can be wrongly grasped. ------------------------------------------- ---------------- H: > but of realizing that there is no core of permanence and substance to be found anywhere in anything. ---------------- By "permanence and substance" I think you mean "permanence and absolute reality" which are two very different things. Everyone here will agree there is no permanence, but no Abhidhamma student will agree with you that a conditioned dhamma lacks absolute reality. ---------------------------------------------- Here we get into a terminological matter that I'm not going to address. I've tired of disputation. ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- H: > This is true not only of macro-objects, but also of all namas and rupas within the five khandhas. This sutta presents a metaphor akin to the peeling of an onion metaphor - close examination shows the absence of core/self. As stated in the Phena sutta about rupas and namas: -------------------------------------- As I will never tire of telling you, anatta means 'no self' - no permanent entity or whole. Anatta does not mean 'no absolute reality.' ---------------------------------------------- Just a suggestion: It might be helpful to consider what the alleged "self" that does not exist is purported to be. Getting it clear in one's mind what it is that one is denying reality to is very important, IMO. ----------------------------------------------- Ken H ========================= With metta, Howard Emptiness *(From the Uraga Sutta) #96122 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:07 am Subject: Re: Why Chant Abhidhamma passages at a funeral? sarahprocter... Hi Rob M, (Han, friends in Sri Lanka & all) Good to see so many Robs posting! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > I just returned from a funeral of one of my past Abhidhamma students. > As you may know, there is a tradition of chanting passages from the > Abhidhamma as part of last rites. There is a short chant from each of > the seven books (Dhammasangani to Patthana); kind of like very short > summaries of each book. > > Does anybody know why this tradition exists? Why chant Abhidhamma > passages at a funeral? .... S: First of all, I'm sorry to hear about the passing away of your student. I imagine that it's a very old tradition pointing us to the fact that what we held and hold so dear are just these namas and rupas. From the the commentary to the Mahaparinibbana Sutta ('The Buddha's Last Days, PTS): " 'That is your teacher, afer I am gone': The Dhamma and the Vinaya are your teacher after I am gone............And during my life, I have taught these: the four foundations of mindfulness (satipa.t.thaana), the four right efforts (sammappadhaana).....All of that basket of Suttanta will perform the role of Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana. And during my life, I have taught these: the five aggregates, twelve spheres (aayatana), eighteen elements (dhaatu), four truths (sacca), twenty-two faculties 9indriya), nine causes (hetu), four foods (aahaara), seven contacts (phassa), seven feelings (vedanaa)........[etc]. I have analysed these things in detail and taught the Abhidhamma-pitaka, which is adorned by the Mahaapa.t.thaana with its countless methods and its twenty-fourfold complete origin (samantapa.t.thaana). All of that, the basket of the Abhidhamma, will perform the role of the Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana. I assume that in the old days, the entire books of the Abhidhamma were chanted over a long period and would have been understood. Later, the Abhidhammatha Sangaha would have been recited and this would be one reason it is memorised by bhikkhus in Myanmar, Thailand and probably Sri Lanka. Perhaps Han or friends in Sri Lanka can add more. Here is a summary I just found of what according to this article occurs in Thailand today: http://tdm.ucr.edu/monastery/ritual_liturgy.html "In Thailand, the most common text chanted at a funeral in the Abhidhamma Chet Kamphi. The Abhidhamma Chet Kamphi ( Seven Books of the Abhidhamma ) is a genre of texts well-known by both the elite and common people in Thailand. There are several versions. The text was most likely composed long before the eighteenth century, but there are few copies that have survived. Although its origins are largely unknown, it has been used as a funerary text for centuries.This title is misleading. This text does not contain the entire seven volumes of the Abhidhamma . There are many different versions, some simply list the titles of the seven volumes of the Abhidhamma and then a section from the matika (index) which offers an extremely abbreviated summary of the contents of the seven volumes (although this is a gross simplification). Other versions include miraculous stories about how syllables from the different titles of the Abhidhamma help cure diseases and even helped create the world. The Abhidhamma Chet Kamphi is not the only type of Abhidhamma text chanted or used at funerary rites. The Abhidhammasangaha , a 12th century Pali commentary on the Abhidhamma has long been associated with funerals in Thailand . The Abhidhammasangaha or at least the "sī na" (four subjects) is chanted at the beginning of the funerary rites when the corpse has yet to be removed from the home. The Abhidhamma Chet Kamphi is chanted at the time of the actual cremation. These subjects were important to study at elite royal monasteries as is seen in monastic university textbooks as early as 1926 (this is the earliest copy I could find, however, this is not the first edition and the textbook was probably first printed in 1912). There are also hundreds of manuscript copies of these texts. According to Abhidhamma teachings, human life can be reduced to mental and physical conditions. Therefore, this would be a sobering, but timely subject at a funeral. A life is no more than these conditions (actions, sense-objects, association, disassociation, dependence, practice, previous birth, etc.). However, these seven short passages in this manuscript do not explicitly discuss conditions. In fact, the text is very simple and repetitive. It would seem senseless to the untrained ear. It would simply sound like a list of similar sounding words. They either have to be expanded upon in oral vernacular commentary or listened to not for their semantic meaning, but for the meritorious power at the time of death. Most often they are chanted in Pali only at a funeral and then the words are "lifted" and used as the basis for a vernacular sermon after the funeral. These verses are chanted while monks stand in front of the funeral pyre ( suut na fai ). Sections from the longer Abhidhammasangaha , discussed below, are chanted at the beginning of the funeral. This chanting is in Pali, which the vast majority of lay people and monks cannot understand. The semantic meaning of the chanting matters little compared to its powerful ritual value. Funerals are perhaps the most common and frequent times for public Pali chanting in Thailand . Indeed, a funeral is the occasion when large groups of lay people come in contact with monks. The Abhidhamma is one of the most commonly heard and least understood texts in Thai ritual life." .... S: We talked to the widow of our friend, Peter, who suddenly collapsed and passed away a couple of months ago. She arranged a '50 day' ceremony for family and friends in Australia and arranged the service in advance with the monks. She mentioned to them well in advance that Peter had been very interested in the Abhidhamma and had not believed in a sitting practice of meditation as being 'the path', so she tactfully suggested there might be Abhidhamma reminders included in the sermon, but not 'meditation' reminders. Well, it was a good example of how little control we have of such occasions. When the sermon was given, the mourners were told about the advantages of 'sitting meditation' and advised to follow Peter's good example in this regard! Fortunately, his widow found this amusing as she explained the misunderstanding to the other friends and family members! I'm also thinking of the examples you gave in your article and quotes from another source, as I recall, of helpful objects and activities to perform for a person who is dying as a condition for wholesome consciousness to arise. The truth is that we can do whatever we think is most helpful and of greatest support, but no one can 'make' the cittas to be kusala. Our kindness may just be a condition for attachment and grief. Still, kusala is always kusala and we do the best we can on these occasions. Metta, Sarah ====== #96123 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 5:52 am Subject: Re: Response to Scott's Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, I wished to comment on this... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > > Dear Dhamma friends > I find Mettaabhaavanaakathaa from Vism. difficult to read because I > feel a lot of dosa now. I realised it's very hard to appreciate this > Metta reminder now. > > My metta experience is very diffrent from this which has being shown > in Vism. .... S: It's the same for all of us, i.e our 'metta experience' is very different from the metta to the level of jhana which is being described in all the recent installments. Sometimes we hear about people referring to having universal metta or 'radiating' it to all without exception, but I think that your last comment is more sincere. Unless metta has been developed to the degree of jhana, it cannot be 'universal'. This is why we need to begin in daily life by being friendly and helpful to those we associate with when we have opportunities, thinking of others' needs instead of our own for a change. Gradually, with understanding, the characteristic of metta becomes more familiar and arises more easily and naturally. .... > > Actually, in my life I had a lot of akusala. I've learned it for > years, and when I see people which has a lot of anger, which steal or > even kills I feel metta. very very natural, not induced by anyone. ... S: And the more understanding, the more akusala becomes apparent. When there is ignorance, it's not known. And so you give an example yourself of metta when you see people who are angry. ... > actually there is noappropriate behaviour. just conditioned dhammas, > nothing more. > > Can you say something about it, because i have a lot of doubts. .... S: As you say, different kinds of conditioned dhammas, none of them belonging to anyone. That's all. Whether it's metta or dosa arising now, it's just another conditioned dhamma that can be known. Nothing to hang on to or fuss about:-)). Metta, Sarah p.s Next edited recording (A.Sujin's 80th) due to be uploaded tomorrow or the next day! ======== #96124 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 6:06 am Subject: Re: thinking and vitakka sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, > >S: KS: "Are you looking for something?.....If one looks for other > > moments - impossible to understand dukkha right now.If one does not understand reality right now, clinging takes one away from this > > moment -wanting to experience the one which hasn't come yet." > > L: Thanks for nice reminder. ... S: you're welcome! .... > Generally I have some doubts about vitakka. Seeing sees. It doesnt > know anything about shapes, forms. It doesn't even know whether rupa > which impinges on eyesense is red or white. .... S: Mmmm, it (seeing) experiences visible object exactly as it is. As Howard mentioned in a post, "what is separated out is not baseless- it is based on the character of the original sight" (#94605). .... > Seeing experiences only ruupaayatana. It's a function of seeing. ... S: Yes, this is true, but each ruupa seen is distinct and seen exactly as it is by the citta. Remember the details about cittas in the Atthasalini and how they come to be called cittas because they are so variegated (citra). Seeing sees all the finest detail of its object. ... > But later on when we differentiate colours and shapes there is > thinking on account of what we saw. Does vitakka arise in those > moments. .... S: Yes. Apart from seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching cittas, vitakka is needed to accompany all other kamavacara (sense- sphere) cittas in order for them to experience or 'touch upon' their objects. ... > I hope you're enjoying your stay in Fiji, Sarah. ... S: Thank you for your kind wish! You see, not only dosa and doubt, but many kind thoughts as well! Apologies for the slow response! Metta, Sarah ======== #96125 From: "Robert" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To T avalo1968 Hello Nina, Thank you for your reply, but I don't see why the Buddha enumerated this list in such detail if all of these monks were doing the same thing. It seems quite possible he did so because these monks were all engaged in different practices designed to work on the mind in various ways - so the monk abiding devoted to the development of loving- kindness was actually going about it somewhat differently than the monk devoted to the development of the meditation on foulness. Regards, Robert A. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Robert A, > Op 21-feb-2009, om 17:29 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > > > "In this Sangha of bhikkhus there are bhikkhus who abide devoted to > > the development of > > loving-kindness...of compassion... of appreciative joy...of > > equanimity...of the meditation > > on foulness...of the perception of impermanance-such bhikkhus are > > there in this Sangha > > of Bhikkhus. I this Sangha of Bhikkhus there are Bhikkhus who abide > > devoted to the > > development of mindfulness of breathing." > > > > The question is: what is meant by the phrase like "abide devoted to > > the development of > > loving-kindness"? How does one abide devoted to the development of > > a particular > > quality of mind? > -------- > N: In knowing that it is not self who does so. All these good > qualities arise because of conditions and right understanding of > realities is the main condition. That is, right understanding that it > is a kind of naama that develops these qualities. They are developed > together with satipa.t.thaana, so that they are known as non-self. > Nina. #96126 From: "Robert" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:35 am Subject: Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To The Bud avalo1968 Hello Jon, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert A > > > I think it is not emphasized enough that sila and qualities such as > generosity, patience, > > renunciation, and lovingkindness are not merely the fulfillment of > satipattana, but also its > > foundation and support. > > I agree with the general sentiment you express here. I would only > wish to add a caveat against the notion that a certain level of sila > or other kusala qualities are a prerequisite to the development of > satipatthaana at the beginning level. > > On the question of the development of sila, generosity, patience, > renunciation and loving-kindness generally, I find it helpful to be > reminded that there are opportunities for these throughout the day. > > Take loving-kindness, for example. For much of the day there are > other persons in our presence or at least in our thoughts, and at > such times the mental states will either be wholesome (in which case, > metta) or unwholesome (attachment or aversion). There are no > ethically neutral mental states in the javana process. > I have no problems with this. > > I would like to ask you a question about this passage from the > Anapanasati Sutta: > > > > "In this Sangha of bhikkhus there are bhikkhus who abide devoted to > the development of > > loving-kindness...of compassion... of appreciative joy...of > equanimity...of the meditation > > on foulness...of the perception of impermanance-such bhikkhus are > there in this Sangha > > of Bhikkhus. I this Sangha of Bhikkhus there are Bhikkhus who > abide devoted to the > > development of mindfulness of breathing." > > > > The question is: what is meant by the phrase like "abide devoted > to the development of > > loving-kindness"? How does one abide devoted to the development > of a particular > > quality of mind? > > Thanks for bringing up the passage. To my understanding (and without > checking the commentary), "he abides" ("viharati") refers to the > repeated arising of a kusala mental state in the person being spoken > of. > > As regards the "devoted to the development of" part, the things > mentioned in the passage are all "kammatthaana", the 38 (or 40) > objects of samatha development. > > So I would take the passage to refer to monks whose lives involve the > development of samatha to the level of jhana; thus to monks who lead > a particular kind of lifestyle, since that level of samatha generally > requires the absence of certain hindrances. > > Hoping this makes sense. > > Jon > Makes sense to me. Thank you, Robert A. #96127 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:45 am Subject: abhidhamma talks about people and effort. truth_aerator >"jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > To my understanding, this refers to, for example, a kusala moment >of > restraint from performing an unwholesome act. > > Now that moment of restraint may occur spontaneously, or it may >occur > only after much pondering or agonising. But it is only the kusala > moment or moments that are accompanied by the mental factor of >right > effort, not any akusala moments that may have preceded it/them. > > Any disagreement here? > > Jon Dear Jon. What does active verb means? What does passive verb means? If the Buddh would use passive forms of verbs whenever grammar would allow, then your statements could be true. However he frequently used pali verbs that MEAN action that has to be done. 2nd) Even though he refuted Atta, he did NOT replace one thing with "Self doesn't exist" natthatta. He taught anatta and very carefully he implied the absence of eternal Self. I believe that this teaching style was on purpose. 