#97400 From: "colette" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 7:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (21) ksheri3 Hi Sarah, Please excuse my lack of concern for whatever it is that you are speaking of here since I was only struck by the subject line: The Secluded Place? What the hell is that? What is "seclusion"? We are living in a world where the progression/momentum is towards this hypothetical openess. In the USA, here in Chicago, we are struck with cameras on every street corner documenting everything and everybody thus one must ask what is private. <...> What is seclusion? How can anything be secluded? Isn't seclusion the same as EXCLUSION? AGAIN, What is the stinkin difference between "Private" and "Secret"? How is it possible that they are two different concepts? <....> So, where is privacy and where is security and where is "seclusion" so that you and this hypothetical KS can enjoy a seclude place? <...> Why how nice, I hear POWER STATION performing their greatest hit. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Dear Friends, > > Part 21: Sharpening Pa~n~naa > > "....one can see one's own accumulations perfectly, otherwise it's suppressed." > ***** <...> #97401 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 9:52 pm Subject: Re: "Call Me By My Real Names" by Thich Nhat Hanh scottduncan2 Dear colette, Postures can't be used for anything. It looks so authoritative, that statement, sitting up there like that. Funny. I'm glad to hear from you. colette: "How Wrong View of you. Postures most certainly can be used for something." Scott: What was that Monty Python sketch? 'This is abuse, arguments are down the hall.' But yeah, totally Wrong View, eh? c: "When you plant a seed for your own personal gratification of taking a meal from the plant's excess that eventually will grow THEN you certainly are dealing with a Karma producing event, which means that the event is used for something. Taking a posture is the same way i.e. applying Wrong VIEW OR WRONG ACTION OR ..., or akusala as the MEANS to reach the end of NIRVANA." Scott: You seem to be writing here of kamma and the results of kamma. I'd say postures can't be used for anything in the same way that concepts can't be used for anything. Now, mind-produced bodily intimation is the expression of kusala or akusala, perhaps one could say. c: "If you plant HEMLOCK so shall you receive and so shall you be forced into nurishing your body from the HEMLOCK you showed the world, your peers, that you intend on living from HEMLOCK as your food. That is nothing than mocking your own ignornat EGO. After nourishing your ego on Hemlock once, I bet, won't allow you to live very long and reap the gratification that you thought your propoganda would bestow upon you." Scott: I like to mock my own ignorant EGO. And I'm not all that keen on my propaganda - although I believe it I suppose I could say. Hemlock reminds me of either Socrates or Sherlock Holmes. colette: "again, a classic example of misunderstanding MISUNDERSTANDING or the Emptiness of Shunyata or THE SHUNYATA OF SHUNYATA." Scott: Guilty as charged. ;-) c: "Aren't you trying to reach for the word KLESAS here in terms of KHANDHAS?" Scott: I don't think so, but maybe you can say more about how kilesa might fit here as well. I was more thinking of the momentary, ephemeral arising and falling away of the ultimate realities taken for self (which are void of self, speaking of emptiness). colette: "I'm glad Sarah added 'a little Spring air!' since that is the aspect of Spring which, I think, most nourishes the thoughts of Spring, in the mind. I mean that fresh air, the sun light, and the anticipation of the next few months to come." Scott: Yeah, it's been a longish sort of winter up here. c: "Scott, oooooooooh, diabetes, such an unfortunate malidy to be delt with but that is the world in which we pollute, in which we destroy, and laugh at as if nothing would hurt us since we are Stratos dwellers and don't have to suffer like those trogledikes doing our labor in the caves, etc. (you'd have to have seen and understood that particular version of Gene Rodenberry's imagination called Star Trek since it all relates to the Parasite-Host relationship). When my mom died I found out that she had diabetes but she was an alcoholic which also contributed to her demise.' Scott: I do recall that Star Trek episode. Good call on the 'parasite-host' angle. I like that. c: You speak as if the Easter Bunny is dead in your house simply because your children or members of the house, have diabetes and cannot process sugar? So, the New York Times was correct, and Elton John was telling the truth: 'God Is DEAD'." Scott: Well, it did feel like I SHOT THE EASTER BUNNY (but I did not shoot the deputy). And what's this you say, God is DEAD !!?? c: "Snow, you say! One of my main standards, here in Chicago, during the months of March and April is that 'It always snows on Easter or soon after, so don't get your hopes up.' You place yourself, here in the USA, since it didn't snow in that many places this year." Scott: I'm up in Alberta, actually (Edmonton). I've been snowed on in May, June, and August in my day. Go figure... c: "good to hear from you both, Sarah and Scott." Scott: Same, colette. Always good to touch base. Sincerely, Scott. #97402 From: "connie" Date: Thu Apr 16, 2009 11:57 pm Subject: (No subject) nichiconn Dear Sarah, DSG Audiophiles, when am I Not buried in sammoha? lol. just not the books since we spoke! speaking of that particular one, tho, this is where (as usual) I'd gotten hung up (which dsg mp3??) when you called: second half of Dispeller of Delusion 16 on "Sun": << It seems that a woman was left behind in a desert wilderness by a caravan at night. In the day when the sun rose and the sand became heated, she was unable to keep her feet on it and she took down the basket from her head and stood on it. When the basket became hot with the heat she was unable to stand on it, and placing her upper garment on it she stood on that. When that became hot she laid the child at her waist face down and weeping stood upon it; and together with the child she died in that very place through being burnt up with the heat. >> no mother, no child. no one to mind. or hunger. This example just driving in the point a bit deeper than in the first half, where "sickness due to wind arises and breaks the hands, feet, spine, etc." which, storyline-wise might be more conventionally apparent in our particular circumstances -err, postures - but still just one moment the crumbling and next the accumulating, which must really be the more important. so rather than reading, I've been listening to a lot of the dhamma talks from some of our busy friend Chew's blogs... right now it's disc one of the CMA talks.... http://abhidhammattha.blogspot.com/ There are links to the other blogs there and well worth anyone's time, I think. Also so far, the sound quality has been surprisingly good. There are two different series of talks on Fundamental Abhidhamma & I think the earliest of those (2005) would be the ones going along with the abhidhamma book link we got from mike the other day. Visuddhimagga lectures, anyone? Patthana? Chew's got 'em out there for us (& if there are any problems getting the talks downloaded, you can get them from me). peace, connie ps. if that link ends up goofball, you can find a working one on DSG Links page. really, even if you don't want to listen to a thing but just look and feel appreciation ... #97403 From: "Chew" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:34 am Subject: Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya chewsadhu Read from book "Guide to Conditional Realations": The definition of sahajata-paccaya: The condition where a conditioning state, on arising, related by causing the associated states, the conditioned states, to arise simultaneously with it is known as sahajata-paccaya. The definition of annamanna-paccaya: The condition where a condiioning state relates by causing the associated states, the conditioned states, to arise simultaneously with it and which are all mutually dependent is known as annamanna-paccaya. The nature of sahajata and annamanna: In sahajata-paccaya, the conditioning state is simply related to the associated states that arise simultaneously with it. On the other hand, in annamanna-paccaya, the conditioning state is not only related to the associated states that arise simultaneously with it, but also each of the states is mutually related to the other. According to the Subcomy. In annamanna-paccaya, a conditioning state gives it s force to the conditioned state and also receives the force of the conditioned state. The difference between sahajata and annamanna: On examination of the conditioning and conditioned states, it will be found: (1) that those of sahajata are numerous whereas those of annamanna are few; (2) that those of sahajata are not always of annamanna. For example, citta and cetasika are related to cittajjarupa and also four mahabhuta are related to udayarupa by sahajata-paccaya but not by annamanna-paccaya; (3) that those of annamanna are always of sahajata. With respect, Chew #97404 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:48 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > Op 14-apr-2009, om 5:29 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > …Impermanence is the rise and fall and change in those same > > > khandhas, or it is their non-existence after having been; the > > meaning > > > is, it is the break-up of produced khandhas through their momentary > > > dissolution since they do not remain in the same mode. Contemplation > > > of impermanence is contemplation of materiality, etc., as > > > "impermanent" in virtue of that impermanence...' > > > > Above, the Vissuddhimagga seems to verify my view of anicca as a > > comparative change between the kandhas in one moment and in > > another, "through their momentary dissolution since they do not > > remain in the same mode." > > > > I made a point to Jon that this nature of anicca shows the type of > > characteristic of dhammas that it is: not something that can mark > > an individual dhamma, but one that has to do with the nature of the > > way they change from one moment to another. In other words, anicca > > is about the nature of how dhammas change, not about how they exist > > in a single moment. > > > > Am I seeing this incorrectly? > ------- > N: Still, each individual dhamma falls away never to come back. The > word change could be misunderstood. > Not remaining in the same mode: let us think of an example. At the > moment of seeing five khandhas have arisen: eyesense is rupa-khandha, > seeing is citta, and it is accompanied by seven cetasikas which are > the other three nama-khandhas. They all fall away and then receiving- > consciousness arises. This is accompanied by more than seven > cetasikas, namely vitakka and vicara (applied thinking and sustained > thinking), thus there is already a combination different from the > moment of seeing. All the cittas of the eye-door process fall away > and then bhavagacitta arises. Then the rupakhandha is the heartbase, > the vipaakacitta is different, accompanied by different cetasikas. > The khandhas do not remain in the same mode. How could they, they > fall away immediately. > Nina. As each citta with its cetasikas falls away, and is replaced by a new one with a new group of factors, what is the citta that is able to register this change in cittas in order to directly observe or understand anicca? Some citta must see the change from one citta to the next to see the impermanence. Is there a special way in which this takes place? Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97405 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 13. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > From the quotations of the Visuddhimagga in my previous letter we > have seen that those who first develop samatha to the degree of jhåna > and then develop insight, still have to be aware, after they emerge > from jhåna, of the realities which appear. They should, for example, > realize the rapture and joy experienced in jhåna, as only nåmas which > are impermanent and not self. If one develops insight "based on > jhåna", one should have the "fivefold mastery" (Visuddhimagga IV, > 131), one should be able to attain jhåna and emerge from it at any > time and in any place. Then the jhånacitta is for such a person a > reality which naturally appears in his daily life. Only thus can it > be object of mindfulness. > The Buddha encouraged people to be mindful while walking, eating, > talking, in short, while doing all the things they would normally do. > He did not say that samatha is a necessary requirement for the > development of vipassanå. To those who had accumulated great wisdom > and skill and who were inclined to the development of mindfulness of > breathing, he explained how the development of this subject could > bear great fruit, how it could bring the four applications of > mindfulness to fulfilment. In being aware of nåma and rúpa one will > learn to see the body in the body, feelings in the feelings, citta in > citta and dhamma in dhamma. One will realize nåma and rúpa as not > self. Then the four applications of mindfulness will be brought to > fulfilment. I have enjoyed your series on the anapanasati sutta and the commentary in the Visuddhimagga. Some interesting points along the way, such as the imbuing of citta [?] with the happiness of jhana by making that happiness the object. Also, the activity of seeing the jhana factors from without as temporary and thus treating the jhana as an object of insight. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #97406 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:09 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Robert E., Ken, Jon, > > Regarding: > > R: "...anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic. It is an understanding that comes from the insight that there is no self where previously we thought there was one...Does 'anatta' have substance, a shape or a weight? Does it have a form? Of course not. It is a negation of 'atta.' What anatta says is that there is *not* a form, not an atta. How can you perceive an absence? ... It is not a 'something,' it is the perception of something missing. Likewise, to say that 'no self' is a perceivable characteristic is like saying that 'I can see that there is nothing in this glass.' Sure you can, but only by comparison to 'something.' You don't perceive the 'nothing' in the glass, as it does not exist. You perceive the 'lack of something.' It doesn't exist, it is a perception of absence, by comparison to a missing object...If you never had a concept of self, there would be no such thing as anatta." > > Scott: Consider the PTS PED entry for 'lakkha.na' (characteristic): > > "Lakkha.na (nt.) 1. sign, characteristic, mark ... 5. ... specific attribute, characteristic (mark). In contrast to nimitta more a substantial attribute or primary characteristic ... The 3 properties (tilakkha.na.m) of existing things or of the phenomenal world are anicca, dukkha, anatta, or impermanence, suffering, unreality ... (through contemplating them arises vipassanaa & pacceka -- bodhi -- ~naa.na). -- abl. lakkha.nato 'by or qua characteristic,' 'in its essential qualification,' often found in exegetical analysis in Commentary style combined with various similar terms (atthato, kamato, nimittato etc.)..." > > Scott: Keeping in mind that a definition may not contain the subtlety of doctrine which I believe Jon and Ken are attempting to demonstrate, one can at least see from the above that, for some, the word 'lakkha.na' has the connotation of 'presence' not 'absence.' In other words, the characteristic of 'anatta' is present in and inherent in all dhammaa. > > Furthermore, 'knowing' or 'penetrating' a dhamma in such a way as to 'understand' that it has 'anatta' as characteristic is a function of pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa is not mere thinking or reasoning. Where you say that 'anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic,' I would suggest that it might be more precise to state that the characteristic of anatta is not known by mere perception (nor, for that matter, by mere cognizing). > > Consider Visuddhimagga, XIV, for a statement concerning the specific nature of the function of pa~n~naa: > > "... It is understanding (pa~n~naa) in the sense of act of understanding (pajaanana). What is this act of understanding? It is knowing (jaanana) in a particular mode separate from the modes of perceiving (sa~njaanana) and cognizing (vijaanana). For though the state of knowing (jaanana-bhaava) is equally present in perception (sa~n~naa), in consciousness (vi~n~naa.na), and in understanding (pa~n~naa), nevertheless perception is only the mere perceiving of an object as, say, 'blue' or 'yellow'; it cannot bring about the penetration of its characteristic as impermanent, painful, and not-self." > > Scott: Anatta is not to be perceived or thought about, but is to be known by pa~n~naa. Hence, and contrary to your above statement, the characteristic of anatta will not yield to perception or cognition. It is not, as I see it, a perception of, nor a reasoning about, an absence. Well, I think that for the most part, your discussion here makes my point for me, and in fact leads me to believe that I am more or less in line with the Visuddhimagga, which makes me quite glad. What I believe is being said here, and in one spot in your quote of the Vism said it explicitly, is that anatta is an object of *contemplation,* and as you point out, *not accessible to perception,* which is what I've been saying all along. If something is a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding, and is not a perceptible characteristic, like, as the Vism says in your quote, "blue or red," that is quite a different type of characteristic than one which is structurally inherent in the dhamma itself. And this may be a perfectly valid point, but it is as I have been trying to point out, a characteristic *about the dhamma or the way that it functions,* not something that is inherently *a part of it.* If this is understood, then the discussion could be resolved by just agreeing with me, instead of saying I was wrong. The only part of this in which I seem to be at odds with the Vism is on whether anatta is a positive or negative characteristic. I am not saying it is not a real fact about a dhamma that it has the characteristic of "no-self," which is the direct translation of anatta. But take a look at the translation and you will see that it starts with *no.* What does *no* mean? It means *not* or a *negation* of that which follows. So *no-self* does indeed mean "no self" and is indeed a characteristic of negation. So what does it mean to say that a characteristic which is 100% totally about the negation of the object of the characteristic, that is, atta, or self, is a positive characteristic, something that is actual in other words? It is saying that the *lack of self* is an actuality about the dhamma. This is both true, and at the same time a nonsense statement. I think that it is a conventional statement, in the sense that it is not structurally accurate. You can't have a *no-something* as a *something.* If you look at this logically you will have to agree, but perhaps you will refrain from doing so. I have invited everyone who has challenged me in this particular distinction to explain to me in a bit of detail how it is possible for a negation of a characteristic [of self-hood] can be a positive characteristic, but no one has been able or willing to do so - one or the other. Instead I get quotes in which it is merely stated without explanation that anatta is an inherent characteristic of a dhamma. This hardly shows that it is so, it just asserts it and invokes an authority behind the assertion. But there is no actual explanation of how this takes place. I'd be happy to hear and accept it, if such a description existed! When the detailed explanation comes down to the following: that panna, without having to directly perceive it, is able to understand directly and with certain knowledge, that every dhamma has the characteristic of unreality or no-self, I can accept that without reservation. That is a wise and true understanding, so we have no conflict there. From the beginning my only point has been that this is an understanding, an object of wisdom, and not one that pertains to the structural reality of the appearance/occurence of the dhamma. It is a hair-splitting point, but an important one, because the three marks do *not exist.* They are negations that are given to panna as objects of wisdom, not physical or perceptual realities. And apparently, by my reading of your well-selected quotes and comments, the Vism agrees with me. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97407 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:54 am Subject: The 7 Sets! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What are the 7 Sets, which produces Enlightenment? Before the Blessed Buddha Gotama (563-483 BC) was the good Buddha Kassapa , and before him were the Buddhas : KonÄ?gamana & Kakusandha all in this universal eon! Before them were there Buddhas : VessabhÅ« , SikhÄ« , VÄ«passÄ« , Phussa, and Tissa, Siddhattha, DhammadassÄ«, AtthadassÄ«, PiyadassÄ«, SujÄ?ta, and Sumedha, Padumuttara, NÄ?rada, Paduma, AnomadassÄ«, Sobhita, Revata, and Sumana, Mangala, Kondañña, DÄ«pankara , Saranankara, Medhankara & Tanhankara! Even before them were an endless number of Buddhas, who all explained these Seven Sets of Qualities Producing Enlightenment! What Seven? 1: The Four Foundations of Awareness 2: The Four Best Efforts 3: The Four Ways to Force 4: The Five mental Abilities 5: The Five mental Powers 6: The 7 Links to Awakening 7: The Noble 8-fold Way All Buddhas in the future beginning with Metteyya will also explain these! Those who stay here and pays attention will learn each single set of ability to an extent he/she will not easily forget.. Thus is lasting progress ensured!!! When the mirror is polished, then it produces an entirely perfect reflection of the original supreme absolute...Therefore: Hang on here! Never Give Up! May all sentient beings awaken into the ultimate peace, freedom & happiness! Yeah! The next Future Buddha Bodhisatta Ajita Metteyya More on these 37 requisites for Enlightenment (bodhipakkhiya-dhammÄ? ): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/index.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings.pdf The 7 Sets! Have a nice & shiny day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄ?hita, Sri Lanka * #97408 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:02 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. I find it a little frustrating when you keep saying that my understanding of anatta is incorrect, but you never say what the correct understanding should be, even though I have asked you to do this several times, instead of just saying my version is wrong, or making a general statement. Let me mark off where this takes place one more time below, and if you still don't have a specific correction to give me, at least explain why you will not say anything definite. I would appreciate that. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > ----------------------- > > So please explain to me how it is possible that an absence of self, such as is represented by "anicca" can be a definite *attribute of* a dhamma? > > ----------------------- > > I've not seen "anatta" described in the texts as referring to an "absence of self". "Self" after all is only a concept, so it can neither be present nor absent in a dhamma. Okay, so then what is your understanding of anatta? What does it refer to? > > I think you are extrapolating from the literal meaning of anatta. But anatta is simply the label given to a particular characteristic (just like "effort" is the label given to a particular cetasika). What *is* the characteristic that this designates. Can you describe or define it a bit more? > We need to consider what is said about the characteristic, rather than taking the label and developing an idea based on that. Fine, what *is* said about it. Either your own comment, or a quote, or a reference that I can go read myself online will be fine. > > ----------------------- > Does it wear a wristband that says anatta on it? I am not trying to be sarcastic but just highlight the fact that if you are going to say that it is a positive attribute of a dhamma according to the teachings then to achieve pariyatti level understanding about it you have to have some idea how this is possible. > > ----------------------- > > The "possible/impossible" question arises only because of your particular interpretation of the term "anatta" in this context. Fine, what is *your* interpretation? Or one that you would consider correct? > > > ----------------------- > How does it appear to panna? What does it look like? I may not have seen Heaven, but those who have supposedly seen it can at least describe it. So how can anatta be an attribute that one perceives, rather than an understanding that something is not there that was previously thought to be there, ie, a being or entity? > > ----------------------- > > You are taking the "self" of "wrong view of self" and applying it to the "self" of "characteristic of not-self". That kind of analysis is not appropriate here. What is the alternative that you would consider correct? > > > ----------------------- > > Is there an actual teaching about *what kind* of characteristic of a dhamma this is? Or is it just said in sutta, and understood by those who have insight, that dhammas are *not self* which is what I think it is. > > ----------------------- > > Yes, dhammas are indeed *not self*. But besides that, they also exhibit the characteristic of *not-self*. I think the passage quoted by Scott brings out this distinction very well. Which quote was that? What is the difference between a dhamma being "not self" and it having the characteristic of "not self." Please define the distinction. > > > ----------------------- > > Buddha himself says the same thing over and over again: "Dhammas are not self; if they were self, you would be able to do x with them; they would give satisfaction, etc... Since they are not controllable and do not give satisfaction, etc., they are *not self.