3rd) He often stressed the heedfulness, and energetic effort. He did say, and to the MONKS (not ignorant laity) EVEN IN ABHIDHAMMA PITAKA it says that HE strives, HE generates effort HE takes up the mind etc etc. 1377. Samviggassa ca yoniso padhananti idha bhikkhu anuppannanam papakanam akusalanam dhammanam anuppadaya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati, uppannanam papakanam akusalanam dhammanam pahanaya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati, anuppannanam kusalanam dhammanam uppadaya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati, uppannanam kusalanam dhammanam thitiya asammosaya bhiyyobhavaya vepullaya bhavanaya paripuriya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati. Suttantikadukanikkhepam - Dhammasangani Abhidhamma Pitaka Dhammasangani pali. The pagganhati padahati is used at least 44 times in Vibhanga Abhidhamma pitaka. Again pagganhati, padahati = HE takes up and HE strives. Oh yeh... The "conventional and non existent things" are used MANY times in Abhidhamma itself. For example: is "Monk" a conventional or ultimate truth? The word and its derivatives are used at least 604 times in Abhidhamma Pitaka! Quite a number for the books who are said to teach only the ultimates and no conventional truths... With best wishes, Alex #96128 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The History of Bhaavanaa As Formal Theravada Meditation Goes Back To T nilovg Dear Robert, Op 22-feb-2009, om 16:29 heeft Robert het volgende geschreven: > Thank you for your reply, but I don't see why the Buddha enumerated > this list in such > detail if all of these monks were doing the same thing. It seems > quite possible he did so > because these monks were all engaged in different practices > designed to work on the > mind in various ways - so the monk abiding devoted to the > development of loving- > kindness was actually going about it somewhat differently than the > monk devoted to the > development of the meditation on foulness. --------- N: Yes, this shows their different accumulated inclinations. But these subjects can and should be developed along with satipatthaana, not without mindfulness of nama and rupa. These were all monks who were highly skilled. In the sutta we read that there were arahats, anaagaamis, sakadaagamis, sotapannas, and as to the non-ariyans, they were devoted to the four Applications of Mindfulness and devoted to the development of the other subjects you just quoted. The Co explains that all these were meditation subjects the monks were very interested in. In the sutta where it is stated: they dwell devoted to the four foundations of mindfulness... the noble eightfold Path, there is reference to the thirtyseven factors of enlightenment. The Co explains about the factors of enlightenment, bodhipakkhiya dhammas, that these are lokiya (not lokuttara, that is, those arising when enlightenment is attained) and lokuttara. It states that they are lokiya for the monks who develop vipassana, insight. In the sutta we read about the perception of impermanence. The Co explains that here insight, vipassana, is meant by sa~n~naa, perception. N: We read in the Co. that the monks were very interested in anapana sati. That is why the Buddha dealt with the other meditation subjects in short, but with mindfulness of breathing in detail. The Co now refers to the Visuddhimagga for details about this subject. In the Sutta we read that the Buddha said: Note of Ven. Nanamoli: this refers to arahatship. We then read in the sutta what the Buddha said one month later, at the Komudi festival. This we should carefully consider so that we can understand to whom the explanation of anapanasati was addressed: 8] "Bhikkhus, this assembly is free from prattle, this assembly is free from chatter.[10] It consists purely of heartwood. Such is this Sangha of Bhikkhus, such is this assembly. Such an assembly as is worthy of gifts, worthy of hospitality, worthy of offerings, worthy of reverential salutation, an incomparable field of merit for the world -- Such is this assembly. Such an assembly that a small gift given to it becomes great and a great gift becomes greater -- such is this Sangha of Bhikkhus, such is this assembly. Such an assembly as is rare for the world to see -- such is this Sangha of Bhikkhus, such is this assembly. Such an assembly as would be worthy journeying many leagues with a travel-bag to see -- such is this Sangha of Bhikkhus, such is this assembly. > From these words we can conclude that this assembly was very special. Nina. #96129 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. truth_aerator Hello Sarah, Jon and all, > sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex & all, > S: For context, from the same link: > [DO] > .... > S: So here the Buddha is giving his teaching on D.O. You are making a strawman, Sarah! It doesn't have to be one or the other! Why not both? Ex: The monk did heavy samatha through which he was able to calm down his distracted, lustful, hindrance filled mind, and could focus on the signs of characteristics. Or he could be absorbed INTO characteristics (anicca->dukkha->anatta). > S: You're correct, "things don't just fall out of the blue sky no >matter how we wish things to be otherwise." However, dhammas do all >rise by particular conditions. And one of many conditions IS effort, energy, striving and so forth. Of course the effort doesn't have The Self under it. However this doesn't exclude the need to generate effort! >Any wishing is a condition for more wishing of the same. Trying to >have particular dhammas arise with an idea of Self making an effort >is a condition for more wrong view to arise in future. You are making a good observation about ignorant meditators that I agree 100% with. However not all meditators have self view, or view it that way, Sarah! Also whenever I say "meditation" I could mean being absorbed into characteristics of anicca->dukkha -> anatta. It is no news to me that just being absorbed into the object doesn't make one awakened. It is the seeing of anicca-dukkha-anatta with calm, workable and undistracted mind that does. Even in ABhidhamma pitaka we have this teaching: 1377. Samviggassa ca yoniso padhananti " idha bhikkhu anuppannanam papakanam akusalanam dhammanam anuppadaya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati, uppannanam papakanam akusalanam dhammanam pahanaya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati, anuppannanam kusalanam dhammanam uppadaya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati, uppannanam kusalanam dhammanam thitiya asammosaya bhiyyobhavaya vepullaya bhavanaya paripuriya chandam janeti vayamati viriyam arabhati cittam pagganhati padahati. Suttantikadukanikkhepam - Dhammasangani Abhidhamma Pitaka Dhammasangani pali. The pagganhati padahati is used at least 44 times in Vibhanga Abhidhamma pitaka. With best wishes, Alex #96130 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 8:01 am Subject: Re: The Introduction of New Terms and Expressions. truth_aerator Dear Sarah and all, > "sarahprocterabbott" wrote: > > Dear Connie, Alex, Rob Ep & all, > > Always good to hear more of the 'Buddha vaccana' or Buddha's word: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" > wrote: > > I don't think the texts have to say "the Buddha himself said" but > think Sakka was onto something when he said: << 'It is marvellous, > it is wonderful, sir, how truly this has been said by the venerable > Uttara: "Whatsoever be well spoken, all that is the word of the > Exalted One, arahant, the fully awakened One, wholly based thereon >is > what we and others say"!' >> (GS: Bk of Eights, Ch.1, viii). > ... > S: And as we read in the introduction to the Atthasaalinii, (PTS > transl): > > "... ' "Thus in teaching the seven books, when he came to the >Kathaavatthu The thing is that you are quoting Atthasaalinii, a COMMENTARY that says that Abhidhamma pitaka was the word of the Buddha. I believe that those teachings in Abh.Pitaka or the comy or VsM that are strait from the suttas, and do not deviate from the sutta teachings to be true and useful. We ran into problems when some later commentators add their opinions and interpretations to the texts. How do we know the level of achievement of those commentators? Could they explain Dhamma BETTER or EQUAL than the Buddha? Are 5,500+ pages of suttas NOT enough? With best wishes, Alex #96131 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:11 am Subject: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner scottduncan2 Dear All, Continuing: The Path of Purification. "59. So when this meditator develops the mind-deliverance of lovingkindness through any one of these kinds of absorption, he obtains eleven advantages described in the way beginning 'A man sleeps in comfort'. "60. Herein, 'sleeps in comfort' means that instead of sleeping uncomfortably, turning over and snoring as most people do, he sleeps comfortably, he falls asleep as though entering upon attainment." Path of Purity. "Thus the student, developing mental emancipation through love by means of any one of these ecstasies, enjoys the eleven blessings spoken of above as 'happy he sleeps' and so on. "(1) Of these, 'happy he sleeps': - that is, without sleeping a bad sleep like the rest of the people, turning from side to side and snoring harshly. Though asleep he, as it were, enters into his attainment." Iti etaasu appanaasu yassa kassaci vasena metta.m cetovimutti.m bhaavetvaa aya.m yogaavacaro 'sukha.m supatii 'tiaadinaa nayena vutte ekaadasaanisa.mse pa.tilabhati. 258. Tattha sukha.m supatiiti yathaa sesaa janaa samparivattamaanaa kaakacchamaanaa dukkha.m supanti, eva.m asupitvaa sukha.m supati. Nidda.m okkantopi samaapatti.m samaapanno viya hoti. Sincerely, Scott. #96133 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 7:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Right effort ptaus1 Dear Lukas and Nina, Thank you for your replies, much appreciated. Nina, I was wondering, would it be OK to continue with my questions about Abhidhamma in Daily Life, or it's better to wait until you have some spare time? Thanks pt #96134 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:01 pm Subject: Re: Lukas Questions, I, 4. szmicio Dear Nina > Lukas Q 5. When there is moha there is no understanding. Is it correct? > Kh S: It is correct. > Ann: What is the characteristic of di.t.thi ? > Kh S: We may try very hard to know di.t.thi, but we do not know the > actual moment of di.t.thi. When awareness arises with pa~n~naa, one > knows when it is there. If there is no awareness one only knows words. L: What is ditthi? Does ditthi takes everything for self? Pa~n~na is called samma-ditthi, does it mean that it eradictes wrong view? Ditthi doesnt think isn't it? It's not just idea. When there is less Self , is there less ditthi? What about mana? Even when there is less Self involved in daily life there can be still mana which wants to make us more important. > Lukas Q 1: < 1. Can pa~n~na know concept when it impinge on mind- > door? Do concepts have any characteristic? When I lead my normal life > there are some moments of understanding of concept which impinge on > mind-door.> > > Kh S: This is thinking, thinking of concepts about realities. > Understanding can understand theoretical knowledge. L: Well it's not clear enough. How pa~n~na can understand something theoretical?? Are we talking about 'wise thinking'? Can you say something about diffrent levels of pa~n~na? My best wishes Lukas #96135 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: Alex wrote: > Meditate Ananda! Don't be heedless! > > Jhayatha = 2nd plural verb that is active or imperative. > >>Again, the choice of words show that effort must be done. Meditation > isn't some passive thing that "just happens" > ... > S: As in the above text, this is referring to the development of samatha and vipassana ["Meditating (jhaayato): meditating (jhaayantassa, alt. grammatical form) on account of meditating on an object and on account of meditating on a characteristic."] > > Yes, there must be right effort, there must be the 'burning' of defilements and ignorance. The question, however, is according to the Buddha's teachings, inc. D.O. (as given above in brief), what are the causes of unwholesome dhammas, such as defilements and ignorance and what are the causes of wholesome dhammas, such as all the right factors to arise? Does right effort come about by Self or by conditions? If there were no intermediary volition or action necessary on the part of the practitioner, why would Buddha say something so directive and aimed at the person as "Meditate Ananda! Don't be heedless!" Doesn't that language flatly contradict the notion that one should not instruct or put forward the idea of conventional effort towards the practitioner? And doesn't it flatly contradict the idea that all of Buddha's talks were descriptive rather than prescriptive? Whatever one may think of a volitional self -- which I think all of us arguing agree does not exist in fact -- one cannot argue in the face of such a statement that Buddha did not use prescriptive language as a skillful device. I think, as I have stated before, that it makes more sense to see the Buddha aiming such directives and imperatives at the kandhas and bypassing the conventional self altogether, and the person thus spurred on also representing kandhas that are thus organized and pushed forward in a particular way by such a directive -- that it makes more sense to see the impersonal nature of such directives and that imperatives have their affect on kandhas and create effects in cittas and cetasikas in an impersonal way even though the concept of conventional self is used in the formulation of instructions; than to try to twist the sense of the language to make it seem that the imperatives and directives never took place in the first place, and that all the Buddha was doing was describing things that could take place or that had already taken place. The sad part of this is that the effect would be the same; only we would not have to contort around the language to try to make it other than what it is. By extension, if the conventional self-concept gets one to sit down and meditate with the idea "I am going to discern realities," it is quite possible that the "I-concept" itself will be one of the objects that becomes discerned in that process and that the original intention will open up to a higher level of panna, to see that there is no self in the process but that the process still works. It almost seems superstitious to believe that even with a mind open to observation of what is, that one believes that one cannot get on the right track unless one is already totally free of self-concept and therefore all volitional activities should be avoided as they will prevent the development of panna. Buddha seems to think that one can use and instruct the self-concept in order to put the cittas in the *right* direction and create conditions for panna by saying such things as "try hard - meditate with devotion" even though you would think that was wrong view. The truth is that we all have self-concept until we are enlightened, even if we hide it behind a "view of right view" that covers it over; and it is not a precondition for practice - it is the end result of practice. No one can eliminate self-concept just by avoiding suspected intentional activities, or thinking the right concepts -- that is not right view -- and it is better to do helpful activities that Buddha and the arahants used to build discernment than to be afraid of them because they represent a wrong-view concept from a conceptual framework. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - #96136 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:09 pm Subject: Re: Greetings szmicio Dear Sarah > > When javana-cittas arise, the seeing consiousnes has fallen away. > > How can it be an object for javana-cittas? It's no longer there > when > > javana-cittas arise and experience their object. > ... > S: Its characteristic still appears (by 'na vattabbaaramma.naa' as I > just referred you to). See more on this term in U.P. L: Well, can you say more? What is U.P ? My best wishes Lukas #96137 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:33 pm Subject: Re: Reminder szmicio Dear Sarah The letter is very good reminder. All what you're saying is so similiar to my daily life experience. So much. > > Those moments of understandig arise so naturally. No one can induce > > it, no matter how hard he tries. It's conditioned and we cannot > make > > it arise by "sitting". It's not possible. Not in this world, not in > > this Dhamma. > ... > S: And isn't that a great relief? L: Oh it is. big relief. It's called eradiction of dukkha. We should remember of it. The development should lead to the eradiction of dukkha. When cittas experience their object there is so big relief, no problem with anything at all. No mother, no father, just diffrent moments of experience diffrent objects. That's the eradiction of dukkha, it arises just on conditions, we shouldnt try to achive anything. There is present moment now. We cannot experience eradiction of dukkha by "changing" realities. There is so much Self involved. >Life is very simple and easy-going > when one doesn't need to search for answers or try to do anything for > right understanding to develop. One knows it all comes back to the > understanding of whatever dhamma is appearing now by conditions > already. There's no need to look for it! L: sadhu!! It's so big relief so big. It's so similar to those Sigalovada words: "Excellent, Lord, excellent! It is as if, Lord, a man were to set upright that which was overturned, or were to reveal that which was hidden, or were to point out the way to one who had gone astray, or were to hold a lamp amidst the darkness, so that those who have eyes may see. Even so, has the doctrine been explained in various ways by the Exalted One." > Does this make us lazy? No, > it's a condition, I find, to really consider and reflect more on the > teachings and appreciate the value of them throughout the day. At > moments of dana, sila or bhavana, right effort is there already. L: True. My best wishes Lukas #96138 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:40 pm Subject: Re: Response to Scott's Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner szmicio Dear Sarah I am glad you comment this old post. > Sarah > p.s Next edited recording (A.Sujin's 80th) due to be uploaded > tomorrow or the next day! L: That's really good. I can't wait. My best wishes Lukas #96139 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Right effort is always with right understanding. szmicio Dear Nina Can we know diffrence between effort of satipatthana and effort of any kusala citta without pa~n~na, by 'right thinkings'? --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > Op 21-feb-2009, om 14:44 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > > > I have also a question in this wonderful topic. Can we say that there > > is right effort, when there is development of kusala, but there is no > > pa~n~na? > > I belive that there is just effort with dvi-hetuka-kusala citta, and > > right effort with right understanding. > ------- > N: Apart from right effort, it is already very difficult to know when > kusala citta arises with pa~n~naa and when without. There may be some > moments with pa~n~naa closely followed by moments without pa~n~naa. > Just typing out your next Q and Kh Sujin answered a question by Ann > who wanted to know when there is di.t.thi: know di.t.thi, but we do not know the actual moment of di.t.thi. When > awareness arises with pa~n~naa, one knows when it is there. If there > is no awareness one only knows words. > > She stressed very often that we may know only words. > I think that for bhaavanaa there must be pa~n~naa, be it samatha or > vipassanaa, and thus also right effort. But I hesitate to pinpoint, > we cannot know precisely without sati and pa~n~naa. > Nina. #96140 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 10:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right effort nilovg Dear pt, Op 23-feb-2009, om 4:52 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > Nina, I was wondering, would it be OK to continue with my questions > about Abhidhamma in Daily Life, or it's better to wait until you have > some spare time? -------- N: No need to wait, do continue. Nina. #96141 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 22, 2009 11:23 pm Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Re: Lukas Questions, I, 4. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 23-feb-2009, om 6:01 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > L: What is ditthi? Does ditthi takes everything for self? > --------- N: The akusala cetasika di.t.thi is wrong view. There are many kinds of wrong view, such as eternalism, annihilation view, wrong view of self, etc. A very heavy wrong view is the belief that there is no kamma, no result of kamma, that kamma does not produce result. > Sakkaya di.t.thi, personality belief is wrong view with regard to > each of the five khandhas as self, mine, or a self contained in > each of the khandhas, or self as containing each of the khandhas. Or there can be wrong view with regard to things outside. ---------- > L: Pa~n~na is > called samma-ditthi, does it mean that it eradicates wrong view? -------- N: Pa~n~naa as a factor of the eightfold Path is called sammaa- di.t.thi, right view, and as you say, only this pa~n~naa can eradicate wrong view. This happens at the moment of attaining the first stage of enlightenment. ---------- > L: Ditthi doesnt think isn't it? It's not just idea. --------- N: It is a cetasika that may arise with lobha-muulacitta. It does not think, but it can accompany lobha-muulacittas that think about a person or self, viewing this as lasting. --------- > L:When there is less Self , is there less ditthi? -------- N: Sakkaayadi.t.thi, personality belief leads to all kinds of wrong view. When you listen to the Dhamma and develop more understanding, di.t.thi arises less often, but it can only be eradicated by pa~n~naa as it develops in the course of the stages of insight. It is completely eradicated at the moment of enlightenment. ---------- > L: What about mana? Even when there is less Self involved in daily > life > there can be still mana which wants to make us more important. --------- N: When there is clinging to the importance of self there is no wrong view. Maana is a different cetasika. Only the arahat has eradicated maana. ---------- > > > Lukas Q 1: < 1. Can pa~n~na know concept when it impinge on mind- > > door? Do concepts have any characteristic? When I lead my normal > life > > there are some moments of understanding of concept which impinge on > > mind-door.> > > > > Kh S: This is thinking, thinking of concepts about realities. > > Understanding can understand theoretical knowledge. > > L: Well it's not clear enough. -------- N: I understand, the answer is very short. A concept is not a reality with a characteristic and pa~n~naa of the level of vipassanaa penetrates the true nature of realities. --------- > L: How pa~n~na can understand something theoretical?? Are we talking > about 'wise thinking'? > Can you say something about diffrent levels of pa~n~na? -------- N: When listening to the Dhamma and considering it there can be pa~n~naa of the level of intellectual understanding. It begins to understand the difference between realities and concepts. This level of pa~n~naa can arise now while we discuss Dhamma with kusala citta and make an effort to have correct understanding. Such effort is not self, it is viriya cetasika arising because of conditions. When we think of the names of the different terms, pa~n~naa of the level of theoretical understanding may arise. But we know that this is not enough. Any reality that appears now can be understood as just a dhamma, a conditioned dhamma, without having to think of names. In this way direct understanding can develop. Nina. #96142 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:38 am Subject: Re: Request for comment - Khandhavibhanga, Rupakhandha, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, Still catching up on your old posts addressed to me: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "szmicio" wrote: > "2. Analysis according to Abhidhamma. > > 32. The five aggregates are: The aggregate of material quality, > aggregate of feeling, aggregate of perception, aggregate of mental > concomitants, aggregate of consiousnes. > > <32. Pa~ncakkhandhaa – ruupakkhandho, vedanaakkhandho, > sa~n~naakkhandho, sa"nkhaarakkhandho, vi~n~naa.nakkhandho.> > > Therein what is the aggregate of material quality? > > The aggregate of material quality by way of singlefold division: All > material quality is not root(sabba.m ruupa.m na hetu) > Is not accompanied by root(ahetuka.m), is not associated with > root(hetuvippayutta.m). > > hetuvippayutta.m,>" > > Can you explain those 3 instances? I mean those tree ways that sabbe > ruppa.m na hetu, ahetuka.m, hetuvippayutta.m. .... S: I think Connie explained. We can only refer to namas, not rupas, as being a) hetu (roots), i.e. lobha, dosa, moha, alobha, adosa, panna. Similarly, we can only refer to cittas (and associated cetasikas) as being ahetuka (without roots), such as seeing consciousness or as hetuvippayutta (not associated with roots). Metta, Sarah ====== #96143 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:41 am Subject: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 12. nilovg Dear friends, As a person develops pa, 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 Pimokkha, 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. Pa 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. #96144 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 12:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right effort is always with right understanding. nilovg Dear LUkas, Op 23-feb-2009, om 6:44 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Can we know diffrence between effort of satipatthana and effort of any > kusala citta without pa~n~na, by 'right thinkings'? ------ N: So long as the first stage of insight: directly knowing the difference between naama and ruupa, has not been realized there is no clear and precise knowledge of the different cetasikas. We should not try to find out, it does not help. We can remember that effort is not self, that it arises because of conditions and that it is conditioned by the accompanying cetasikas. We cannot plan to have effort with pa~n~naa. When it arises, it does so because of its own conditions. We can learn that it is only a dhamma. Nina. #96145 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:00 am Subject: Re: RFC - etc. khanda sarahprocter... Hi Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > we think we're this on-going ego dude but buddha said that is conventional, conceptual... you take the old fruit waggon apart and you've got five heaps of parts. pa~nca(5) khandha(heap): 4 have no physical attributes. ... S: But have we? The Buddha also described the khandhas as realities, not concepts. So pleasant feeling now is a khandha, so is sanna and so on. No two feelings the same, but all are khandhas. .... >1 only does & that one is called ruupa-kkhandha(aggregate). ... S: So if we like to call hardness experienced now a heap, OK, but it's certainly a khandha. The translations and 'concept' are tricky, but the reality is there to be known by panna. ... >khandha's a pretty cool word... lotsa connotations and 'synonymi' (to coin a term). but ultimately, there's a heap more breaking down to do to fully consider the matter (haha and the immaterial sides). an actual and purely mental breakdown into tedium and beyond if you like... and if you don't? still the same. ... S: Yes, heaps of work for panna to 'bhavati'. Without panna, no striving or diligence of any use. So how are the leg rupa heaps doing these days? I went to a physio this morning who muttered a lot about surgery for my hip - in other words that heap is beyond his skills, but I'm resisting with a mixture of pride and patience and laziness. Perhaps it's time for another Fiji fix! Metta, Sarah p.s and what is RFC - 'rupas for consideration', 'rupas from Caroline'....? ====== #96146 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:11 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Back to your post #93913! >> S: Again, I can only say the heat, the visible object, the taste, the > thinking - all are anicca. The mountain, meal or pencil can only be said to be > impermanent in a worldly sense which is different from the anicca of heat, > visible object or taste. > =========================== H:> Sarah, have you pondered what the nature of that difference might be? As > I see it, the impermanence of macroscopic (conventional) objects such as > mountains, meat, and pencils reduces to the impermanence of the paramattha > dhammas that are their basis. How do you see it? .... S: I don't see it in the same way. When we refer to the impermanence of a mountain or meat or pencil, it's a conventional understanding of impermanence of conventionally spoken of objects. If we say that the pencil can be reduced to macroscopic particles which are impermanent, again it's a conventionally accurate statement which can be proved by science, but has nothing to do with the impermanence of realities taught by the Buddha which can be directly understood through the development of insight. The first may be a helpful way to (accurately) consider the world in a scientific sense, but the latter is the way to understand the 1st Noble Truth and to develop dispassion for all that is experienced and conditioned at this very moment. Actually, I'd have thought you would agree with this. It's true that rupas that are never experienced arise and fall away all the time, making up the so-called pencil or mountain, but it is the characteristics of what can be known that is to be understood. What do you think? Metta, Sarah ======== #96147 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:24 am Subject: Re: RFC - etc. khanda szmicio Dear Sarah Request for Comment ;> > p.s and what is RFC - 'rupas for consideration', 'rupas from > Caroline'....? > ====== > #96148 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:32 am Subject: Lukas Questions, II. nilovg Dear friends, Lukas Q. 2: Q.: . I realised in my life what citta is. There were moments of understanding of citta. It has a characteristic of experience. It experience its object. It is not just word, that's a reality. Those moments of experience characteristic of citta was so natural. It was when I met your teachings for the first time. But now I don't experience it anymore. And I start to think that maybe all those is gone and i won't experience it anymore. I know that's lobha on account of past experience. But I feel bad with it. Akusala arise more often then kusala. And I think that's wrong. I still take it for myself." -------- Kh S: Knowing that this is wrong is good. He thinks in that way because it is still he. N: He has to accept that. Kh S: most people think of wanting not to have akusala, because there is ignorance, avijjaa. -------- L: "In one moment there can be kusala and then there can be akusala. then regrets on account of akusala may arise. But it's so hard to deal with regrets." ------------- Kh S : It is still he who would like to have kusala. He knows that there is attachment and this is real. This can be the object of understanding. ------------ L: There can be also a lot of moments of akusala on account of reading of Dhamma. Should we stop reading Dhamma then? -------- Kh S: And then what? Go on with ignorance, not knowing that reading and understanding lead to more understanding? --------------- L: "Can you remind us more about citta now?" ------------ Kh S: Naama is not easy to understand. One tries to have it as if it were like ruupa. At this moment it performs its function, for example, the function of seeing. Citta experiences an object all the time, it arises also when we do not think of a specific object, such as the object of seeing or hearing. Sound is known by citta, the naama which hears it. Naama is that which experiences an object. When we are thinking, the characteristic of naama may appear and pa~n~naa or manaasikaara attends to the characteristic of naama. At that moment we do not mind what the object is of the citta which thinks. ------------ Jon: Many people feel that akusala is a hindrance to sati. ----------- Kh S: Pa~n~naa can understand that as just a reality, no matter what kind of akusala it is. It is real, it arises and falls away. It can be object of understanding. When there is the idea of self, it is not understood, one does not want it to appear. --------- L: There is much thinking about realities, not yet the realization of the truth. Kh S: There is still the idea of self who knows what is kusala. It is not known that kusala is not self, just a reality. N: How can we realize that kusala is just a reality? Kh S: By being aware on and on, with understanding of whatever arises, not trying to be aware.... Intellectual understanding will condition understanding of what appears as just a reality. That is why we need to learn more about realities, so that pa~n ~naa can understand what appears as just a reality. Trying to have more sati is wrong. Forget about sati. Whenever there is pa~n~naa there is also sati. In that way attachment to sati can be eliminated. ------ Nina. #96149 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:45 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 nilovg Hi Howard and Ken, I could not make out who said what, but I have a feeling, Howard, that the point of grasping at a whole was not yet clear. Let me try again. When I look at a tree or a person, I may cling to the appearance of a whole and I may think that the person or the tree truly exist. That is wrong view. Pa~n~naa can do the peeling of the tree or the person, and then it is known that through eyes only visible object or colour is seen, not the whole of the person or tree. In being aware of different namas and ruupas as they appear one at a time through the six doors, there will be a lessening of the idea of a self, a core, a whole of a person. Nina. Op 22-feb-2009, om 14:00 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > H: > Respectfully, I disagree with your interpretation of the point > of this sutta. The point, it seems to me, is not that of not grasping > at a "whole," > -------- > > As I understand the term "grasping at a whole" it refers to the > function of ignorance (avijja) whenever it experiences a conditioned > dhamma. Instead of seeing that conditioned dhamma as a single, > momentary phenomena, it prefers to see it as a whole - or permanent - > thing. In other words, avijja prefers to see conventional reality in > every object. > -------------------------------------------- > I didn't understand that to be what Nina was pointing out, but if she > was, then I consider it to be an interesting take, though I don't > see that as > at all explicit in the sutta. #96150 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 3:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Greetings sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, thx for RFC! Now I can SIP (sleep in peace!) --- On Mon, 23/2/09, szmicio wrote: >What is U.P ? ... S: Useful Posts!!! Go to the files section of DSG and scroll down to Useful Posts, click on 'N' for na vattabba and then open the linked numbers in the treasure trove:-)) Let me know if you have any problems or find anything you'd like to discuss further. Metta, Sarah ======== #96151 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:07 am Subject: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner scottduncan2 Dear All, Continuing: The Path of Purification. "61. He 'wakes in comfort': instead of waking uncomfortably, groaning and yawning and turning over as others do, he wakes comfortably without contortions, like a lotus opening. "62. He 'dreams on evil dreams': when he sees dreams, he sees only auspicious ones, as though he were worshipping a shrine, as though he were making an offering, as though he were hearing the Dhamma. But he does not see evil dreams as others do, as though being surrounded by bandits, as though being threatened by wild beasts, as though falling into chasms." Path of Purity. "(2) 'Happy he wakes': - he does not awake in want of ease like others, moaning, yawning, turning from side to side, but awakes happy, without physical change, like an opening lotus. "(3) 'He sees no bad dreams': - though he may dream, he sees good dreams, as though he were paying respects to a shrine, or doing acts of worship, or listening to the Doctrine. He does not see, as others do, such dreams as being surrounded by thieves, or oppressed by wild beasts, or falling down a precipice." Sukha.m pa.tibujjhatiiti yathaa a~n~ne nitthunantaa vijambhantaa samparivattantaa dukkha.m pa.tibujjhanti, eva.m appa.tibujjhitvaa vikasamaanamiva paduma.m sukha.m nibbikaara.m pa.tibujjhati. Napaapaka.m supina.m passatiiti supina.m passantopi bhaddakameva supina.m passati, cetiya.m vandanto viya puuja.m karonto viya dhamma.m su.nanto viya ca hoti. Yathaa pana a~n~ne attaana.m corehi samparivaarita.m viya vaa.lehi upadduta.m viya papaate patanta.m viya ca passanti, eva.m paapaka.m supina.m na passati. Sincerely, Scott. #96152 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:37 am Subject: Re: Right effort is always with right understanding. szmicio Dear Nina Can you say more about pa~n~na of samatha? Is it ti-hetuka or dvi- hetuka? I am a little bit confused about that and also about all those diffrent levels of pa~n~na. > > Can we know diffrence between effort of satipatthana and effort of any > > kusala citta without pa~n~na, by 'right thinkings'? > ------ > N: So long as the first stage of insight: directly knowing the > difference between naama and ruupa, has not been realized there is >no clear and precise knowledge of the different cetasikas. We should >not try to find out, it does not help. L: So are we talking about satipatthana now? what is function of pa~n~na of pariyatti? Does it has diffrent characteristic then pa~n~na of level of patipatti? what about thinking on account of past experiences? Usually there is a lot of thinking about past experiences, and it's all so misleading. My best wishes Lukas #96153 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 5:39 am Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 abhidhammika Dear Jon, Sukin, Ken H, Sarah, Nina and KS Folks How are you? Jon wrote: "Thanks for this explanation. You are using "Theravada meditation" to refer generally to the different kinds of development spoken of in various suttas. That of course is fine (but the expression itself has no basis in the texts)." The term "meditation" is now widely understood to refer to samatha and vipassanaa practices in the context of Buddhist literature. Please see these authors: Daniel Goleman (the Meditative Mind), Jon Kabat Zinn (the University of Massachusetts Medical Center). Many new comers to Buddhism would certainly be more familiar with the term "meditation" than the term "development". Witness Sukin is using the expression "meditating". I think the posters in DSG also used the term "meditation" to refer to samatha and vipassana. If I recall correctly, it is me to first use the term `development' to force KS folks to accept the development of the Noble Eightfold Path as meditation when I noticed they were objecting to the practice of meditation. Many of you might recall when I asked a Buddhist monk living in Thailand if he accepted the development of the Noble Eightfold Path. Sukin prevented him from answering my question. I think Sukin feared that, if the monk answered 'Yes' to my question, this would amount to not endorsing K Sujin's and KS folks' stance against the practice of meditation. As the Buddha mentioned samatha and vipassanaa in the following passage among others, the term `meditation' as the equivalent of the Pali terms `samatha' and `vipassanaa' has basis in the Pali Tipi.taka. 32. "Dve me, bhikkhave, dhammaa vijjaabhaagiyaa. Katame dve? Samatho ca vipassanaa ca. Section 32, Baalavaggo, Dukanipaata Pali, Anguttaranikaayo. The expression "Theravada meditation" is used to distinguish Theravada samatha and vipassanaa from non-Theravada practices. After all, we are discussing things here in the context of Theravada Buddhism. Thus, your assertion "the expression (Theravada meditation) itself has no basis in the texts" is wrong and uninformed. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #96154 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 2/23/2009 4:11:34 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: H:> Sarah, have you pondered what the nature of that difference might be? As > I see it, the impermanence of macroscopic (conventional) objects such as > mountains, meat, and pencils reduces to the impermanence of the paramattha > dhammas that are their basis. How do you see it? .... S: I don't see it in the same way. When we refer to the impermanence of a mountain or meat or pencil, it's a conventional understanding of impermanence of conventionally spoken of objects. If we say that the pencil can be reduced to macroscopic particles which are impermanent, again it's a conventionally accurate statement which can be proved by science, but has nothing to do with the impermanence of realities taught by the Buddha which can be directly understood through the development of insight. The first may be a helpful way to (accurately) consider the world in a scientific sense, but the latter is the way to understand the 1st Noble Truth and to develop dispassion for all that is experienced and conditioned at this very moment. Actually, I'd have thought you would agree with this. It's true that rupas that are never experienced arise and fall away all the time, making up the so-called pencil or mountain, but it is the characteristics of what can be known that is to be understood. What do you think? ---------------------------------------------- Howard: I think, as I said, that the impermanence of macroscopic (conventional) objects reduces to the impermanence of the paramattha dhammas that are their basis. I also agree that what is directly known is what is important as regards awakening. ---------------------------------------- Metta, Sarah =========================== With metta, Howard *(Anonymous) #96155 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:26 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Ken) - In a message dated 2/23/2009 4:46:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard and Ken, I could not make out who said what, but I have a feeling, Howard, that the point of grasping at a whole was not yet clear. Let me try again. When I look at a tree or a person, I may cling to the appearance of a whole and I may think that the person or the tree truly exist. That is wrong view. ---------------------------------------------- That's fine, Nina. That just isn't what Ken said you were talking about, as far as I could tell. He seemed to indicate that you were speaking of grasping paramattha dhammas as concepts. As I see it, 1) This was not your point, and 2) The sutta wasn't about "grasping as a whole" at all in any case. The matter of "whole" has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of that sutta that I can find. =========================== With metta, Howard *(Anonymous) #96156 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 7:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 nilovg Hi Howard, I agree with your point 1, but point two is problematic. What about the whole tree? Stable, impressive, standing there? Peel it, and it is of no importance, a mere nothing. Nina. Op 23-feb-2009, om 15:26 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > That's fine, Nina. That just isn't what Ken said you were talking > about, > as far as I could tell. He seemed to indicate that you were > speaking of > grasping paramattha dhammas as concepts. As I see it, 1) This was > not your point, > and 2) The sutta wasn't about "grasping as a whole" at all in any > case. The > matter of "whole" has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of > that sutta > that I can find. #96157 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 2:54 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 2/23/2009 10:40:34 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, I agree with your point 1, but point two is problematic. What about the whole tree? Stable, impressive, standing there? Peel it, and it is of no importance, a mere nothing. ----------------------------------------------- Nina, I completely agree with you about a tree!! My only point was that of what that particular sutta dealt with. It simply wasn't about wholes versus elements. The discussion of a tree and of missing pith and heartwood was just metaphor for emptiness of dhammas. After discussing the tree, the Buddha immediately says "Even so, friend, a monk beholds no trace of the self nor of what pertains to the self in the sixfold sense-sphere," and, so, the absence of core in the tree was metaphor for the absence of core in dhammas known through all the sense doors. That same metaphor occurs in the Phena Sutta, where the Buddha likens farications to a (coreless) banana tree. ----------------------------------------------- Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard *(Anonymous) #96158 From: "Alex" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. truth_aerator Hello Robert, Sarah and all, > "Robert Epstein" wrote: > > Hi Sarah. > If there were no intermediary volition or action necessary on the >part > of the practitioner, why would Buddha say something so directive and > aimed at the person as "Meditate Ananda! Don't be heedless!" > > Doesn't that language flatly contradict the notion that one should >not instruct or put forward the idea of conventional effort towards >the practitioner? Robert, you are right. Well, if "doing something" is wrong, then how can we not do anything? Isn't walking to the car, driving, eating, washing, etc etc considered to be doing something? By some people's logic, we shouldn't even move the limbs because that would involve "self concept"... Apparently some do not know that one can meditate on characteristics and without self concept involved... With best wishes, Alex #96159 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:11 am Subject: Re: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner scottduncan2 Dear connie, Thanks for: c: "I mostly want to point out xiv 9-10 below from the Path of Discrimination..." Scott: I appreciate the quotes. The reply has been delayed by seemingly endless birthday parties and other sundry single-parent events, for which I apologise. I've re-read the section in *my own copy of Pa.tisambhidhaamagga* (!). Mettaa 'treats kindly,' and I like the way this is stated. Mettaa does so simply by function, that is, when present, having arisen by conditions, mettaa *is* non-oppression, non-injury, non- disappointment, and non-harassment. I like how it is will, and how this explains that there is no one who is kind. I think that the strong need to see one's self as kind, and hence, the strong need to believe in the practice of kindness, is nicely done away with when one understands the place of 'will' in all of this. I like the explanation of concascence and of how the various mental factors function together and contribute to the wholesomeness of the moment. Sincerely, Scott. #96160 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 1:21 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 kenhowardau Hi Nina and Howard, Once again I have butted in without knowing exactly what the conversation was about. :-) ------- H: > That's fine, Nina. That just isn't what Ken said you were talking about, as far as I could tell. He seemed to indicate that you were speaking of grasping paramattha dhammas as concepts. As I see it, 1) This was not your point, and 2) The sutta wasn't about "grasping as a whole" at all in any case. The matter of "whole" has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of that sutta that I can find. ------- I was thinking of a long-ago post from Robert K in which - according to my recollection - he had quoted the texts as saying moha 'preferred' to see dhammas as if they were concepts. However, after a quick look in UP's I see there was actually no mention of "preferred" but rather the term was "darts among." Quote: "it is ignorance since it darts among those things which do not actually exist [i.e.men, women] and since it does not dart among those things that do exist [i.e.it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas]." In message 28298 there is a conversation between Robert K, Dan and Sarah on the meaning of "darts among." I still think we can say that moha "prefers to see dhammas as if they were conventional realities" but maybe it would be best to stick with "darts among." :-) Ken H #96161 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:15 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Nina) - In a message dated 2/23/2009 4:22:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Nina and Howard, Once again I have butted in without knowing exactly what the conversation was about. :-) ------- H: > That's fine, Nina. That just isn't what Ken said you were talking about, as far as I could tell. He seemed to indicate that you were speaking of grasping paramattha dhammas as concepts. As I see it, 1) This was not your point, and 2) The sutta wasn't about "grasping as a whole" at all in any case. The matter of "whole" has nothing whatsoever to do with the content of that sutta that I can find. ------- I was thinking of a long-ago post from Robert K in which - according to my recollection - he had quoted the texts as saying moha 'preferred' to see dhammas as if they were concepts. However, after a quick look in UP's I see there was actually no mention of "preferred" but rather the term was "darts among." Quote: "it is ignorance since it darts among those things which do not actually exist [i.e.men, women] and since it does not dart among those things that do exist [i.e.it cannot understand the khandas, paramattha dhammas]." In message 28298 there is a conversation between Robert K, Dan and Sarah on the meaning of "darts among." I still think we can say that moha "prefers to see dhammas as if they were conventional realities" but maybe it would be best to stick with "darts among." :-) Ken H =============== In any case, Ken, I think the matter that you raised is interesting. We can think about many things wrongly, even including what some call "realities." Avijja is wide ranging. :-) With metta, Howard *(Anonymous) #96162 From: "Sukinder" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 4:11 pm Subject: Re: Response to Robert E. 1 sukinderpal Hi Rob Ep, > As much as I enjoy our dialogue, I am slightly relieved, because I am > way behind on "the things of this earthly life" as a householder, Dad > and occasional husband to my wife; so I will forgive you. :-))) Thanks for this. It makes it easier for me too. I won't even be surprised if the time that it takes you to type one post is just a little longer than what it takes me to read it. So you can imagine how much time I take to write one response. :-) I thought to let you have the last word with this post, but after reconsidering, I decided to try once more to explain. You appear to continue misunderstanding my position and go on to making critical remarks that do not therefore apply. I'll start off with laying out what I see as three different approaches to the Dhamma, yours, mine and the one you are saying is mine. a) There are those who see value in the Dhamma and are interested in continued study of the Texts, but without having applied any of what is heard to the experience of the present moment. These often end up doing what's called, holding the snake by the wrong end. b) Those who see value in the Dhamma, are interested in hearing more, but are moved greater, by an idea about `practice' hence ending up downplaying the importance of listening to and reflecting on the Dhamma. c) Those who see value in the Dhamma, are interested in hearing / studying more, conditioned in part by seeing a direct relationship between hearing the Dhamma, and coming to understand those things which they would otherwise never have come to realize. This position is arrived at only as result of some degree of `application' to the present moment experience. And this is reflective of seeing importance of direct understanding, but not one which goes on to take wrong practice for right. b) is what I see as being your position. c) is where I am, and a) is where you judge me to be. I have tried in many ways to show you the difference between c) and a), but you keep making comments as if in fact there is no difference between the two. Perhaps I'm stupid, so much so that I don't know what I am talking about. You may be right, but your response has not helped me see where I am wrong. And since I don't think that I can do any better than this, discontinuing this discussion may be the right thing to do. But I'll add more comments on what I wrote above, and I'll do this using a section of your response to bring out the context. ======== > How and when will insight arise as a result of conceptual > understanding? How is this conversion going to take place ever? > Insight into what? What you are reading? Where is the real dhamma in > all this? What has happened to the present object while you are > reading and conceptualizing? Where is it? The distinction between theory and practice is something few people fail to appreciate. You don't need to hear the Dhamma to think along these lines. Indeed it is likely that one goes about this particular idea with `self view' if one has yet to really appreciate the Dhamma, which is something only a Buddha could point out. On the other hand, the one important distinction got from hearing the Dhamma is that of reality vs. concept. It is in fact from seeing this distinction that in the Teachings, `practice' is understood to be reference to a particular kind of consciousness and not some conventional activity. The kind of practice which you are trying to promote here is of the latter kind, a conceptual story and taken seriously. This is due to failure at making the concept / reality distinction. In other words your repeated pointing out the need to get on with the practice and drop the theory is motivated by `self view', one which fails to distinguish reality from concept. After all you talk for example, in terms of `reading' and the need to stop this and instead `look'. While I have said that no matter what conventional activity is being engaged in, there are realities arising and falling away which can be the object of understanding, you are asking me to stop and do something else, even if this is to "look" at what is going on while reading. This impresses upon you as application / practice, however from where I stand, it's just `thinking' motivated by self view. While right understanding may manifest on occasion as reminder about paramattha dhammas and conditionality, this is not what you are doing. You are insisting on `taking action' with total disregard to the reality / concept distinction and the principles of anatta and conditionality. In other words you advice because you fail to *understand*! And if I followed you, it would be a case of the blind being lead by the blind. =============== > If you want to take the dhamma theory seriously, then understand what > you