*" > > > > That is Buddha's argument about anatta. He never says that anatta is something you can perceive in its own right. So please explain to me what the teaching is about how it can appear as part of a dhamma - not in general that "this is seen by one with panna," but specifically how is it possible? > > ----------------------- > > Two different things: dhammas being not self, and dhammas having the characteristic of not-self. Great, please discuss it a bit and make clear what the "two different things" are, so that I will understand what you are talking about. Thanks, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #97409 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:10 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. I will leave aside the issues that arise from using uncorrelated nomenclatures of element and entity. There is plenty to be confused about in the areas where we have a semi-common language, so I'll stick to those. See below: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: Rob E. wrote: > > You haven't addressed the point. Dhammas are momentary, the characteristic of anicca only displays over time. So how can that characteristic exist in a single moment? > > ----------------------- > > Again, as with anattaa, there is the fact that dhammas are impermanent, and there is the characteristic that is given the label "impermanence". These are two separate (but related) aspects of the teachings. Are you saying that the characteristic of anicca has nothing to do with the meaning of the word as something that is temporary or changeable? If that is the case, can you please tell me what on earth it does mean? Thanks in advance. > > ----------------------- > If you fall back on doctrine that merely says this is the case, then you are neither affirming or refuting the point. My point relies on the nature of anicca - impermanence - not on doctrine for or against. Can you refute my logic? If you only state that it *is* a characteristic of a dhamma, you are not explaining how such is possible. And you increase the possibility that "anicca" is seen as a "thingy" that is somehow attached or displayed somewhere in the dhamma, than the real attribute of anicca. > > ----------------------- > > There are 2 points here, (1) that impermanence cannot be a characteristic because it can only be perceived over time, and (2) that calling anicca a characteristic means that I am likely to be developing wrong view. > > I have already addressed the first of these. How did you address this? By saying that anicca is a characteristic that is just "called" anicaa and it really means something else? But you haven't ever said what it does refer to. I would actually like to know that, so please don't keep it to yourself. > The second is just your own way of seeing things, I believe ;-))! I didn't say you would fall into wrong view. That is a generalized extrapolation of what I said. But I will drop that point rather than reiterate it. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97410 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - Jaatipi dukkhaa, jaraapi dukkhaa, mara.nampi dukkh sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, Again, all you comments in #97370 were 'spot on', thanks! --- On Wed, 15/4/09, sprlrt wrote: In order to be abandoned these conditioned dhammas have to known by panna as they actually are, as anatta, arising because of conditions instead than under one's control; as anicca, falling away immediately, instead than as lasting beings and things; and as dukkha, just not worth clinging. ... S: And a very nice summary at the end! Metta, Sarah ======= #97411 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:57 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (21) sarahprocter... Hi Colette, Thanks for your response.... --- On Fri, 17/4/09, colette wrote: >Please excuse my lack of concern for whatever it is that you are speaking of here since I was only struck by the subject line: The Secluded Place? What the hell is that? What is "seclusion"? ... S: I think you've asked the best questions! The point is that we think of 'seclusion' or 'secluded places' in terms of forests, mountains, quiet temples, lack of media, beautiful beaches with sunsets and so on, whereas in the only 'true' or 'real' sense, 'seclusion' has to refer to the present mental states when there is no attachment, no aversion and no ignorance arising - particularly at moments when there is detachment, non-aversion and wisdom arising. So there can be a 'retreat' from all that is unwholesome right now. .... >We are living in a world where the progression/ momentum is towards this hypothetical openess. In the USA, here in Chicago, we are struck with cameras on every street corner documenting everything and everybody thus one must ask what is private. <...> >What is seclusion? >How can anything be secluded? >Isn't seclusion the same as EXCLUSION? ... S: Again, even whilst in a Chicago (or Hong Kong) crowd, watched by the cameeras, there can be seclusion of mind at moments of generosity, kindness and wisdom. There are no thoughts at such times about the 'important ME', about 'inclusion', 'exclusion' or 'exploitation' at such times. ... >AGAIN, >What is the stinkin difference between "Private" and "Secret"? How is it possible that they are two different concepts? <....> So, where is privacy and where is security and where is "seclusion" so that you and this hypothetical KS can enjoy a seclude place? ... S: Again, at moments of 'peace' or tranquility, when there is freedom from all that stinks by way of attachment, anger and ignorance, there is no concern about what is 'private', 'secret' or 'secure'. Our lives are 'open books' at such moments without thoughts of ourselves at all. .... >Why how nice, I hear POWER STATION performing their greatest hit. ... S: and I'm just back from POWER yoga! More stories and dreams at this moment. Such dreaming and enjoyment can be known as mere dhammas too! Thanks Colette for helping me to put this long series in perspective! Metta, Sarah ====== #97412 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:14 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Nina & all) - In a message dated 4/16/2009 11:50:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: As each citta with its cetasikas falls away, and is replaced by a new one with a new group of factors, what is the citta that is able to register this change in cittas in order to directly observe or understand anicca? Some citta must see the change from one citta to the next to see the impermanence. Is there a special way in which this takes place? =============================== I believe the usual answer is that a citta is (or can be) known directly as object as soon as it falls away - which, to me, if taken literally, would mean that a citta that no longer exists is *directly* taken as object by the immediate-successor citta after the predecessor citta has "fallen away." Inasmuch as I do not believe that we have mastered time travel, I think this is misleading if taken literally, for no mind state that is no longer present is ever directly known as object, but only by memory. If the recalling of it is immediate, however, then the memory is a "fresh memory" and quite faithful - a virtual clone. One can properly speak of that prior state as the "object of current consciousness" in the informal sense that it is what memory and thought are involved with at the moment. Whenever we recall something, either just passed or long gone, that "something" is, so to speak, the object of our attention in the sense that our memory and thinking pertain to it, but not in the sense that it still exists is being directly apprehended. It is the object of consciousness in the informal sense that "it" is what is recalled and thought about, but for sure it is not being directly known. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97413 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:22 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97271) > ----------------------- > I am delighted to have so many points of agreement. Usually my imprecise language and creative license assures disagreement, even when the concepts behind it may not be as different from yours as they seem. > ----------------------- Me too. Agreement is always better than disagreement ;-)) > ----------------------- > As for the single point of disagreement, the definition of anatta, I would agree that anatta points to the nature of dhammas as "mere impersonal elements." So we can agree on that too. However, if dhammas are mere impersonal elements, how does impersonality show up as a characteristic? Wouldn't we take for granted that they were impersonal and not even have this topic come up if we did not have a prior view of them being "personal" and creating a "self?" > ----------------------- It's true that there is wrong view of self, but this wrong view is not associated with the moments during which panna arises and directly experiences a dhamma. To my understanding of the texts, when such panna is weak, only the specific characteristic of the dhamma (e.g., as seeing consciousness, or as visible object) is apparent; the 3 characteristics that are common to all conditioned dhammas begin to become apparent at a more developed stage. This probably doesn't answer your question, but it should be obvious to you by now (if it wasn't before) that I don't claim any first hand knowledge of these matters ;-)) > ----------------------- > I am just taking the opportunity to point out again that anatta cannot be a perceivable characteristic. It is an understanding that comes from the insight that there is no self where previously we thought there was one. It only exists by comparison to an akusala citta [if I'm using the term correctly] that came before. > ----------------------- To my (intellectual) understanding, the direct experience of the 3 characteristics is not a matter of a comparison being made, but is an aspect of the direct understanding of dhammas. This is regardless of whether the names given to those characteristics are positive or negative, or suggestive of a comparison with other dhammas. Jon #97414 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:23 pm Subject: Addendum Re: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Howard (97272) > When the Buddha taught "... don't go ... by traditions, by scripture, > ..., by agreement through pondering views, or by the thought, 'This > contemplative is our teacher'," I do NOT think that what he meant was the following : > "... don't go ... by traditions (except for a tradition growing out of > my words), by scripture (unless it is the recording of my words), ..., by > agreement through pondering views (unless the views are mine or those of > tradition-authorized spokespersons), or by the thought, 'This contemplative > is our teacher' (unless the teacher is me)." > ----------------------- I hope it's clear to you from my reply to your earlier message in this thread that I was not suggesting the above interpretation of the sutta. > ----------------------- > The Buddha taught ehipassiko. He pointed the way, correctly pointing, > IMO, but the only standard of *truth* is one's own direct experience - the > effect on the peace and understanding that arise in one's own mind stream. > All else is mere conjecture and opinion. The proof of the pudding is in the > eating, not in the advertising claims. Buddhist saddha is an earned > confidence in a teaching, earned by direct experience of the truth, and not by > dependence on tradition, scripture, pondering of views, or allegiance to a > teacher. > ----------------------- I don't disagree with what you say here about saddha, but I think that's a different matter to the one my original statement was addressing. I was simply saying that for the purposes of assessing the worth of a statement made by another, especially in regard to something that goes beyond one's personal experience/level of understanding, the only standard is the body of teachings. Jon #97415 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Howard (97284) > Just to clarify, I see the factors of the Eightfold Path as mental factors > (cetasikas) that accompany the moments of enlightenment (all 8 factors), or > moments of satipatthana or mundane insight (5 or 6 of the factors). > ============================ > I think that seeing these as cetasikas is quite reasonable, including > acts of abstaining etc, but even thinking of them that way, most of them occur > in the midst of day-to-day life, not at moments of awakening. That is > particularly clear, I think, for right speech, action, and livelihood. For example, > the definition of right livelihood is the following, which involves > abandoning dishonest livelihood, a mental action that may occur one or more times > during one's life, but certainly prior to awakening, and also involves KEEPING > one's life going with right livelihood, which is