have read and then be present to the actual arising moments. > Your real experience is something like "reading reading reading > reading, scratching eyebrow, glance to side, cough, hunger pang, > sadness, thought of past, person comes into room is perceived as body, > thought of taking nap, reading reading reading reading, shopping list. > All of these break down into many different dhammas, many different > cittas with accompanying cetasikas. To do the real work of discerning > such, one would be looking at these, not at the book the concept, the > com. So if indeed there are only citta, cetasikas and rupas, why be moved by conventional activity? Why need to stop "doing" something even if only momentarily, in order that something else is "done"? Why such ideas? The real difference is that while there may arise little or no panna at all during any activity including reading, which implies there was ignorance all this time, I understand that this is conditioned and beyond control. *This* realization however, even if it is only at the level of suttamaya panna or cintamaya panna, would be an instance of development along the right direction. You on the other hand, not with any level of right understanding about the present moment, but instead some wrong view about practice, end up being moved by "intention to do". When in fact this very intention to practice could have been the object of panna, a story about practice is instead being followed. This is idealism. And I'll say that even though you speak so much in favor of practice, that you associate it particularly with `formal meditation' and disassociate it from the development of right understanding at the level of pariyatti, is reflection of lack of confidence. Because if there was enough saddha, no excuse will be made as to why understanding can't arise "now" at this very moment. And if there was in fact any level of right understanding, the need to keep on hearing/ studying will never be overlooked. ================ > Sure there is room for reading, but only to understand a bit more, > then stop reading and look around the room and see what is really > happening in "real life," including the dhammas that arise in reading > the book in the first place. You are saying that direct understanding can arise only if one makes a decision to stop reading and start looking? What is your definition of "real life" which makes `reading a book' not part of it? Dhammas arise and already fallen away before we know it. The object of direct understanding is a paramattha dhamma just fallen away and is not without this very understanding. What you are suggesting leans towards a view about dhammas being within control, and when anatta is misunderstood, so will any perception of rise and fall. And btw, what of the idea of formal practice now? If you are suggesting the possibility of direct understanding arising at any time, what then is the role of meditation? =============== > The real dhammas in the reading are not > the concepts of the cittas and rupas; it is "eye door/eye object/ idea > of book, asngle of book/hardness/scanning of words on > page/concept/thought of concept/thought of application of > concept/hardness of page/turning of page/see words in eye door/eye > processing through nama/new citta; and of course even that is just a > gross gloss of all the cittas arising in the act of reading and all > the dhammas; but at least one would really be following the dhamma > theory and really looking at the dhammas instead of > concept/concept/concept/concept and more concept; more menu, more > thoughts about dhammas, without acknowleding the real dhammas that are > right in front of one's nose. And what message are you trying to convey to me with these descriptions? What have you added to the above which you see as lacking in the Abhidhamma and the commentaries that I may happen to be reading? I have my own idea about what is actually going on: The Abhidhamma has an extensive list of the various paramattha dhammas and talks about them from various perspectives, such as dhatu, ayatana, khandha etc. It provides also a description of the characteristic and functions of all these different realities, and gives a detailed description about the various conditions possibly involved. Far from leading one to think that one "knows" just by reading all this, it in fact helps us to realize how little is understood, at the intellectual level itself, not to speak of direct understanding of characteristics. On the other hand, the message I get from you, is that there is no need to even distinguish reality from concept. And why is this? Because one only need to begin "looking" and it does not matter then what the object of consciousness is, let alone determining whether the consciousness itself is one which is rooted in wisdom. One takes it unquestioningly to being `mindfulness' of some level. The suggestion hence is that when one starts looking, the development of mindfulness and understanding is taking place. This is like the suggestion by one biologist to another to look through a microscope with the expectation that what is observed by the one will also be observed by the other. *This is not the way of Dhamma*, but in fact an encouragement by one to another, the feeding of ignorance and craving! One is caught in the illusion of result and tries to drag another along the same path. The concepts that are being pointed out to do not exhibit characteristics, but being agreed upon convention, all that is needed for the illusion to continue, is a nod of approval. One last thing, your objection to pariyatti may in part be due to the perception of it being constantly referred back to the Texts rather than what may come from personal experience. It appears to you therefore like parroting and clinging. True there may be little or no direct understanding, but even if someone were to experience insight, if there was a need to express one's understandings, the inclination would be to refer back to the source of the Teachings if possible rather than to talk in terms of one's own experience, would it not? And given that the Teachings are available to be quoted at anytime, what would be the right thing to do than to quote just those Texts? Besides should one not also show acknowledgement of the Buddha being the source of these Teachings without which one could not even begin to understand such things? And if the understanding is indeed quite low, what is there to say about personal experience except maybe the very fact of there being so little understanding? Also if one has had even a glimpse of what is involved when making reference to one's past experience, namely perversion of consciousness and of perception if not also of view, one becomes hesitant to take seriously such thinking, would one not? As usual, I've written more than necessary. But you don't have to respond, especially since you are discussing the same points in other threads. Metta, Sukin #96163 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 8:32 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 rjkjp1 Dear Ken Thanks for reminding me of this quote (great post by Sukin today http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/96162 also i thought) I was with Ivan and kevin last night in starbucks on Sukumvit road discussing points about pratice and theory. Ivan was wondering how anyone can think there is a self doing anything, when every moment new cittas are arising at the doors. It can be seen that it is all changing so fast even just at the thinking level before direct insight. Of course the reason is that ignorance and wrong view cloud and pervert perception so thta one is like a madman who really believes in non-existant things. A crazy man will see demons following him , in the same way ignorance takes color and sound and touch and turns these elements into real people and so on. Without ignorance or wrongview one could not see such concepts as having any reality- One would not have to try not to see it that way anymore than a 'normal' person has to try to stop seeing demons. Robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > In message 28298 there is a conversation between Robert K, Dan and > Sarah on the meaning of "darts among." I still think we can say that > moha "prefers to see dhammas as if they were conventional realities" > but maybe it would be best to stick with "darts among." :-) > #96164 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Beginner abhidhamma questions ptaus1 Dear Nina, thanks for the opportunity to continue with questions. Regarding ADL chapter 12: 1. I'm not clear on this - bhavanga-citta can be classified as mind-consciousness, right? I mean, it's not one of the sense-consciousnesses and it's not a consciousness of its own type, because in Theravada there are only six consciousnesses as I remember 5 senses plus the mind. And the physical base for bhavanga-citta is hadaya-vatthu, right? 2. How can one find out with which roots s/he was born only alobha and adosa, or with panna also? I mean for example, I'm interested in developing jhanas, but if I was born with only two roots (no panna), then there is no point trying and instead of wasting time I should develop insight. This relates to the following passage from chapter 12: "All bhavanga-cittas during a lifespan are of the same type as the patisandhi-citta of that life. If one is born with two hetus, with alobha (non-attachment or generosity) and adosa (non-aversion or kindness), but without wisdom, then all bhavanga-cittas have only two hetus. Such a person can cultivate wisdom, but he cannot become enlightened during that life. If one is born with three hetus, which means that one is born with alobha, adosa and panna (wisdom), all bhavanga-cittas are accompanied by these three sobhana hetus (beautiful roots) as well. Thus that person is more inclined to cultivate wisdom and he can attain enlightenment during that life." There is also a similar passage in Cetasikas, chapter 35, which has to do with jhana: "If someone is born with maha-vipakacitta accompanied by understanding he may, if he intends to develop higher degrees of calm, be able to attain jhana in that life. If someone develops insight he may attain enlightenment in that life. If someone is not born with maha-vipakacitta accompanied by understanding he can sail develop calm or insight, but he cannot attain jhana or enlightenment in that life." Thanks pt #96165 From: "szmicio" Date: Mon Feb 23, 2009 10:08 pm Subject: Request for Comment - 1st Vibh, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m szmicio Dear Connie 1st Vibh, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m, Rupakhandho states: The aggregate of material quality by way of twofold division: There is material quality that is derived (atthi ruupa.m upaadaa). There is material quality that is not derived (atthi ruupa.m no upaadaa). There is material quality that is grasped(by craving and false view) (Atthi ruupa.m upaadinna.m) There is material quality that is not grasped. (atthi ruupa.m anupaadinna.m.) There is material quality that is grasped, is the object of the attachments. (Atthi ruupa.m upaadinnupaadaaniya.m) There is material quality that is not grasped, is the object of the attachments. (atthi ruupa.m anupaadinnupaadaaniya.m) There is material quality that is visible (Atthi ruupa.m sanidassana.m) There is material quality that is not visible (atthi ruupa.m anidassana.m) There is material quality that is impingent (Atthi ruupa.m sappa.tigha.m) There is material quality that is not impingent (atthi ruupa.m appa.tigha.m) ------------------------------ 1)"There is material quality that is grasped(by craving and false view) (Atthi ruupa.m upaadinna.m)" L: What does upaadinna.m means? Does it refers to rupa which is perceive by citta accompanied by ditthi and lobha? --- 2)"There is material quality that is not grasped, is the object of the attachments. (atthi ruupa.m anupaadinnupaadaaniya.m)" L: What does it mean that is not grasped and then it is the object of attachements? --- 3)"There is material quality that is visible (Atthi ruupa.m sanidassana.m)" L: Can you explain this pali term: sanidassana.m? --- 4)"There is material quality that is impingent (Atthi ruupa.m sappa.tigha.m)" L: Can you explain this term sappa.tigha.m? it means dangerous, harmful. My best wishes Lukas #96166 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Beginner abhidhamma questions nilovg Dear pt, Op 24-feb-2009, om 6:15 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > 1. I'm not clear on this - bhavanga-citta can be classified as > mind-consciousness, right? I mean, it's not one of the > sense-consciousnesses and it's not a consciousness of its own type, > because in Theravada there are only six consciousnesses as I remember > 5 senses plus the mind. --------- N: In the Suttanta we find a sixfold classification of citta: the five types of sense-cognitions and mind-consciousness which includes all the other cittas. This is only one kind of classification of cittas, there are other classifications besides this one. -------- > pt: And the physical base for bhavanga-citta is > hadaya-vatthu, right? --------- N: Correct, because the sense-cognitions have the relevant senses as their base and all the other cittas have the heartbase as their base. -------- > > pt: 2. How can one find out with which roots s/he was born only > alobha > and adosa, or with panna also? I mean for example, I'm interested in > developing jhanas, but if I was born with only two roots (no panna), > then there is no point trying and instead of wasting time I should > develop insight. ------- N: Nobody can find this out. Any reason why you want to develop jhaana? If you are so inclined you can still develop samatha but, if you are born with two roots you will not be able to not attain jhaana or enlightenment. -------- > This relates to the following passage from chapter 12: > > "All bhavanga-cittas during a lifespan are of the same type as the > patisandhi-citta of that life. ... > "If someone is born with maha-vipakacitta accompanied by understanding > he may, if he intends to develop higher degrees of calm, be able to > attain jhana in that life. If someone develops insight he may attain > enlightenment in that life. ... ------ N: If someone is born with three roots it is still necessary to develop pa~n~naa of the level of samatha in order to attain jhaana, and pa~n~naa of the level of insight in order to attain enlightenment. ******* Nina. #96167 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:55 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Threes (49-50) nilovg Dear friends, 49: sutta: Walshe: DN 33.1.10(49) 'Three "unsurpassables": of vision, of practice, of liberation (dassanaanuttariya'm, pa.tipadaanuttariya'm, vimuttaanuttariya'm). Tii.ni anuttariyaani : dassanaanuttariya.m, pa.tipadaanuttariya.m, vimuttaanuttariya.m. -------- N: The Co: Vipassanaa is the is the unsurpassable seeing. Subco: by seeing properly, in contemplating impermanence, dukkha and anattaa of conditioned dhammas. Co: The Path is the unsurpassable practice. Subco: there is no higher practice. Co: The fruition (N: Lokuttara vipaakacitta, the result of the maggacitta) is the highest freedom. Subco: because it is unshakable. N: The Co. has three other ways of classification: Fruition is the unsurpassable seeing. Subco: It occurs having seen nibbaana by realizing it directly. Co: the Path is the unsurpassable practice, nibbaana is the unsurpassable freedom. Subco: nibbaana liberates from all conditioned dhammas. N: three other ways of classification: Nibbaana is the unsurpassable seeing. Subco: there is nothing higher that can be seen. Co: Magga is the unsurpassable practice. Fruition is the unsurpassable freedom. Unsurpassable: the highest good. N: Without the Buddhas teaching it is impossible to realize the truth of all conditioned realities, one thinks of a self who sees, hears or feels. But thanks to his teaching one can begin to develop understanding of the realities of ones daily life. Vipassanaa is the is the unsurpassable seeing because through vipassanaa it can be realized that the phenomena occurring at this moment are impermanent, dukkha and anattaa. -------- Nina. #96168 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:00 am Subject: Lukas Questions III, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Q. Lukas III: 1) Self is so much involved in our daily life. We think about things and people. What is the way which leads to eradiction of wrong view? -------- Kh S: When there is no understanding it is impossible. --------- L 2) Can pa~n~na arise without hearing Dhamma? ------- N: There are many levels and many kinds of pa~n~naa. But the pa~n~naa that knows the truth of condiitoned realities as impermanent, dukkha and anattaa can only be developed after hearing the Dhamma as taught by the Buddha. ----------- Ann: How does one develop pa~n~naa? ------- Kh S: No, it is not one develops. It develops by listening and considering. Does one want to experience directly the arising and falling away of realities or just learn to become detached from clinging to the idea of self? Develop right understanding in order to eradicate clinging to the idea of self. There can be reading and listening just to have right understanding. It has to be right understanding of the reality that appears just now. Visible object appears. Is this not the object that should be understood more clearly? --------- L3) Should we know characteristic of each akusala? -------- Kh S: Little by little in a day. N: We cannot know each akusala. Kh S: When there is no direct awareness, all right, what can you do? No one can do anything. Understand that pa~n~naa will grow little by little. Be patient. ---------- L 4) No one can start to think in the right way. No one can understand if he wants to understand. Instead of kusala there is a lot of akusala. We talkin about developing understanding, but what we call development it's just a few conditioned moments which arise on its own conditions. Thinking is conditioned. Sati is conditioned, Right understanding is conditioned. Sila is conditioned. Reading and considering Dhamma is conditioned. We think about ourselves all the day. But it's also conditioned. No one can do anything, there is no self which can change realities. But notion of "Self" is so strong, it determines all our akusala and we take it for ourselves. Sould we lead normal life? --------- Kh S: Lukas understands the right Path: no one can do anything. He leads his normal life already by conditions. ---------- Jon: A normal life, that seems to be the most difficult thing. ----------- Kh S: Why? It is already normal life. ---------- Nina. #96169 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:07 am Subject: [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 13. 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 nma and rpa it will be clearly known that it is only a type of nma which thinks of different subjects. If the characteristic of the nma 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 nma 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. ******* Nina. #96170 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Right effort is always with right understanding. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 23-feb-2009, om 13:37 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > Can you say more about pa~n~na of samatha? Is it ti-hetuka or dvi- > hetuka? I am a little bit confused about that and also about all those > different levels of pa~n~na. --------- N: Pa~n~naa always arises with a citta rooted in alobha, adosa and amoha (pa~n~naa). Pa~n~naa of the level of samatha has to know when the citta is kusala and when akusala, so that subtle lobha will not be taken for kusala. This pa~n~naa has to know in what way there can be true calm (removed from akusala) by means of a suitable meditation subject. It has to know how to abandon jhaanafactors of a lower stage in order to reach a higher stage. There are many levels of pa~n~naa and pa~n~naa that is pa~n~naa of the level of samatha, pa~n~naa that is intellectual understanding of paramattha dhammas, and pa~n~naa that is insight knowledge are different kinds of pa~n~naa. --------- > > > > Can we know diffrence between effort of satipatthana and effort of > any > > > kusala citta without pa~n~na, by 'right thinkings'? > > ------ > > N: So long as the first stage of insight: directly knowing the > > difference between naama and ruupa, has not been realized there is > >no clear and precise knowledge of the different cetasikas. We should > >not try to find out, it does not help. > > L: So are we talking about satipatthana now? > what is function of pa~n~na of pariyatti? Does it has diffrent > characteristic then pa~n~na of level of patipatti? -------- N: They must be of different levels.Pa~n~na of pariyatti is intellectual understanding of the reality of the present moment, and it knows the difference between reality and concept. It can condition direct understanding of the present reality as a mere dhamma, and that is pa.tipatti. ----------- > > L: what about thinking on account of past experiences? > Usually there is a lot of thinking about past experiences, and it's > all so misleading. -------- N: It arises because of conditions, but if it is known that it is more helpful to understand the present reality, there will be conditions to have more understanding of the present reality. Nina. #96171 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: K.Sujin on meditation.... and confrontation. sarahprocter... Hi Rob Ep! (Lukas*) --- On Sun, 22/2/09, Robert Epstein wrote: >> S: Exactly! Any idea of doing anything in order to have sati, takes us off-track. It's a question of understanding, not of doing, as I see it. ... R:>How about doing what you're doing *with* right understanding? Or does right understanding preclude sitting *at all?* Obviously it was okay for the monks that the Buddha addressed in the Anapanasati Sutta, even if one grants that they were "specially qualified." .... S: Yes, it all depends on the understanding. Many people even went to listen to the Buddha with wrong views and intentions to disprove him or show him up as some charlatan. .... R:>Then how does one distinguish a worldling who will make no progress because of just following the ordinary logic of samsara which leads to the continued cycle of rebirth, and one who escapes the cycle by developing the 8-fold path? If no one is allowed to do anything, does it just happen totally at random? ... S: No, of course not:-) It depends on very specific conditions - hearing the dhamma and carefully considering it so that pariyatti and then patipatti will develop. Of course, this 'hearing' and 'considering' is not a matter of how many suttas or how much Abhidhamma one has read or how much Pali one knows. Also, it's not a question of 'being allowed to do anything'. What is done or not done depends on conditions, not self in anyway. .... S:>>....The common ordinary attachment we're likely to have, such as now, won't send us off-track. ... R:>Why is that? .... S: Because, while any attachment is a hindrance to the development of samatha, only wrong view (and ignorance) are hindrances to the development of the path. Attachment can be known just like any other reality as long as one is not following the wrong path. ... >> S: Again, it's good to have warnings about attachment, but the wrong view is most serious. Of course, there can be wrong view arising when translating commentaries too. ... R:> And is this less likely? Why would that be? Wouldn't the idea arise pretty easily that "by reading sutta in the original I will make much better progress in developing panna." Don't you think that's just as common [in the back of one's mind] as it is in meditation or any other Dhamma-related action? .... S: I agree that wrong view can be pretty subtle and you give a good example of how it may arise. We can only know for ourselves in such a circumstance what the cittas are. It's true that we may think "we don't follow the wrong view of meditators who think panna can arise by focussing on particular objects", but not realise the wrong view arising at other times. Perhaps we can say however, that whenever there is an idea of focussing on a sensation or movement of the abdomen or feeling, for example, in order to develop satipatthana, it's wrong view. So the purpose of such practices (for this goal) is wrong from the start. [As Jon has said, if the purpose is for health or other benefits, then no wrong view is involved.] ... R:>Well, you are very encouraging. I hope that others don't feel that you are instigating me to torment them further with my incessant complaints. ... s: Pls continue tormenting them and 'torturing Sukin' for all our sakes:-). Also, the Soma transl of the Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries can be found here, I think: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html It's an inexpensive small booklet that is available from BPS and maybe Pariyatti, I forget. Later, I'll check if we have a spare copy and will be happy to send one if so. Will let you know off-list. Metta, Sarah *p.s Lukas, I have an old, falling apart copy of CMA I can send you or else we can send you a new copy from Pariyatti as it's very inexpensive. Just send me your snail-mail add off-list. ========= #96172 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Right effort is always with right understanding. sarahprocter... Dear Pt & Lukas, I was about to respond to Pt's questions on right effort when I saw Lukas's response (#96078) and I thought it was excellent! Do we know the characteristic of effort that is arising now? If not, how can we tell whether it's right or wrong effort? Whenever there's any idea of our doing anything with an idea of self, it's certainly wrong effort that's arising. Again there's a gold-mine of saved posts from the archive on this topic in 'Useful Posts' under 'Effort-right'. Here's an extract from Dan: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/13176 "** Dan: These are certainly to be developed, with the utmost urgency and total effort. However, they must be developed in the context of the eightfold path, central to which is right view (4NT); otherwise, the development doesn't go in the right direction, doesn't lead to liberation. "As an example, consider effort/energy/endeavour which is one of the components of each: the right exertions, the bases of power, the five faculties, the five strengths, the seven factors for Awakening, the noble eightfold path. We read from the Dhammasangani (376): Katamam tasmim samaye viriyindriyam hoti? "What at that time is the faculty of effort/energy/endeavor?" "That which is mental endeavor (viriyarhambo), riddance of lethargy, exerting harder and harder, endeavoring higher and higher, striving, painstaking zeal, utmost exertion, steadfastness, resoluteness, unfaltering endeavor, having sustained desire (chanda) to strive, not relinquishing the task, discharging the task well, effort (viriya) as the faculty of effort, power of effort, wrong effort -- this at that time is the faculty of endeavor." "Wrong effort?! Everything sounded pretty good up to that point! This is a description of the viriya cetasika arising with lobha-mula- cittani. It is interesting to read how it differs from the viriya cetasika arising with the sense-sphere kusala cittas: [Dhs. 13] "What at that time is the faculty of effort/energy/endeavor? That which is mental endeavor (viriyarhambo), riddance of lethargy, exerting harder and harder, endeavoring higher and higher, striving, painstaking zeal, utmost exertion, steadfastness, resoluteness, unfaltering endeavor, having sustained desire (chanda) to strive, not relinquishing the task, discharging the task well, effort (viriya) as the faculty of effort, power of effort, right effort -- this at that time is the faculty of endeavor." "The only difference is the word "right" in the second paragraph contrasting with the "wrong" of the first. It's fine and dandy to toss around lists of the five this's and the four that's, but it is critical to be able to discern clearly when they are "right" or "wrong" as they arise. This hinges on development of discernment and understanding. Is this done via ritual? I don't think so.**" .... L:> I have also a question in this wonderful topic. Can we say that there is right effort, when there is development of kusala, but there is no pa~n~na? I belive that there is just effort with dvi-hetuka-kusala citta, and right effort with right understanding. ... S: Viriya cetasika accompanies every kusala (and akusala) citta. Therefore, when the citta is kusala, the viriya must be 'right', but with panna accompanying it, of course it's not right effort of the path or of the development of samatha. As you say, without panna, the kusala cittas have only the two roots of alobha and adosa (dvi-hetuka-kusala citta). Metta, Sarah p.s Pt, I appreciate your Abhi qus. Pls go ahead and ask them anytime - someone will always respond sooner or later even if Nina is busy. Have you listened to any of the discussions with A.Sujin on www.dhammastudygroup.org? I think you'll appreciate these too. ========== #96173 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:09 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Anicca Part1 sarahprocter... Hi Alex, Back to an old one (#93922) We were discussing what anicca refers to in the Teachings: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > >S: Before the Buddha's time and in other religions/philosphies, of > >course everyone knows that mountains and pens are impermanent. > >AL Actually no, not all. There were twisted philosophies about that > things only APPEAR impermanent, but in reality they are unchanging > oneness. Do I need to find a quote from Ditthisamyutta, Or Brahmajala > sutta re: the above? ... S: No need for a sutta. I think it's clear that most people have an understanding of mountains and pens as being impermanent without needing to hear a Buddha. .... > >S: They wear away, get lost and disappear. However, this is not the > >impermanence that it needed a Buddha to teach. With this idea of > >impermanence, there will never be an understanding of dhammas, of > >the ti-lakkhana of dhammas or any release from Dukkha. > > .... ... >A: Please don't slander the Buddha's Dhamma. It is THAT impermanence > that is meant in the suttas. > > The difference between Buddha's teaching & others > a) Buddha didn't teach Attavada. So while other teachers may have > taught that 5 sense organs & objects were anicca - what they did > teach was the permanence of Atta. Since atta was taught, the root of > craving & aversion was left intact. Not so in Buddha's teaching. .... S: When we have an idea of a mountain or pen as existing in reality as 'some thing', it is attavada. You've been looking at the Abhidhamma and quoting slabs of Pali recently. What does the Abhidhamma say about khandhas, starting with rupas. What are rupas? Are mountains and pens included? Even more to the point, can you experience a mountain or pen now? If so, how? Metta. Sarah p.s. Many thanks for your 'Happy New Year' at the end of this message I'm responding to!! ========== #96174 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. jonoabb Hi Robert E > What then would be an example of "hearing of the true Dhamma?" To my understanding, "hearing the true Dhamma" means receiving any part of the teachings in a form that is understandable, or potentially so, to the person receiving it. Now while this could of course include reading the suttas, it cannot be said that all parts of the suttas will be understandable to every reader. A given sutta undoubtedly constituted the "hearing of the true Dhamma" on the part of those to whom it was originally addressed. However, it's hearing by someone else who (like you and me) does not have the same level of panna, would not necessarily do so. It can't be said with any certainty either way. The point is once again that it's not a matter of the doing of a particular activity (reading, discussing, studying, etc). Jon #96175 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. jonoabb Hi Robert E > I hate to say this, Jon, but that fine distinction seems like > hair-splitting The distinction is an important one, so I wouldn't see it as a matter of hair-splitting. The distinction may be more clearly seen by considering the case of a person who both meditates and reads suttas. The former he may regard as his "practice", the latter as merely a source of information regarding that practice. > and evasion of the fact that the purpose of studying > Abhidhamma is to understand and facilitate the path, whether it is > directly or indirectly, otherwise no one would bother to read it. I agree that a person who studies the teachings may do so, broadly speaking, for the general purpose of better understanding the path (this would of course be in regards to understanding at an intellectual level). As said before, the fact of it being something done with a purpose does not make it a practice. > It is no less direct or indirect than the various intentions one may > have for formal meditation. One person may think "Well the path is > meditation" and be more direct about it; another may think "Well I > doubt I will get directly enlightened just by sitting, but it is one > of the things the Buddha talked about as part of practice, so I will > do it" and have a much more indirect sense of it, just as with study. > It can vary just as much. (It has already been agreed in our discussion that both meditation and Abhidhamma study, as conventional activities, are activities that may either be performed with wrong view or without.) > I don't think there's any principled argument that can say that > studying sutta and Abhidhamma and com is less a practice than > meditating or any other activity that one feels is *associated* in > whatever way with the Dhamma. Yes, I understand that that is your position. But then your position is one that does not accept the distinction between something done as a practice and something done otherwise than as a practice. In any event, this is all somewhat beside the point, because as explained already the development of the path is not a matter of the doing of an activity of some kind. Jon #96176 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. jonoabb Hi Robert E > That is very sweet and I appreciate your humor. Have no doubt, my > wife is also a fellow lunatic, just of a slightly eclectic variety > like myself. I know the feeling of having this sort of companionship > and I acknowledge you for having such a nice set-up. :-) She is fortunate in having you as her intellectual partner. > As for losing my job, I am self-employed, but plan to fire myself for > sloth and torpor and related offenses in the near future. Having fired yourself you could then, in recognition of the gross error of judgement involved in that, bring yourself back in at a higher position ;-)) Jon #96177 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:23 am Subject: Re: abhidhamma talks about people and effort. jonoabb Hi Alex > > To my understanding, this refers to, for example, a kusala moment >of > > restraint from performing an unwholesome act. > > > > Now that moment of restraint may occur spontaneously, or it may >occur > > only after much pondering or agonising. But it is only the kusala > > moment or moments that are accompanied by the mental factor of >right > > effort, not any akusala moments that may have preceded it/them. > > If the Buddh would use passive forms of verbs whenever grammar would > allow, then your statements could be true. Thanks for this comment (and the others in your message). It would help me in responding to your comments if you could indicate in what respects you find the statements made in my earlier post to be not true. > 2nd) Even though he refuted Atta, he did NOT replace one thing with > "Self doesn't exist" natthatta. He taught anatta and very carefully he > implied the absence of eternal Self. I believe that this teaching > style was on purpose. I'm not sure what your point is here. Please feel free to explain further. > 3rd) He often stressed the heedfulness, and energetic effort. Yes, both were stressed. But as kusala qualities (not as acts to be done). > Oh yeh... The "conventional and non existent things" are used MANY > times in Abhidhamma itself. > > For example: is "Monk" a conventional or ultimate truth? > > The word and its derivatives are used at least 604 times in Abhidhamma > Pitaka! Quite a number for the books who are said to teach only the > ultimates and no conventional truths... But all language is conventional, so even when the subject matter is absolute truths, there will inevitably be a degree of conventional matter in there also. (BTW, nobody has claimed that the Abhidhamma to be without conventional reference.) Jon #96178 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 3:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Concepts sarahprocter... Hi Howard (& Alex), Back to #93846! ... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: >> S: Let's say 'idea' is "What a wonderful Xmas" or "pencil". Now "What a > wonderful Xmas" or "pencil" are not aware of anything. They are not namas - they > don't experience anything at all. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Howard: > But the thinking expressed by, say, "pencil" (which probably amounts to > picturing a pencil in isolation, added to, perhaps, by some quick > recollections of holding one, or using one, and also mentally noting the typical yellow > color of the shaft, the beige color of the whittled-down end, the black lead > at the very end, and the pinkish, rubber eraser, below which there is a band > of yellow, grooved metal, and then mentally reciting "pencil"). [The > foregoing was retrieved by memory, not by holding a pencil in front of me.] And, > interspersed with all that thinking, at a multitude of different moments, is > consciousness of recalled bits and pieces (i.e., of segments) of that thinking. > The thinking and the consciousness of segments of that thinking seem to me to > occur in a frequent interleaving pattern: thinking, recalling (of the > thinking), thinking, recalling, thinking, recalling, etc. And the greater the > frequency of that interleaving (and the shorter the thought segments), the more it > seems that the thinking itself involves consciousness. The ideas are just the > (segments of) thinking. > --------------------------------------------------------- S: Or I'd say, *the ideas are just the objects of thinking." Not only does the thinking 'involve' consciousness, it *is* consciousness. Cittas arise with vitakka, sanna and other mental factors and experience their objects, in this case ideas about pencils. ... > .... >> A: Maybe I am wrong about the way some people think. I personally am > aware of ideas. They are impermanent, unsatisfactory and not self. > .... >> S: When we have such an idea: "I personally am aware of ideas", it's just > thinking. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > That's right. Ideas are lines of thought, or, better, specific stretches > of thinking (or sometimes, abstractions from a collection of similar ideas, > which is just another, "higher-level," piece if thinking. > ------------------------------------------------------- S: I think we need to distinguish between the nams, the thinking and the ideas or thoughts which the thinking thinks of. ... >>S: In truth and reality there is no "I", there is no awareness of ideas. > However, there is lots of thinking about ideas. > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > And consciousness (recollection, really) of the thinking. Ideas and > stretches of thought (or thinking) are actually one and the same. When we think > that in addition to the thinking, there are other things called "ideas," we > are, I believe, making a mistake. > ------------------------------------------------- S: I can see why I didn't rush to respond - Just as seeing is different from visible object, hearing is different from sound, bodily experiencing is different from hardness, so thinking is different from the ideas thought about. ... > > S: Concepts exist as concepts but not as realities. > > A:> And what, if I may ask, is the difference between "existing as > concepts" and "existing as reality"?! > ... >> S: Existing as concepts is only existing in a conventional sense. > -------------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > Anytime we posit a separate "thing," including, for example, such > paramatha dhammas as cittas, hardnesses, and visible objects, we are also > conceptualizing a conventional object, I believe. Reality doesn't come > compartmentalized. It is a seamless flow, with no quality or operation remaining "as is" for > any time at all. Change is constant and unrelenting. Our parsing of > experience is a matter of thinking, of conceptual fragmentation into mentally created > (imagined) entities that are mere matters of convention, useful though they > may be. > -------------------------------------------------- S: If we don't clearly distinguish the namas from the rupas, the paramattha dhammas from the pannatti, I don't believe it's possible for there to be any eradication of an idea of self or any understanding of anicca or dukkha. It's true that now we're using concepts to talk about cittas, visible objects and so on, but these concepts represent realities which can be directly known. Ideas or concepts can never be directly known because they are not absolute realities. ... >>S: Conventionally, we can say a pencil exists or there's a pencil on my desk. > In reality, no pencil exists, no desk exists. There are only namas and rupas > arising and falling away. What is seen is visible object. What is thought > about or imagined is a pencil. > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > It is needed to take this further, Sarah. The paramattha dhammas are > also conventional constructs. Reality itself can only be directly apprehended > with wisdom, not thinking. > ------------------------------------------------- S: We use conventional constructs to talk about paramattha dhammas, but I agree that realities (in the plural) can only be directly known with wisdom. Now, there can be that direct understanding of seeing or visible object or thinking, but never of 'pencil' or 'mountain'. Thanks for the other comments and my sincere apologies for the delayed responses. I always blame poor Phil for it - I used to be very systematic in replying, but he encouraged me to take a more 'artistic' approach:-). Metta, Sarah ====== #96179 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:24 am Subject: Visuddhimagga IX Mettaabhaavanaakathaa Corner scottduncan2 Dear All, Continuing: The Path of Purification. "63. 'He is dear to human beings': he is as dear to and beloved by human beings as a necklace worn to hang on the chest; as a wreath adorning the head. 64. 'He is dear to non-human beings': he is just as dear to non-human as he is to human beings, as in the Elder Visaakha's case. He was a landowner, it seems, at Paa.taliputta (Patna). While he was living there he heard this: "The Island of Tambapa.n.ni (Ceylon), apparently, is adorned with a diadem of shrines and gleams with the yellow cloth, and there a man can sit or lie wherever he likes; there the climate is favourable, the abodes are favourable, the people are favourable, the Dhamma to be heard is favourable, and all these favourable things are easily obtained there'." Path of Purity. "(4) 'He is dear to men': - he is dear, attractive to men like a pearl necklace dangling on the breast, a wreath of flowers worn on the head. "(5) 'He is dear to non-human beings': - he is dear to non-human beings as he is dear to men, like the Elder Visaakha. They say that he was a rich householder at Paa.tiputta. Living there he heard this report: 'It is said that Tambapa.n.ni Island (Ceylon) is adorned with garlands and shrines, is resplendent with yellow robes. There one may sit or lie down in any place one likes. Agreeable weather, suitable dwellings, agreeable men - all these are easy to get there.'" Manussaana.m piyo hotiiti ure aamuttamuttaahaaro viya siise pi.landhamaalaa viya ca manussaana.m piyo hoti manaapo. Amanussaana.m piyo hotiiti yatheva manussaana.m, eva.m amanussaanampi piyo hoti visaakhatthero viya. So kira paa.taliputte ku.tumbiyo ahosi. So tattheva vasamaano assosi 'tambapa.n.nidiipo kira cetiyamaalaala"nkato kaasaavapajjoto icchiticchita.t.thaaneyeva ettha sakkaa nisiiditu.m vaa nipajjitu.m vaa utusappaaya.m senaasanasappaaya.m puggalasappaaya.m dhammassavanasappaayanti sabbamettha sulabha 'nti. Sincerely, Scott. #96180 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 6:47 am Subject: Does This Come From K.Sujin:2? Re: K.Sujin on meditation abhidhammika Dear Sarah, Jon, Nina, Robert K and KS folks How are you? Sarah wrote: "Perhaps we can say however, that whenever there is an idea of focussing on a sensation or movement of the abdomen or feeling, for example, in order to develop satipatthana, it's wrong view. So the purpose of such practices (for this goal) is wrong from the start. [As Jon has said, if the purpose is for health or other benefits, then no wrong view is involved.]" Suan replies: Sarah, the Buddha said the following: 374. "Kathaca pana, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kaaye kaayaanupassii viharati? idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu araagato vaa rukkhamuulagato vaa suaagaaragato vaa nisiidati pallankam aabhujitvaa ujum kaayam pa.nidhaaya parimukham satim upa.t.thapetvaa. so satova assasati, satova passasati. Section 374, Aanaapaanapabbam, Kaayaanupassanaa, Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Suttam, Mahaavaggo, Diighanikaayo. 374. "And, Monks, how does a monk lives as a repeated bodyobserver in the body? Here, Monks, the monk goes to the forest or to the root of the tree or to a quiet building and sits having crossed his legs, keeping his upper body upright, orienting mindfulness towards breathing as the meditation object. He inhales mindfully only. He exhales mindfully only." In the above Pali passage from Mahaasatipa.t.thaana Suttam, the monk is focussing on the processes of breathing in line with the Buddha's instructions for the purpose of developing mindfulness. Now, Sarah, I asks. Why is the purpose of this mindfulness meditation wrong if the purpose being developing mindfulness? And, why is the monk's view - of focussing on the processes of breathing in line with the Buddha's instructions in order to develop mindfulness - a wrong view? Now, Sarah, I ask you further. Is the above assertion your personal opinion (attanomati)? Or does it come from K. Sujin? By the way, it is very unlikely that your assertion has any support from Theravada Pali texts both canonical and commentarial. Thanking you in advance. Best wishes and good luck! Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #96181 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Concepts upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 2/24/2009 6:26:01 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: I think we need to distinguish between the nams, the thinking and the ideas or thoughts which the thinking thinks of. ... >>S: In truth and reality there is no "I", there is no awareness of ideas. > However, there is lots of thinking about ideas. > --------------------------------------------------- > Howard: > And consciousness (recollection, really) of the thinking. Ideas and > stretches of thought (or thinking) are actually one and the same. When we think > that in addition to the thinking, there are other things called "ideas," we > are, I believe, making a mistake. > ------------------------------------------------- S: I can see why I didn't rush to respond - Just as seeing is different from visible object, hearing is different from sound, bodily experiencing is different from hardness, so thinking is different from the ideas thought about. ... ============================ I don't believe in actual things that are ideas/thoughts. I only believe in the process of thinking. And for your own Abhidhammic consideration: What sort of dhamma would an idea/thought be? It is not rupa and it is not nama (including nibbana), and, IMO, that makes it nothing at all. With metta, Howard *(Anonymous) #96182 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: On Anicca Part1 truth_aerator Hi Sarah, >"sarahprocterabbott" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > S: When we have an idea of a mountain or pen as existing in reality > as 'some thing', it is attavada. > > You've been looking at the Abhidhamma and quoting slabs of Pali > recently. What does the Abhidhamma say about khandhas, starting >with rupas. What are rupas? Re: Rupa I prefer to stick with Sutta analysis. Rupa = visible object. Kayo, Mahabhuta & its derivatives is 'matter'. >Are mountains and pens included? In the final analysis no. However this doesn't mean that functional aggregation of elements that we label as pen, trees, or mountains don't exist. It doesn't mean that one should disregard walls, trees, objects in one's path and so on. > Even more to the point, can you experience a mountain or pen now? Ultimately not. However this doesn't mean that those aggregations do not apply to 'conventional' level or that mere mention of them (disassociated from wrong view) to be wrong. > Metta. > > Sarah > p.s. Many thanks for your 'Happy New Year' at the end of this message > I'm responding to!! > ========== you are welcome. :) With metta, Alex #96183 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:33 am Subject: Re: abhidhamma talks about people and effort. truth_aerator Hi Jon and all, > "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > It would help me in responding to your comments if you could >indicate in what respects you find the statements made in my earlier >post to be not true. regarding the passivity of development. I've made a number of posts showing that Buddha has used an active, not passive, sense, in his speeches to MONKS. > > For example: is "Monk" a conventional or ultimate truth? > > > > The word and its derivatives are used at least 604 times in > Abhidhamma > > Pitaka! Quite a number for the books who are said to teach only the > > ultimates and no conventional truths... > > But all language is conventional, so even when the subject matter is absolute truths, So there is no such thing as "absolute vs conventional truth"? Thank you for admitting that. Furthermore you support my statement about the effort (Atta-less of course) in the above. Buddha wasn't using a hidden lingo (that only Abhidhammikas and ONLY KS followers could decode) when he said: Develop this and that, Monk! Don't be heedless! >there will inevitably be a degree of conventional > matter in there also. (BTW, nobody has claimed that the Abhidhamma > to be without conventional reference.) > > Jon Somewhere I remember reading that Abhidhamma, unlike the suttas, uses super Absolute truth and without conventional truth. With metta, Alex #96184 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:43 am Subject: Does This Come From K.Sujin:2? Re: K.Sujin on meditation truth_aerator > Sarah wrote: > > "Perhaps we can say however, that whenever there is an idea of > focussing on a sensation or movement of the abdomen or feeling, for > example, in order to develop satipatthana, it's wrong view. So the > purpose of such practices (for this goal) is wrong from the start. > [As Jon has said, if the purpose is for health or other benefits, > then no wrong view is involved.]" Hi Sarah. The point isn't to be absorbed into the abdomen! The point is in seeing the characteristic of anicca and the air element becoming inner part of the body and leaving the body (thus showing anatta). So the meditation is about seeing characteristics of anicca, anatta AND all the insights that follow from those two characteristics. With metta, Alex #96185 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 11:06 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Request for Comment - 1st Vibh, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m nilovg Dear Lukas, part of your Q can be answered by revisiting Sangiitisutta Co. Op 24-feb-2009, om 7:08 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > 3)"There is material quality that is visible (Atthi ruupa.m > nidassana.m)" > > L: Can you explain this pali term: sanidassana.m? > > --- > > 4)"There is material quality that is impingent (Atthi ruupa.m > sappa.tigha.m)" > > L: Can you explain this term sappa.tigha.m? > it means dangerous, harmful. -------- N: Quote: [dsg] Re: Sangiiti Sutta Threes (34-36) DN 33.1.10(34) Threefold classification of matter: visible and resisting, invisible and resisting, invisible and unresisting. (Tividhena ruupasa'ngaho : sanidassanasappa.tigha.m ruupa.m anidassanasappa.tigha.m ruupa.m, anidassanaappa.tigha.m ruupa.m. ---------------- N:sanidassana: visible. As to resisting, sappa.tigha, this can be translated as with impingement. Pa.tigha means striking against. The Co. refers to the Dhammasangani (753-758, transl. U Kyaw Khine). External rupa that is visible is visible object or colour. It is the only rupa that can be seen. All other rupas are invisible. Visible object is with impingement, it impinges on the eye-base and then there are conditions for seeing. The Co states that visible object is able to strike at or impinge on the eyesense (cakkhu- pa.tihanana-samattha). We read (Dsgh 754): As to the external rupas that are with impingement, these are the five sense-objects, and as we have seen, one of these, visible object is visible and with impingement, the other four sense-objects are invisible and with impingement. We read in Dhsg 757: < What is the external Corporeality which arises with impingement? There is visible object which causes the arising of Eye- consciousness ...p... tangible object which causes the arising of Body-consciousness. This is the external Corporeality which arises with impingement, (The five Aaramma.na and seven Visaya Ruupa).