a repeated activity occurring > throughout one's life: Thanks for coming in on this thread. What is the activity involved in "keeping one's life going with right livelihood", as you read that passage quoted? Jon > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the > noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with > right livelihood: This is called right livelihood." > â€" SN 45.8 #97416 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 10:53 am Subject: Re: Addendum Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/17/2009 10:24:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (97272) > When the Buddha taught "... don't go ... by traditions, by scripture, > ..., by agreement through pondering views, or by the thought, 'This > contemplative is our teacher'," I do NOT think that what he meant was the following : > "... don't go ... by traditions (except for a tradition growing out of > my words), by scripture (unless it is the recording of my words), ..., by > agreement through pondering views (unless the views are mine or those of > tradition-authorized spokespersons), or by the thought, 'This contemplative > is our teacher' (unless the teacher is me)." > ----------------------- I hope it's clear to you from my reply to your earlier message in this thread that I was not suggesting the above interpretation of the sutta. > ----------------------- > The Buddha taught ehipassiko. He pointed the way, correctly pointing, > IMO, but the only standard of *truth* is one's own direct experience - the > effect on the peace and understanding that arise in one's own mind stream. > All else is mere conjecture and opinion. The proof of the pudding is in the > eating, not in the advertising claims. Buddhist saddha is an earned > confidence in a teaching, earned by direct experience of the truth, and not by > dependence on tradition, scripture, pondering of views, or allegiance to a > teacher. > ----------------------- I don't disagree with what you say here about saddha, but I think that's a different matter to the one my original statement was addressing. I was simply saying that for the purposes of assessing the worth of a statement made by another, especially in regard to something that goes beyond one's personal experience/level of understanding, the only standard is the body of teachings. -------------------------------------------- If by this you mean that when another person makes the claim that such & such is genuine Buddhadhamma, it is only the teachings themselves that can confirm or rebut that, I agree. (For me, though I realize not for you, it is only the teachings recorded in the Sutta Pitaka that I rely on for such *ultimate* confirmation, for it is these that I consider to be the most faithful record of what our teacher actually taught. I do look further, though, even to DSG posts(!) ;-)), for elucidation and aid in understanding.) -------------------------------------------- Jon ========================= With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97417 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 4/17/2009 10:25:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (97284) > Just to clarify, I see the factors of the Eightfold Path as mental factors > (cetasikas) that accompany the moments of enlightenment (all 8 factors), or > moments of satipatthana or mundane insight (5 or 6 of the factors). > ============================ > I think that seeing these as cetasikas is quite reasonable, including > acts of abstaining etc, but even thinking of them that way, most of them occur > in the midst of day-to-day life, not at moments of awakening. That is > particularly clear, I think, for right speech, action, and livelihood. For example, > the definition of right livelihood is the following, which involves > abandoning dishonest livelihood, a mental action that may occur one or more times > during one's life, but certainly prior to awakening, and also involves KEEPING > one's life going with right livelihood, which is a repeated activity occurring > throughout one's life: Thanks for coming in on this thread. What is the activity involved in "keeping one's life going with right livelihood", as you read that passage quoted? ---------------------------------------- Repeated arisings of intention is the way I see it. When (and if) one's mind turns to the possibility of a harmful means of support, or to engaging in an improper action as part of an otherwise proper occupation, that is an instance of wrong livelihood, but when one avoids such, refrains from such, or intends to change from a harmful occupation or business practice to a proper one, that is a moment of right livelihood. The activity is mental. "Mind is the forerunner." This is how I see it. ----------------------------------------- Jon > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the > noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with > right livelihood: This is called right livelihood." > â€" SN 45.8 ======================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97418 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 11:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. upasaka_howard Hi again, Jon - In a message dated 4/17/2009 11:07:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: ---------------------------------------- Repeated arisings of intention is the way I see it. When (and if) one's mind turns to the possibility of a harmful means of support, or to engaging in an improper action as part of an otherwise proper occupation, that is an instance of wrong livelihood, but when one avoids such, refrains from such, or intends to change from a harmful occupation or business practice to a proper one, that is a moment of right livelihood. The activity is mental. "Mind is the forerunner." This is how I see it. ----------------------------------------- =============================== I should add as wrong livelihood the willingness to continue in an improper occupation or an improper business activity. With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97419 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:42 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. nilovg Dear Rob Ep, I like your keen questions. Op 17-apr-2009, om 5:48 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > As each citta with its cetasikas falls away, and is replaced by a > new one with a new group of factors, what is the citta that is able > to register this change in cittas in order to directly observe or > understand anicca? Some citta must see the change from one citta to > the next to see the impermanence. ------- N: A citta with wisdom arising shortly afterwards can penetrate the characteristic of impermanence of a previous citta or cetasika. -------- > R: Is there a special way in which this takes place? ----- N: When understanding has been developed and reached the first stage of principal insight it realizes this. "We" do not try or worry about it, it is the function of pa~n~naa. But in the beginning the difference between nama and rupa has to be directly known, which is the first stage of tender insight. Nama has to be seen as nama, rupa as rupa. Then follow two more stages of tender insight before the arising and falling away of a nama or a rupa is realized, only one at a time. This is different from thinking about impermanence. ------- Nina. #97420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:51 pm Subject: Re: Q.[dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 13. nilovg Op 17-apr-2009, om 5:53 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > Some interesting points along the way, such as the imbuing of citta > [?] with the happiness of jhana by making that happiness the object. ------- N: But do not forget, when he experiences this happiness, piiti, with non-confusion, with pa~n~naa, he sees it is liable to destruction. Pa~n~naa leads to detachment. In daily life we find pitti, rapture, very important. But we can learn that it is only a conditioned naama, not so important. -------- > R: Also, the activity of seeing the jhana factors from without as > temporary and thus treating the jhana as an object of insight. ------- N: Yes, that also leads to detachment, even from jhaana. Even when one can reach the highest stage of aruupa jhaana, one still has to develop insight starting from the very beginning in order to reach nibbaana. Just knowing seeing as a nama, visible object as a rupa, when they appear in daily life. There is no other way. Nina. #97421 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 16-apr-2009, om 21:39 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > What's the difference between conascence-condition and mutuality- > condition? ------- N: I quote from my Conditions: Some of the phenomena which are related by conascence-condition are also related by mutuality-condition (aññamañña-paccaya). They condition one another reciprocally while they arise simultaneously. The realities that condition one another mutually, can, each of them, be in turn conditioning dhamma (paccaya) and conditioned dhamma (paccayupanna dhamma). We read in the “Visuddhimagga” (XVII, 78): “A state that assists by means of mutual arousing and consolidating is a mutuality-condition, as three sticks of a tripod give each other consolidating support.” Three sticks which are leaning against each other at the upper ends mutually support one another. Evenso the realities to which mutuality- condition pertains condition one another reciprocally. There are three classes of phenomena to which this condition pertains. As to the first class, the four nåma-kkhandhas which condition one another by way of conascence, also condition one another by way of mutuality. They support and consolidate one another. As to the second class, the four Great Elements which are related to one another by conascence-condition are also related to one another by way of mutuality-condition. Solidity, cohesion, temperature and motion which arise together condition one another reciprocally and give each other mutual support. As to the third class, the paìisandhi-citta with the accompanying cetasikas and the heart-base arising simultaneously condition one another by way of mutuality. As we have seen, at the moment of rebirth kamma produces, apart from the group of rúpas with the heart- base, two other groups, namely the group with the body-base and the group with sex. There is no relation of mutuality between the latter two groups and the paìisandhi-citta. The other classes of phenomena which are related by conascence are not related by mutuality. The rúpa produced by citta is conditioned by that citta by way of conascence, but there is no relation of mutuality. That rúpa does not, in its turn, condition citta, it does not consolidate citta by way of mutuality-condition. The four Great Elements are conascent-condition for the derived rúpas, but there is no relation of mutuality; the derived rúpas do not consolidate the four Great Elements by way of mutuality-condition. Visible object or sound, which are derived rúpas, cannot arise without the four Great Elements, but the four Great Elements are not dependant on these rúpas. Thus we see that phenomena which are related by mutuality also are related by conascence, but that not all phenomena which are related by conascence are also related by mutuality. ******* Nina. #97422 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:08 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. nilovg Dear Howard and Rob Ep, Howard, you are right that it has just fallen away. I would like to add a few things. Op 17-apr-2009, om 15:14 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I believe the usual answer is that a citta is (or can be) known > directly as object as soon as it falls away - which, to me, if > taken literally, > would mean that a citta that no longer exists is *directly* taken > as object > by the immediate-successor citta after the predecessor citta has > "fallen > away." -------- N: That would not be the immediate successor, it is in a new process, and there are bhavangacittas in between. ------- > H: Inasmuch as I do not believe that we have mastered time travel, I > think this is misleading if taken literally, for no mind state that > is no > longer present is ever directly known as object, but only by memory. ------ N: Instead of memory, I think that pa~n~naa should be emphasized here. But I do not deny the role of memory, since it accompanies each citta and thus connects the past to the present. -------- > H: If the > recalling of it is immediate, however, then the memory is a "fresh > memory" and > quite faithful - a virtual clone. One can properly speak of that prior > state as the "object of current consciousness" in the informal > sense that it > is what memory and thought are involved with at the moment. > Whenever we > recall something, either just passed or long gone, that "something" > is, so to > speak, the object of our attention in the sense that our memory and > thinking > pertain to it, but not in the sense that it still exists is being > directly > apprehended. It is the object of consciousness in the informal > sense that > "it" is what is recalled and thought about, but for sure it is not > being > directly known. ------- N: Still, pa~n~naa knows directly, in this sense that it does not think about a concept of citta, a 'story' of cittta. ------ Nina. #97423 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:33 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E., Regarding: R: "Well, I think that for the most part, your discussion here makes my point for me, and in fact leads me to believe that I am more or less in line with the Visuddhimagga, which makes me quite glad." Scott: :-/ This is likely a function of strength of view, not of being 'in line' with Visuddhimagga, more's the pity. Don't be too glad. I think it is important that you consider all the textual quotes I've given, Robert. Buddhaghosa also wrote the commentary to the Vibha.nga, Sammohavinodanii, and there he made the very clear point regarding modes of alteration: "For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." Scott: I don't see any internal inconsistency in Buddhaghosa's commentary between Visuddhimagga and Sammohavinodanii. R: "What I believe is being said here, and in one spot in your quote of the Vism said it explicitly, is that anatta is an object of *contemplation,* and as you point out, *not accessible to perception,* which is what I've been saying all along. If something is a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding, and is not a perceptible characteristic, like, as the Vism says in your quote, 'blue or red,' that is quite a different type of characteristic than one which is structurally inherent in the dhamma itself. And this may be a perfectly valid point, but it is as I have been trying to point out, a characteristic *about the dhamma or the way that it functions,* not something that is inherently *a part of it.