> ----- N: As to the visaya ruupas, these are seven objects, visayas. The sense objects classified as five external aayatanas can also be classified as seven objects: when we take into account tangible object that includes the three great Elements of solidity, heat and motion, there are seven rupas that are sense objects. Internal ruupa that is not visible (anidassana) are the five sensebases. These are internal and with impingement. Eyesense that is an internal aayatana is a condition for seeing, but it cannot be seen. We read in the Dhsg 756: The rupas with impingement are the gross rupas: the seven sense- objects, classified as five external aayatanas, and the five sense- bases, classified as five internal aayatanas. The Co. explains as to the second of the tripartite classification of ruupa, invisible ruupas with impingement, that these are nine aayatanas that are gross rupas: the five internal aayatanas and four external aayatanas, since visible object is excepted. As to the third of this tripartite classification of ruupas: invisible and without impingement, these are the sixteen rupas which are subtle rupas. There are twentyeight ruupas in all, and of these twelve are gross and sixteen are subtle. ------ Pali: Sanidassanaadiisu attaana.m aarabbha pavattena cakkhuvi~n~naa.nasa"nkhaatena saha nidassanenaati sanidassana.m. Cakkhupa.tihananasamatthato saha pa.tighenaati sappa.tigha.m. Ta.m atthato ruupaayatanameva. Cakkhuvi~n~naa.nasa"nkhaata.m naassa nidassananti anidassana.m. Sotaadipa.tihananasamatthato saha pa.tighenaati sappa.tigha.m. Ta.m atthato cakkhaayatanaadiini nava aayatanaani. Vuttappakaara.m naassa nidassananti anidassana.m. Naassa pa.tighoti appa.tigha.m. Ta.m atthato .thapetvaa dasaayatanaani avasesa.m sukhumaruupa.m. ------------------------- Nina. #96186 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 12:24 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Survey, Ch 36, no 10 kenhowardau Hi Howard, --------- H: >In any case, Ken, I think the matter that you raised is interesting. We > can think about many things wrongly, even including what some call > "realities." Avijja is wide ranging. :-) ---------- Thanks Howard, yes, there is no shortage of interesting material in Dhamma study. The presence of moha means that vitakka and vicara will think ignorantly about their joint object of consciousness. Because of moha they can't possibly know that a dhamma is just a dhamma. And it all happens in one tiny fraction of a second - without any person (permanent entity) being involved. Ken H #96187 From: "connie" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:39 pm Subject: Request for Comment - 1st Vibh, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m nichiconn Dear Lukas, 1)"There is material quality that is grasped(by craving and false view) (Atthi ruupa.m upaadinna.m)" L: What does upaadinna.m means? Does it refers to rupa which is perceive by citta accompanied by ditthi and lobha? --- 2)"There is material quality that is not grasped, is the object of the attachments. (atthi ruupa.m anupaadinnupaadaaniya.m)" L: What does it mean that is not grasped and then it is the object of attachements? --- CSCD: Sa.myuttanikaayo Khandhavaggo 1. Khandhasa.myutta.m 5. Attadiipavaggo 6. Khandhasutta.m SPD: We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (III, Khandhaa-vagga, First Fifty, Ch 5, 48, The Factors) that the Buddha, while he was at Saavatthii, explained to the monks about the five khandhas and the five upaadaana khandhas, khandhas of grasping: 48. Saavatthi nidaana.m. <>. <>ti. These are called the five upadaana khandhas." peace, connie #96188 From: "Sukinder" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 4:01 pm Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 sukinderpal Dear Suan (Ken H and Rob E), I'm behind in my reading and so just saw this post and the one before this. ========== > Dear Sukin, Jon, Ken H, Sarah, Nina and KS Folks > > How are you? > > Sukin, you wrote: > > "If right understanding were to arise while meditating, this would > be due to past accumulated right understanding, including of the > pariyatti level, in other words it would arise in spite of the > activity and not as a result of it." > > Suan asked: > > What do you mean by meditating? > > By it, did you mean Theravada meditation in the sense of formal > development of satipa.t.thaaana in line with the Buddha's > instructions in Mahaa Satipa.t.thaana Suttam? You may have not noticed it, but in many of my posts I have spoken about Satipatthana as being the only Path to enlightenment. And yes, this is what I think is the Theravada position. So obviously in my statement to Rob E, I wasn't referring to Satipatthana when mentioning `meditation'. It was as Ken has pointed out, a reference to what is done in the name of practice by most Buddhists today, at home and in meditation retreats and which amounts to being nothing more than rite and ritual. What do you mean by `formal development of satipa.t.thaaana"? If it is something similar to what I was pointing out to, then I'll have to disagree with you regarding it being what the Buddha taught in the Maha Satipatthana Sutta. Metta, Sukin #96189 From: "Alex" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 7:13 pm Subject: Does This Come from K Sujin? Re: Response to Robert E. 3 truth_aerator Hi Sukin, >--- "Sukinder" wrote: > > Dear Suan (Ken H and Rob E), > > You may have not noticed it, but in many of my posts I have spoken > about Satipatthana as being the only Path to enlightenment. It is "Direct Path" accoding to Ven. Analayo book on Satipatthana and even if it means "the only path", then what about MN36 sutta where Buddha has said that JHANA is the path to awakening? "There is the case where a monk having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html We are obviously using different teachings. With metta, Alex #96190 From: "ptaus1" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 7:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Beginner abhidhamma questions ptaus1 Dear Nina, thanks for your reply. >Nina: Any reason why you want to develop jhaana? pt: I'd like to be thorough, that is, examine as closely as possible everything mentioned in the tipitaka. More questions about ADL chapter 12 regarding the following passage: "If the rupa which will be object has contacted more than one atita bhavanga, it will have fallen away before the process can be completed, since it cannot last longer than seventeen moment of citta. A process can, after it has started, be interrupted, for example, after the votthapana-citta, before kusala cittas or akusala cittas can arise. It may also happen that the atita-bhavanga is succeeded by the bhavanga-calana, but that the bhavangupaccheda does not arise; then there will be no process of cittas. Sound may, for example, impinge on the ear-sense and then the atita-bhavanga which arises is succeeded by the bhavanga-calana. However, the bhavangupaccheda does not arise and thus the stream of bhavanga-cittas is not interrupted and the ear-door process cannot start. In that case the sound cannot be heard." 1.What would be the reasons for rupa contacting more than one atita bhavanga? 2. What would be the reasons for the sense-process getting interrupted after the votthapana-citta? 3. What would be the reasons for bhavangaupaccheda not arising after bhavanga-calana? I'm guessing that all this has to do with different strengths of vipaka, which would influence how long/short is the sense-door process. Thanks pt Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 7:45 pm Subject: Re: Right effort is always with right understanding. ptaus1 Dear Sarah,thanks for your comments. Yes, I just came across the Useful Posts section yesterday. Will probably spend a lot of my free time there in the next few months. And hopefully get to audio files as well. Best wishes pt #96192 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:08 pm Subject: Re: Request for Comment - 1st Vibh, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m szmicio Dear Connie Those words: "saasava.m upaadaaniya.m" L: How else we can translate it? "saasava.m" is with aasavas. What aasavas mean? What is a diffrence between aasavas and anusayas? Each khandha is with aasavas? What deos it mean that rupa can be not grasped and then can be object for attachments? Can you say more about word: "upaadaaniya.m"? >goes together with the aasavas, and is a condition for upaadaana, ? >grasping. #96193 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:40 pm Subject: Re: Survey, Ch 36, no 11. epsteinrob Hi Nina. To me, this talk is lovely, and you have given a very nice rendition of how panna may perceive realties with a sense of peace and freedom. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #96194 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 8:57 pm Subject: Re: Request for Comment - 1st Vibh, Abhidhammabhaajaniiya.m szmicio Dear Connie Continuing: "Atthi ruupa.m indriya.m, atthi ruupa.m na indriya.m. Atthi ruupa.m mahaabhuuta.m, atthi ruupa.m na mahaabhuuta.m. Atthi ruupa.m vi~n~natti, atthi ruupa.m na vi~n~natti. Atthi ruupa.m cittasamu.t.thaana.m, atthi ruupa.m na cittasamu.t.thaana.m. Atthi ruupa.m cittasahabhu, atthi ruupa.m na cittasahabhu." -- There is material quality that is controlling faculty. (Atthi ruupa.m indriya.m) There is material quality that is not controlling faculty. (atthi ruupa.m na indriya.m) There is material quality that is of the (four) great essentials. (Atthi ruupa.m mahaabhuuta.m) There is material quality that is not of the (four) great essentials. (atthi ruupa.m na mahaabhuuta.m) There is material quality that is expressive. (Atthi ruupa.m vi~n~natti) There is material quality that is not of expressive. (atthi ruupa.m na vi~n~natti) There is material quality that is generated by consiousness. (Atthi ruupa.m cittasamu.t.thaana.m) There is material quality that is not generated by consiousness. (atthi ruupa.m na cittasamu.t.thaana.m) There is material quality that is co-existent with consiousness. (Atthi ruupa.m cittasahabhu) There is material quality that is not co-existent with consiousness. (atthi ruupa.m na cittasahabhu) ------- 1)"There is material quality that is controlling faculty. (Atthi ruupa.m indriya.m)" L: Well. I always have problems with indriya. What does it mean? What does it refers to? What does it mean that ruupas are indriya? ---- 2)"There is material quality that is expressive. (Atthi ruupa.m vi~n~natti)" L: I don't understand it. What does it mean that ruupa is expressive? The word vi~n~natti means intimation, information. 3)"There is material quality that is generated by consiousness. (Atthi ruupa.m cittasamu.t.thaana.m)" L: so citta - consiousness, samu.t.thaana - cause. So it means that "ruupas can have their cause(or origination) in citta." This kind of ruupa is called cittaja-ruupa. Which kinds of ruupas are cittaja-ruupas? --- 3)"There is material quality that is co-existent with consiousness. (Atthi ruupa.m cittasahabhu)" L: citta - consiousness, sahabhu - arise together with So the translation is: "ruupas can arise with consiousness" But what does it mean that they can arise with citta? ruupas are cittavipayutta. My best wishes Lukas #96195 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: K.Sujin on meditation.... and confrontation. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. Well at least I am now clear on the basic idea of where "wrong view" lies and why it is more serious than attachments of various kinds. I think there is no possibility of the usual meditation interpretion and the one you have given being reconciled with each other. It truly is a very different perspective. Well, we can hope it all sorts out. If I follow "wrong view" and get side-tracked, I have no doubt that you will remind me whenever possible, even if you don't see me for several thousand lifetimes. Eventually I'll get the idea! You are very kind to think of sending me the translation of the Satipatthana sutta w/commentary. If you find it I will be very glad to read it; if not, I will be happy to buy it if you direct me to the correct place. That would be very good to see. Thanks for your good notes above, and also for permission to keep tormenting various group members. That is especially good of you. :-) Best, Robert = = = = = = = = = = = = = #96196 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. epsteinrob Hi Jon. Since one cannot make panna come about, or even arrange to hear the correct sutta, one had better hope that the right conditions come about and leave it at that. Otherwise, one could spend lifetimes watching tv commercials and not getting much done. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #96197 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:12 pm Subject: Re: Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. epsteinrob HI Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > (It has already been agreed in our discussion that both meditation > and Abhidhamma study, as conventional activities, are activities that > may either be performed with wrong view or without.) I had not realized this, so thanks for mentioning it. It has been said by others that meditation can *only* lead to akusala arising, since it is a product of wrong view. I appreciate your saying it is possible to meditate with right view, even if you don't believe it is too common. > > > I don't think there's any principled argument that can say that > > studying sutta and Abhidhamma and com is less a practice than > > meditating or any other activity that one feels is *associated* in > > whatever way with the Dhamma. > > Yes, I understand that that is your position. But then your position > is one that does not accept the distinction between something done as > a practice and something done otherwise than as a practice. I am interested in a bit more of a sense of what constitutes a practice or a non-practice, if you think you may be able to clarify it. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #96198 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 9:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. epsteinrob Hi Jon. > > Having fired yourself you could then, in recognition of the gross > error of judgement involved in that, bring yourself back in at a > higher position ;-)) > > Jon Thanks Jon, for your nice comments. My wife does appreciate me, even though I can be a pain at times. Well, I now don't think it's worth it to fire myself. I would probably wind up with a lawsuit against myself, so I'll let it go.... Best, Robert E. =========================== #96199 From: "szmicio" Date: Tue Feb 24, 2009 10:07 pm Subject: Visudhimagga Chapter VIII [Mindfulness of death] szmicio Dear Connie, Nina, Sarah and all friends I'll type out the whole section on mindfulness of death here. I also have some questions on it. I'll be gratefull if you can help me. ------- ================================== CHAPTER VIII OTHER RECOLLECTIONS AS MEDITATION SUBJECTS (Anussati-kamma.t.thaana- nidessa) [Mindfulness of Death] [229] Now comes the description of the development of mindfulness of death, which was listed next (Ch. III, $105). [Definitions] Herein, death (mara.na) is the interruption of life faculty included within [the limits of] a single becoming(existence). But death as termination (cutting of), in other words, the Arahant's termination of the suffering of the round, is not included here, nor is momentary death, in other words, the momentary dissolution of formations, nor the 'death' of conventional(metaphorical) usage in such expressions as 'dead tree', 'dead metal', and so on. ================================== ------- "CHAPTER VIII OTHER RECOLLECTIONS AS MEDITATION SUBJECTS (Anussati-kamma.t.thaana- nidessa)" L: This chapter is called "other recollections as meditation subjects". And then section on mindfulness of death begins. Then there are also "mindfulness occupied with the body" and "mindfulness of breathing". That 3 sections are classified separately as 3 diffrent meditation subject or the whole chapter VIII is classified as one object? There is 40 meditation objects, can you introduce it to me in brief? Does this 40 meditation subjects leads to vipassana?? If samatha bhaavaana is developed, is there ti-hetuka or dvi-hetuka kusala citta? Pa~n~na of samatha knows what is kusala and what is akusala, and also knows conditions for developmnet more kusala in the future. But when this kind of pa~n~na arises, is it ti-hetuka or dvi-hetuka citta that arises with it? When pa~n~na of samatha arises is it pa~n~na of eightfold path? Can there be samatha bhaavaana without pa~n~na of samatha and also without pa~n~na of vipassana? ---- "Herein, death (mara.na) is the interruption of life faculty included within [the limits of] a single becoming(existence)." L: so death is not just concept, is also a reality. What kind of life faculty is mentioned there? is it jivitindriya-cetasika? It's a little bit similar to the description of what is past ,future and present according to Suttanta division in vibhanga pali, khandha section. ---- "But death as termination (cutting of), in other words, the Arahant's termination of the suffering of the round, is not included here, nor is momentary death, in other words, the momentary dissolution of formations," L: Khun Sujin mention momentary death in SPD. Where can i find something about momentary death? --- "nor the 'death' of conventional(metaphorical) usage in such expressions as 'dead tree', 'dead metal', and so on." L: As I said not a concept. My best wishes Lukas =========== * Howard's signature blocks: == A change in anything is a change in everything (Anonymous) == Entrances to holiness are everywhere. The possibility of ascent is all the time, even at unlikely times and through unlikely places. There is no place without the Presence. (From Mishkan T'filah, the new Reform prayerbook) == He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none - such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin. (From the Uraga Sutta) == Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains "going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it" and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible. (From the Avarana Sutta) == Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream. (From the Diamond Sutra) == When knowing what is to be known, he doesn't construe an [object as] known. He doesn't construe an unknown. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-known. He doesn't construe a knower. (The Buddha, speaking of himself in the Kalakarama Sutta) == See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance. (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) == Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head; in the same way, the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. (From the Sacitta Sutta) == "Rouse yourself! Sit up! What good is there in sleeping? For those afflicted by disease (suffering), struck by the arrow (craving), what sleep is there? "Rouse yourself! Sit up! Resolutely train yourself to attain peace. Do not let the king of death, seeing you are careless, lead you astray and dominate you. "Go beyond this clinging, to which devas and men are attached, and (the pleasures) they seek. Do not waste your opportunity. When the opportunity has passed they sorrow when consigned to Niraya-hell. "Negligence is a taint, and so is the (greater) negligence growing from it. By earnestness and understanding withdraw the arrow (of sensual passions)." (From the Utthana Sutta) == "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' (From AN 2.19) ==