* If this is understood, then the discussion could be resolved by just agreeing with me, instead of saying I was wrong." Scott: Firstly, not a function of perception refers, as I understand it, to sa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa, like sa~n~naa, is a mental factor with function and characteristic but with a different function and characteristic than sa~n~naa. The point is that pa~n~naa, not sa~n~naa, is capable of experiencing the characterstic of anatta. And not some nebulous thought about anatta - an actual characteristic of an actual dhamma. R: "The only part of this in which I seem to be at odds with the Vism is on whether anatta is a positive or negative characteristic. I am not saying it is not a real fact about a dhamma that it has the characteristic of "no-self," which is the direct translation of anatta. But take a look at the translation and you will see that it starts with *no.* What does *no* mean? It means *not* or a *negation* of that which follows. So *no-self* does indeed mean 'no self' and is indeed a characteristic of negation. So what does it mean to say that a characteristic which is 100% totally about the negation of the object of the characteristic, that is, atta, or self, is a positive characteristic, something that is actual in other words? It is saying that the *lack of self* is an actuality about the dhamma. This is both true, and at the same time a nonsense statement. I think that it is a conventional statement, in the sense that it is not structurally accurate. You can't have a *no-something* as a *something.* If you look at this logically you will have to agree, but perhaps you will refrain from doing so." Scott: Conceptual designates differ from ultimate realities. In the above you simply remain at a conceptual level. I consider you to continue to be in error regarding anatta as a characteristic. I think, in part, your error resides in not considering that the characteristics of a dhamma all inhere in that dhamma simultaneously. As Buddhaghosa notes, it is in the mode of alteration of a given dhamma that the characteristics are penetrated. As for the characteristic of anatta of any given dhamma, according to Buddhaghosa (emphasis mine): "The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them *IS* the characteristic of no-self." Anicca, dukkha, and anatta are characteristics of dhammaa because of the nature of a given dhamma, and the nature of dhammaa in general. When it is realised (not by intellection or rationale) that a dhamma is not subject to control because it arises and falls away due only to conditions and the fixed order of things, this is penetrating the positive characteristic anatta. Anatta is a positive characteristic given to experience because the dhamma really does arise and really does fall away and really does so according to conditions and really cannot be controlled by any 'one' since there is no controller. Another aspect of this I think you aren't quite appreciating is that, although the Abhidhamma exegesis parses out individual dhammaa for descriptive purposes, this is artificial. In actuality many dhammaa arise conascently, conditioned by other dhammaa by a multitude of specific conditions. All three characteristics - anicca, dukkha, and anatta - are inherent in each dhamma arising 'in a complex', as it were. It is true that there are certain deliverances based on which particular characteristic is penetrated, but all characteristics inhere in each dhamma. The fact that dhammaa are ultimate realities which have actual existence, and are not simply some nebulous conceptual construct created out of a misunderstanding of 'emptiness', is why each of the tilakkhakkha.na are positive not amorphous, or negative characteristics; they are not conceptual. R: "I have invited everyone who has challenged me in this particular distinction to explain to me in a bit of detail how it is possible for a negation of a characteristic [of self-hood] can be a positive characteristic, but no one has been able or willing to do so - one or the other. Instead I get quotes in which it is merely stated without explanation that anatta is an inherent characteristic of a dhamma. This hardly shows that it is so, it just asserts it and invokes an authority behind the assertion. But there is no actual explanation of how this takes place. I'd be happy to hear and accept it, if such a description existed!" Scott: Please reconsider the Sammohavinodanii quote. You are stuck in a conceptual realm about 'selfhood' when the characteristic in question is occuring all the time. R: "When the detailed explanation comes down to the following: that panna, without having to directly perceive it, is able to understand directly and with certain knowledge, that every dhamma has the characteristic of unreality or no-self, I can accept that without reservation. That is a wise and true understanding, so we have no conflict there. From the beginning my only point has been that this is an understanding, an object of wisdom, and not one that pertains to the structural reality of the appearance/occurence of the dhamma." Scott: Pa~n~naa, as with citta and each other mental factor, only have ultimate realities as objects. Pa~n~naa *directly* penetrates this characteristic. It is incorrect to add 'without having to directly perceive it.' You seem to suggest that pa~n~naa is really only some fancy form of thinking about things. R: "It is a hair-splitting point, but an important one, because the three marks do *not exist.* They are negations that are given to panna as objects of wisdom, not physical or perceptual realities. And apparently, by my reading of your well-selected quotes and comments, the Vism agrees with me." Scott: This is not my reading of the exact same quotes. Based on the mode of dhammaa, anatta is a characteristic that is directly to be experienced. Sincerely, Scott. #97424 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:44 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I believe the usual answer is that a citta is (or can be) known > directly as object as soon as it falls away - which, to me, if taken literally, > would mean that a citta that no longer exists is *directly* taken as object > by the immediate-successor citta after the predecessor citta has "fallen > away." Inasmuch as I do not believe that we have mastered time travel, I > think this is misleading if taken literally, for no mind state that is no > longer present is ever directly known as object, but only by memory. If the > recalling of it is immediate, however, then the memory is a "fresh memory" and > quite faithful - a virtual clone. One can properly speak of that prior > state as the "object of current consciousness" in the informal sense that it > is what memory and thought are involved with at the moment. Whenever we > recall something, either just passed or long gone, that "something" is, so to > speak, the object of our attention in the sense that our memory and thinking > pertain to it, but not in the sense that it still exists is being directly > apprehended. It is the object of consciousness in the informal sense that > "it" is what is recalled and thought about, but for sure it is not being > directly known. > > With metta, > Howard If this is the case, then anicca is never directly known, even by panna, which would be an interesting scenario. Instead, panna would understand that the prior citta has fallen away and see that it has fallen away without directly knowing it before it fell away; thus able to understand contemplatively that the citta [and all cittas/all dhammas] by extrapolation are temporary. We were recently discussing how anatta is known, and it seems that the Vism states that panna "contemplates" the dhamma's characteristic of 'not-self' in order to realize it. It seems that the realizations of panna are not based on direct perception, but on insight. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97425 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 8:56 pm Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > To my (intellectual) understanding, the direct experience of the 3 characteristics is not a matter of a comparison being made, but is an aspect of the direct understanding of dhammas. This is regardless of whether the names given to those characteristics are positive or negative, or suggestive of a comparison with other dhammas. I think that makes my point, and also makes sense to me, that there is a big difference between "direct understanding" and "direct perception." "Direct understanding" seems to point to an infallible insight into the nature of that which is perceived and contemplated [on the part of panna,] whereas "direct perception" would have to rely on something about the apparency of the object, as you say - either its unique characteristic as "eye-sense" or whatever its specialty is. I think my confusion is that I assumed that panna "directly perceived" the characteristic in order to "directly know it" and I complained that this was impossible. Now I see that the Vism - and you in fact also - clarify that panna "directly knows" the characteristics of the dhamma through "contemplation" which I assume is a moment of bhavana? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97426 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 9:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: What is the activity involved in "keeping one's life going with right livelihood", as you read that passage quoted? > > Jon > > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the > > noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with > > right livelihood: This is called right livelihood." > > â€" SN 45.8 Jumping in: Wouldn't that mean feeding, clothing and sheltering yourself by Dhamma-approved vocations? I know you're not supposed to rob, cheat or steal, so those livelihoods are probably out. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97427 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 7:05 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/17/2009 4:44:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I believe the usual answer is that a citta is (or can be) known > directly as object as soon as it falls away - which, to me, if taken literally, > would mean that a citta that no longer exists is *directly* taken as object > by the immediate-successor citta after the predecessor citta has "fallen > away." Inasmuch as I do not believe that we have mastered time travel, I > think this is misleading if taken literally, for no mind state that is no > longer present is ever directly known as object, but only by memory. If the > recalling of it is immediate, however, then the memory is a "fresh memory" and > quite faithful - a virtual clone. One can properly speak of that prior > state as the "object of current consciousness" in the informal sense that it > is what memory and thought are involved with at the moment. Whenever we > recall something, either just passed or long gone, that "something" is, so to > speak, the object of our attention in the sense that our memory and thinking > pertain to it, but not in the sense that it still exists is being directly > apprehended. It is the object of consciousness in the informal sense that > "it" is what is recalled and thought about, but for sure it is not being > directly known. > > With metta, > Howard If this is the case, then anicca is never directly known, even by panna, which would be an interesting scenario. Instead, panna would understand that the prior citta has fallen away and see that it has fallen away without directly knowing it before it fell away; thus able to understand contemplatively that the citta [and all cittas/all dhammas] by extrapolation are temporary. ------------------------------------------ Well, I think it is still wisdom that is involved with a LIBERATING grasp of impermanence, and not just ordinary deduction. Change is constant and continuous, in my opinion, not a property of momentary "things" whose separate existence is only conventional, but the nature of reality. And wisdom , as I view it, is a kind of time-transcendent "super knowing" [I wonder if there isn't a German noun phrase 'uber gedanken' or something like that which would capture it] that can go beyond the present moment, work upon our observation of change/transitioning - the experiential flow, and penetrate impermanence in a special, non-conceptual way, even if the term 'direct knowing' doesn't quite capture it. ---------------------------------------- We were recently discussing how anatta is known, and it seems that the Vism states that panna "contemplates" the dhamma's characteristic of 'not-self' in order to realize it. It seems that the realizations of panna are not based on direct perception, but on insight. -------------------------------------------- Realization of "not-self" is certainly a matter of insight. But, as I view it, it is the insight into the seamlessness of reality, a seamlessness that denies the very self-existence of separate "ultimate realities" to which anatta could apply as a property! --------------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ============================ With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97428 From: "colette" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:04 pm Subject: Re: "Call Me By My Real Names" by Thich Nhat Hanh ksheri3 Hi Scott, Monty Python's skit on "ABUSE" yes, I recalled it immediately after you raised the issue. GOOD SHOW OF YOU OLE BOY. I'll drink to that, Slante! now lets get to this muddy waters schtick. "can't be used for anything", nothin' huh? Yea maybe I did get that schtick about farming seeds a little out of whack but I was doing it "Impromptu"/Live, without a net, etc. I can honestly say that when I was writing that poem in the mid-80s in Wheaton and I reached the point where I write "and you'll still end up drinking that wine" I can honestly say that I had already conceptualized and visualized what it is that society here in Chicago has been doing to me since my 1978 automobile accident that began my NEAR DEATH EXPERIENCES, and so I DELIBERATELY and INTENTIONALLY wrote that last sentence applying the concept of being forced to drink wine in the context of Socrates so as to give those <....> the pat on the back they so long for receiving every second they can. ;) In the last few minutes I have: Klesas, klesas are like poisons eventhough there are more klesas than poisons. The poiint is that the addictive nature of the klesa is what bijas are all about, the "conditioned seed" "that was planted in my brain, still remains" Simon & Garfunkle Actually I like the Dzogchen view of Klesas where they are nothing more than OBSCURATIONS. Oops, gots ta go. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear colette, > > Postures can't be used for anything. > > It looks so authoritative, that statement, sitting up there like that. Funny. I'm glad to hear from you. > > colette: "How Wrong View of you. Postures most certainly can be used for something." > > Scott: What was that Monty Python sketch? 'This is abuse, arguments are down the hall.' But yeah, totally Wrong View, eh? <...> #97429 From: "colette" Date: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:58 pm Subject: Re: "Call Me By My Real Names" by Thich Nhat Hanh ksheri3 Hi Scott, Klesas, here we are: > c: "Aren't you trying to reach for the word KLESAS here in terms of KHANDHAS?" > > Scott: I don't think so, but maybe you can say more about how kilesa might fit here as well. colette: give me some room here since I'm working Tantra along with Dzogchen, which are both parts of Vajrayana. I found this definition very interesting and applicable as I breezed through the google aspect of the computer. Five Klesas: Bhakti Yoga Dictionary on Avidya Avidya - ignorance, spiritual ignorance, illusion. Ignorance is of four kinds: to mistake that which is impermanent to be permanent, that which is full of misery to be blissful, that which is impure to be pure, and that which is not the self to be the self. Avidya is one of the five types of klesa, or miseries, destroyed by bhakti. (See also: Avidya, Bhakti, Bhakti Yoga, Bhakti Dictionary, Body Mind and Soul) colette: addiction is like an adherence isn't it? Ya know that Puritans and Creations both tend to adhere or cleve to the two dimensional world spoken of by THE BEATTLES (see Paperback Writer) The "Puritan" is one of the most defiled things that could exist -- Monty Python you say: "Burn her, she's a witch" I can picture that scene in my mind's eye, but smoking is bad for your health so what are we ever gonna do with Salem and the Puritans -- so don't rely too heavily on anything good ever arising from a "puritan" point of view. <...> ------------------- I was more thinking of the momentary, ephemeral arising and falling away of the ultimate realities taken for self (which are void of self, speaking of emptiness). > colette: are you serious? Do you actually believe that I'm not going to associate what you just said about "ultimate realities" to what Alex (a Kagyu friend) told me of a "Superfactual" word substituted for the concept "ULTIMATE REALITY"? I don't see how any person could actually speak of Ultimate Realities if they haven't had a NEAR DEATH EXPEREINCE as profound as my first one in 1978. Amazingly, though, there are so many deviant esoteric theologies around the world, that speak very specifically of the actualities that I experienced that first time, AND IT BUGS THE HELL OUT OF ME TO FIND OUT HOW THEY DO IT OR HOW THEY DID IT. Which naturarally leads us to the Vijnanavada School of Buddhism, et al. ---------------------------- > > c: "Scott, oooooooooh, diabetes, such an unfortunate malidy to be delt with but that is the world in which we pollute, in which we destroy, and laugh at as if nothing would hurt us since we are Stratos dwellers and don't have to suffer like those trogledikes doing our labor in the caves, etc. (you'd have to have seen and understood that particular version of Gene Rodenberry's imagination called Star Trek since it all relates to the Parasite-Host relationship). When my mom died I found out that she had diabetes but she was an alcoholic which also contributed to her demise.' > > Scott: I do recall that Star Trek episode. Good call on the 'parasite-host' angle. I like that. > colette: THANK YOU, most people cannot stand my applications of the Parasite/Host relationship or Parasite-Host Relationship because I always try to vanquish that damned CASTE SYSTEM <....> --------------------------------- > c: You speak as if the Easter Bunny is dead in your house simply because your children or members of the house, have diabetes and cannot process sugar? So, the New York Times was correct, and Elton John was telling the truth: 'God Is DEAD'." > > Scott: Well, it did feel like I SHOT THE EASTER BUNNY (but I did not shoot the deputy). And what's this you say, God is DEAD !!?? colette: Naw, Elton John made a big stink about it back in the 70s and I'm just relaying the message since the NYTimes certainly must have printed the headline GOD IS DEAD otherwise a person that only speaks the truth, Elton John, wouldn't have made so much money from the speaking the truth, would he have? > > c: "Snow, you say! One of my main standards, here in Chicago, during the months of March and April is that 'It always snows on Easter or soon after, so don't get your hopes up.' You place yourself, here in the USA, since it didn't snow in that many places this year." > > Scott: I'm up in Alberta, actually (Edmonton). I've been snowed on in May, June, and August in my day. Go figure... > colette: <...> Edmonton, are they the Oilers? Do you guys have a warm spot for former vice president and scholar extradinare with his Global Warming focus, Albert Gore? I don't suppose you could sing THE LUMBER JACK SONG for us? lol Do you guys ever see much of Snydely Whiplash or Dudly Do-Right's horse Nel? good to hear from you too. toodles, colette > c: "good to hear from you both, Sarah and Scott." > > Scott: Same, colette. Always good to touch base. #97430 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:17 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Scott. Thanks for getting into this. I appreciate it. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Robert E., > > Regarding: > > R: "Well, I think that for the most part, your discussion here makes my point for me, and in fact leads me to believe that I am more or less in line with the Visuddhimagga, which makes me quite glad." > > Scott: :-/ This is likely a function of strength of view, perhaps just a conflict of "views," unless you are saying that you don't have one. > not of being 'in line' with Visuddhimagga, more's the pity. No need for sadness, we all develop according to arising conditions. > Don't be too glad. Sorry, but I will continue to be happy that the Vism acknowledges that anatta is known by contemplation, not by perception. That is an important key to my mind, and I thank you for the quote. > > I think it is important that you consider all the textual quotes I've given, Robert. Buddhaghosa also wrote the commentary to the Vibha.nga, Sammohavinodanii, and there he made the very clear point regarding modes of alteration: > > "For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." > > Scott: I don't see any internal inconsistency in Buddhaghosa's commentary between Visuddhimagga and Sammohavinodanii. I don't see any inconsistency at the moment either. I have not criticized Buddhaghosa, have I? "That which consists of..." "is all..." does not say how the characteristics are realized by panna, does it? It states the obvious facts about all dhammas, with which I have always agreed. "...is all" does not mean that they are positive characteristics, like a mole on one's cheek, it means that this is the truth about them, that is all. I would be very happy for you to explain to me what "the mode of alteration" means. Does "alteration" take place in the same moment, or between one moment and another? > R: "What I believe is being said here, and in one spot in your quote of the Vism said it explicitly, is that anatta is an object of *contemplation,* and as you point out, *not accessible to perception,* which is what I've been saying all along. If something is a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding, and is not a perceptible characteristic, like, as the Vism says in your quote, 'blue or red,' that is quite a different type of characteristic than one which is structurally inherent in the dhamma itself. And this may be a perfectly valid point, but it is as I have been trying to point out, a characteristic *about the dhamma or the way that it functions,* not something that is inherently *a part of it.* If this is understood, then the discussion could be resolved by just agreeing with me, instead of saying I was wrong." > > Scott: Firstly, not a function of perception refers, as I understand it, to sa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa, like sa~n~naa, is a mental factor with function and characteristic but with a different function and characteristic than sa~n~naa. The point is that pa~n~naa, not sa~n~naa, is capable of experiencing the characterstic of anatta. Well, the passage doesn't make that distinction. It said basically that it is not the nature of anatta to be perceived, but it is known by contemplation, which I take to be vipassana-bhavana. Panna knows anatta directly, not sanna, and it knows it through contemplation. And not some nebulous thought about anatta - an actual characteristic of an actual dhamma. I don't consider it a nebulous thought so please don't put words in my mouth. If we are talking about panna I consider it a high realization, not nebulous at all. > R: "The only part of this in which I seem to be at odds with the Vism is on whether anatta is a positive or negative characteristic. I am not saying it is not a real fact about a dhamma that it has the characteristic of "no-self," which is the direct translation of anatta. But take a look at the translation and you will see that it starts with *no.* What does *no* mean? It means *not* or a *negation* of that which follows. So *no-self* does indeed mean 'no self' and is indeed a characteristic of negation. So what does it mean to say that a characteristic which is 100% totally about the negation of the object of the characteristic, that is, atta, or self, is a positive characteristic, something that is actual in other words? It is saying that the *lack of self* is an actuality about the dhamma. This is both true, and at the same time a nonsense statement. I think that it is a conventional statement, in the sense that it is not structurally accurate. You can't have a *no-something* as a *something.* If you look at this logically you will have to agree, but perhaps you will refrain from doing so." > > Scott: Conceptual designates differ from ultimate realities. In the above you simply remain at a conceptual level. You would need to demonstrate that through some discussion of what the nature of anatta and panna are, not just make an assertion. You can say anything you like, but I think my discussion is sound, and you can choose to respond to it or not. But dismissing it in general is just a lazy assertion. > I consider you to continue to be in error regarding anatta as a characteristic. I think, in part, your error resides in not considering that the characteristics of a dhamma all inhere in that dhamma simultaneously. As Buddhaghosa notes, it is in the mode of alteration of a given dhamma that the characteristics are penetrated. Well, let's see - I'm not sure what "the mode of alteration" is technically, but if I *do* understand what it means, it means that the characteristics are revealed as they are undergoing their alterations from moment to moment, which would mean that they are contemplated by panna in the midst of undergoing changes, since it is during the process of change that impermanance, suffering and uncontrollability are revealed. If that is the case, it is one of the assertions I have been making. Maybe Buddhaghosa and I are in agreement as well. If you think that is wrong, then please do more than say so - correct the record and tell me how it actually works. What does it mean for a dhamma to be understood during its "mode of alteration?" It's not enough to say "no" to what I say - you have to be able to give a plausible alternative understanding. > As for the characteristic of anatta of any given dhamma, according to Buddhaghosa (emphasis mine): > > "The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them *IS* the characteristic of no-self." Fine, that is a good clarification. Doesn't contradict anything I have said. Uncontrollability as no-self is demonstrated when one attempts to control something. It doesn't *live* in the dhamma either. > Anicca, dukkha, and anatta are characteristics of dhammaa because of the nature of a given dhamma, and the nature of dhammaa in general. When it is realised (not by intellection or rationale) that a dhamma is not subject to control because it arises and falls away due only to conditions and the fixed order of things, this is penetrating the positive characteristic anatta. I am in agreement with this. Noticing that the nature of dhammas is to rise and fall away only due to conditions and thus be both uncontrollable and leading to suffering if one clings to controlling them, are all demonstrated when the dhamma is undergoing change, which I assume is "the mode of alteration." That takes place over the course of a number of cittas, not accessible in one moment. Thus the three marks are realized within time. Anatta is a positive characteristic given to experience because the dhamma really does arise and really does fall away and really does so according to conditions and really cannot be controlled by any 'one' since there is no controller. These are things that are observed or realized by experiencing the dhamma, for sure. But they are of the dhamma, not in the dhamma. Dhammas don't come with "uncontrollability" built in. They just can't be controlled by us. They *are* controlled by conditions however. So they are only 'no-self' to us. What they are "in and of themselves' is superfluous. > Another aspect of this I think you aren't quite appreciating is that, although the Abhidhamma exegesis parses out individual dhammaa for descriptive purposes, this is artificial. In actuality many dhammaa arise conascently, conditioned by other dhammaa by a multitude of specific conditions. Good point. I have no problem with the matrix of codependently arising conditionality. It is infinitely complex and cannot be comprehended by ordinary consciousnss, for sure. > All three characteristics - anicca, dukkha, and anatta - are inherent in each dhamma arising 'in a complex', as it were. Cool! > It is true that there are certain deliverances based on which particular characteristic is penetrated, but all characteristics inhere in each dhamma. The fact that dhammaa are ultimate realities which have actual existence, and are not simply some nebulous conceptual construct created out of a misunderstanding of 'emptiness', is why each of the tilakkhakkha.na are positive not amorphous, or negative characteristics; they are not conceptual. They are also not physical characteristics; they are about how dhammas function and the nature of their behavior. They behave in accordance with conditions, and that can be observed. Thus they are uncontrollable and are 'not-self,' unsatisfying and changable, and all at the same time. I don't see the problem. The point of seeing this is to let go of clinging to dhammas. Perhaps we will. > R: "I have invited everyone who has challenged me in this particular distinction to explain to me in a bit of detail how it is possible for a negation of a characteristic [of self-hood] can be a positive characteristic, but no one has been able or willing to do so - one or the other. Instead I get quotes in which it is merely stated without explanation that anatta is an inherent characteristic of a dhamma. This hardly shows that it is so, it just asserts it and invokes an authority behind the assertion. But there is no actual explanation of how this takes place. I'd be happy to hear and accept it, if such a description existed!" > > Scott: Please reconsider the Sammohavinodanii quote. You are stuck in a conceptual realm about 'selfhood' when the characteristic in question is occuring all the time. I agree it's occurring all the the time. So what? It doesn't occur in a single isolated moment. As you said, that is artificial. Since a single moment never arises without being followed by another one, we can say that the three characteristics are occurring all the time as dhammas change over time. > R: "When the detailed explanation comes down to the following: that panna, without having to directly perceive it, is able to understand directly and with certain knowledge, that every dhamma has the characteristic of unreality or no-self, I can accept that without reservation. That is a wise and true understanding, so we have no conflict there. From the beginning my only point has been that this is an understanding, an object of wisdom, and not one that pertains to the structural reality of the appearance/occurence of the dhamma." > > Scott: Pa~n~naa, as with citta and each other mental factor, only have ultimate realities as objects. Pa~n~naa *directly* penetrates this characteristic. How does it do that? What are the steps? > It is incorrect to add 'without having to directly perceive it.' You seem to suggest that pa~n~naa is really only some fancy form of thinking about things. Nope. It's direct realization, I agree. But the Vism says that it is realized by "contemplation," which I take to be bhavana, and that is different than direct perception in the dhamma itself. It is an observation and understanding of the dhamma's behavior over time and how citta clings to nama-rupa, if I am putting that correctly. > R: "It is a hair-splitting point, but an important one, because the three marks do *not exist.* They are negations that are given to panna as objects of wisdom, not physical or perceptual realities. And apparently, by my reading of your well-selected quotes and comments, the Vism agrees with me." > > Scott: This is not my reading of the exact same quotes. Based on the mode of dhammaa, anatta is a characteristic that is directly to be experienced. How is it experienced? Can you describe the process? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97431 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:23 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ------------------------------------------ > Well, I think it is still wisdom that is involved with a LIBERATING > grasp of impermanence, and not just ordinary deduction. Change is constant > and continuous, in my opinion, not a property of momentary "things" whose > separate existence is only conventional, but the nature of reality. And wisdom > , as I view it, is a kind of time-transcendent "super knowing" [I wonder > if there isn't a German noun phrase 'uber gedanken' or something like that > which would capture it] that can go beyond the present moment, work upon > our observation of change/transitioning - the experiential flow, and > penetrate impermanence in a special, non-conceptual way, even if the term 'direct > knowing' doesn't quite capture it. I think it would have to be a combination of observing phenomena over time and then mindfully registering the properties that they exhibit. Such a process is not totally inaccessible, even to us. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - #97432 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya szmicio dear Nina so when mahabhuta ruupas arise, they are always conditioned by way of sahajata and annamanna paccaya, because each ruupa is a condition to another 3 ruupas? And when mahabhuta ruupas condition derived ruupas then it's only sahajata-paccaya? best wishes Lukas #97433 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:29 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > I like your keen questions. Thanks, Nina! I appreciate the conversation! > Op 17-apr-2009, om 5:48 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > As each citta with its cetasikas falls away, and is replaced by a > > new one with a new group of factors, what is the citta that is able > > to register this change in cittas in order to directly observe or > > understand anicca? Some citta must see the change from one citta to > > the next to see the impermanence. > ------- > N: A citta with wisdom arising shortly afterwards can penetrate the > characteristic of impermanence of a previous citta or cetasika. > -------- > > R: Is there a special way in which this takes place? > ----- > N: When understanding has been developed and reached the first stage > of principal insight it realizes this. "We" do not try or worry about > it, it is the function of pa~n~naa. But in the beginning the > difference between nama and rupa has to be directly known, which is > the first stage of tender insight. Nama has to be seen as nama, rupa > as rupa. Then follow two more stages of tender insight before the > arising and falling away of a nama or a rupa is realized, only one at > a time. This is different from thinking about impermanence. This is a very helpful description. Thanks for talking about this. It seems very clear. Thanks, Robert E. = = = = = = #97434 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:39 am Subject: Re: Q.[dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 13. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > Op 17-apr-2009, om 5:53 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > > Some interesting points along the way, such as the imbuing of citta > > [?] with the happiness of jhana by making that happiness the object. > ------- > N: But do not forget, when he experiences this happiness, piiti, with > non-confusion, with pa~n~naa, he sees it is liable to destruction. > Pa~n~naa leads to detachment. > In daily life we find pitti, rapture, very important. But we can > learn that it is only a conditioned naama, not so important. > -------- > > R: Also, the activity of seeing the jhana factors from without as > > temporary and thus treating the jhana as an object of insight. > ------- > N: Yes, that also leads to detachment, even from jhaana. Even when > one can reach the highest stage of aruupa jhaana, one still has to > develop insight starting from the very beginning in order to reach > nibbaana. Just knowing seeing as a nama, visible object as a rupa, > when they appear in daily life. There is no other way. > Nina. Thanks for making this point. This whole discussion is very interesting. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97435 From: "szmicio" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 6:51 am Subject: Conditions szmicio Dear Nina It's very beneficial to read your Conditions. It starts to remind me again about realities of daily life. Chapter 7: "As to strong dependence or decisive support-condition of object, the object is the paccaya, condition, for the citta which experiences it, the paccayupanna dhamma, conditioned dhamma, and that object conditions the citta by way of strong dependence. We see in the "Patthana" (Faultless Triplet, VII, Investigation Chapter, Strong Dependence, §423), that the objects which are the conditioning factors are the same as in the case of object predominance-condition, arammanadhipati paccaya [71], thus, they have to be desirable objects. The cittas which are conditioned by way of decisive support of object are also the same types as in the case of object predominance-condition. Thus, the realities involved in these two kinds of conditions are the same, but there is a difference in the conditioning force of object predominance-condition and of decisive support-condition of object. In the case of object predominance-condition the desirable object is highly esteemed by the citta and cetasikas concerned so that they give preponderance to it. In the case of decisive support-condition of object the desirable object is a powerful inducement, a cogent reason, for the arising of the citta and cetasikas concerned, which are strongly dependent on that object. Desirable objects which are object predominance-condition can also, at the same time, be decisive support-condition of object, a powerful inducement for the arising of the cittas concerned. Phenomena can be conditioned by several types of conditions at the same time. " Can you help me to grasp the difference between these two conditions? My best wishes Lukas #97436 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 8:03 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sprlrt Hi, Most people would agree with the 1st NT, which basically lists different situations where suffering is experienced. The 2nd NT, establishing the cause of suffering in tanha/lobha, craving/attachment, is not as widely accepted as the 1st is, it's not that common to blame one's own clinging for one's own suffering, usually it's because of bad health, bad weather, bad people, bad god(s), bad luck, bad food, bad place, bad vibes, etc. In the long enumeration of lobha's attributes, Dhs (nikkhepakandam, tikam, (akusala) hetugocchakam), includes dukkhamuulam and dukkhanidaana.m, root and source of suffering, as well as several aspects of tanha, including craving for what is visible, udible, tastable, smellable, touchable and thinkable (rupa, sadda, gandha, rasa, photabba, dhamma tanha), all the six classes of objects that citta experience through the corresponding 6 doors. A simile for a (pleasant) object being experienced by lobha is given by the Atthasalini as a piece of meat contacting an hot pan. It sticks... And where does tanha arises, when there are conditions for its arising, and where does it fall away, once arisen? To this question the Vibh. basically answers that where there is a pleasant, desiderable thing, piya-saataruupa.m (which includes all the six classes of objects), there is where tanha arise & then falls (when there are conditions for this to happen). Lobha experiences pleasant objects, ittharammana, and through the five sense doors it can only arise in the (akusala) javana series of cittas which follows a pancavinnana vipaka citta, seeing for instance, which has to be kusala, the result of past kusala kamma. In the 2nd NT then the vipaka vatta/round is kusala, unlike in the 1st where is akusala, while kilesa/kamma rounds remain the same, akusala. Alberto #97437 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:00 am Subject: What to do when Tempted? bhikkhu.sama... Friends: How to Cool the Slavery of Desire and Lust? At Savatthi, the Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, when the perception of a human skeleton or a worm-infested, bleeding or pus festering corpse, or a livid bluish black & rotting corpse, or a cut up, gnawed and hacked corpse, or a bloated, inflated & swollen corpse, is developed and cultivated, then it is of great fruit and benefit! It leads to great good, it leads to great security from bondage, it leads to a great sense of urgency, it leads to living in fearless ease & comfort! How, Bhikkhus, is the perception of a skeleton developed & cultivated so that it is of great fruit and benefit? Here, the Bhikkhu systematically develops the: Awareness Link to Awakening, joined with the experience of a skeleton. Investigation of states Link to Awakening, while examining a cadaver. Energy Link to Awakening, perceiving a worm-infested & rotting corpse. Joy Link to Awakening, while laughing over a gnawed & hacked corpse! Tranquillity Link to Awakening, accompanied by seeing a livid corpse... Concentration Link to Awakening, focused on a bloated & swollen corpse. Equanimity Link to Awakening, indifferent even near a hacked carcass... Which is based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, & maturing in release... It is in this way that the perception of a skeleton or a disgusting corpse is developed & cultivated, so that it is of great advantage, and benefit... Bhikkhus, when the perception of a skeleton is developed and cultivated in this way fused & enhanced with the seven Links to Awakening, one of two fruits is to be expected: either final knowledge in this very life or, if there is a remaining residue of clinging, the state of non-returning ... Comments: Meditating on disgusting signs is the only thing that can quell greed & lust! For inspiration regarding such corpse-meditation see the corpse pics at: http://picasaweb.google.com/bhikkhu0/AsubhaDisgust?authkey=87KkpQSf1MM# Should only be viewed by adults : Strong Warning!!! This particular meditation on disgusting signs is especially well suited for: Those characterized by greed, lust and desire as the dominant defilement: Homosexual gays and lesbians, Paedophiles, Overweight Eaters, Porn-maniacs, Bulimics, any compulsive mental disorder, anxiety, angst, worry, obsessions, Phobias, and everybody in general overwhelmed by their yearning desires! Whenever desire arises one can quell it by remembering a disgusting sign! <...> This eliminates fear of loosing body. Not afraid of loosing body means no fear even of Death! When not afraid of Death, then one does not fear anything at all in this world! Then one is relaxed by the gladness of ease! When Death comes, one says: Come on in! Have a cup of tea before we go? Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V:129-32] section 46: The Links. 57-61: The Skeleton... Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄ?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net What to do when Tempted? #97438 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 7:40 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/18/2009 1:24:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > ------------------------------------------ > Well, I think it is still wisdom that is involved with a LIBERATING > grasp of impermanence, and not just ordinary deduction. Change is constant > and continuous, in my opinion, not a property of momentary "things" whose > separate existence is only conventional, but the nature of reality. And wisdom > , as I view it, is a kind of time-transcendent "super knowing" [I wonder > if there isn't a German noun phrase 'uber gedanken' or something like that > which would capture it] that can go beyond the present moment, work upon > our observation of change/transitioning - the experiential flow, and > penetrate impermanence in a special, non-conceptual way, even if the term 'direct > knowing' doesn't quite capture it. I think it would have to be a combination of observing phenomena over time and then mindfully registering the properties that they exhibit. Such a process is not totally inaccessible, even to us. --------------------------------------------- Yes, I think that is exactly how our regular knowledge of impermanence works, but I believe that the grasp of impermanence associated with awakening goes radically further and deeper than that, and comes, in fact, as an amazing surprise, with the liberating realization of anicca fully inducing a thoroughgoing realization of anatta as well. ---------------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. ============================ With metta, Howard /Thus is how ye shall see all this fleeting world: A star at dawn, a bubble in a stream, a flash of lightning in a summer cloud, a flickering lamp, a phantom, and a dream/ (From the Diamond Sutra) #97439 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 12:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (22-final) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Part 22: Dhutaangas (Ascetic Practises) "He praised what should be praised like dhutaangas......but it has to be his real nature." ***** Vince: It seems to be a really tricky area because [there are] so many different examples in the Visuddhimagga - the dhutaanga practice to always sit down or some people took up practices to never lie down - and the Buddha encouraged this and that's not being natural. Sujin: But you see that the Buddha only encouraged, he did not force, because he knew people's accumulations. So he praised what should be praised like dhutaangas, praised what should be praised when it's the person's nature, but it has to be his real nature, not because of wrong understanding or hoping for results or wishing for such and such ~naa.na (knowledge). He encouraged people to have his real nature like that with dhutaanga and with a secluded place, with less attachment to sensuous objects. Ven Dhammadharo: Because people were doing it in this case, not to get lots and lots of sati, not to become enlightened faster, but because it was their true nature to live so very, very simply, for example. It's so praiseworthy when it's one's true nature to be like that and not just to suddenly take on a practice thinking that 'if I do this I'll be more aware, I want to have more awareness by doing this.' Peter(?): What are the benefits of dhutaanga practise? Sujin: Less clinging and attachment to self, [less] self-indulgence. Ven Guttasila: K.Sujin, how does [it] lead to satipa.t.thaana? Sujin: Right understanding to see that the object of awareness is not self will eliminate the attachment to self. Tony(?): I think there is a misunderstanding. In what way does the dhutaanga practice support satipa.t.thaana? Sujin: When one sleeps, can one be aware? Tony: Not so much. Vince: The Visuddhimagga states that the benefit of staying awake is for virtue.... Sujin: To be aware. Vince: No, it's for developing more siila. By siila, there's more detachment Sujin: Siila for what? What is the purpose of developing siila? Vince: For more detachment. Sujin: [Then] It is not awareness. The highest thing that the Buddha wants us to do is to be aware. [To be a] sotaapanna just for siila? Ven D: The siila of satipa.t.thaana, I think we can say it's the highest siila. Vince: It seems double-handed to me. At one moment you [K.Sujin] seem to be leaning towards practices of sense restraint by going to the country and [saying] all these practices that are talked about in the Tipi.taka are just due to accumulations and then say that the Buddha encouraged siila and that's what I said in the first place! Sujin: Siila and pa~n~naa, awareness too. [End of series] ***** Metta, Sarah ======== #97440 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:00 pm Subject: Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97292) > ---------------------- > > For a start, it seems to me that for anyone taking up meditation in line with the perceived "instructions", the moments of consciousness will be mostly akusala, with relatively few (if any) moments of kusala. > > You say "it seems to you" that such meditation will be mostly akusala, but what basis do you have for thinking that? Do you have a scriptural basis? An experiential basis? What is this based on? > ---------------------- I was responding to your question: "Without Abhidhamma, how do you determine whether the Buddha is giving meditation instruction or describing arising cittas that happen to look a certain way?" As I'm sure you know, I don't see in the suttas any "giving meditation instruction", and my comments are simply a corollary of that understanding. If someone followed what they took to be a meditation instruction when in fact it was a description of a person of certain attainments, there could hardly be much (or any) kusala involved. > ---------------------- I know it is a very popular view in some Abhidhamma circles [though not others, and notwithstanding the fact that the Abhidhamma itself seems to advocate realization of the nature of dhammas within meditation in some books. I did have a reference for that, but can't find it right now, but I believe it was the Patthana as well as one of the other books.] > ---------------------- There is frequent reference in the texts to the attainment of enlightenment with jhana as basis, but that is a description of those who have attained or are within reach of attaining jhana rather than a statement of general doctrine, as I understand it. > > Well there are also the ancient commentarial writings, which present a similar interpretation to that of the Abhidhamma. And in any event, some of those "raw suttas" have material that is presented in terms very similar to the commentarial/Abhidhamma texts (I am thinking of some of the texts in KN). > > Any ones in particular that come to mind? Yes, the Patisamphidaa Magga, which is cited here from time to time and has been the subject of some series in the past. > > Pausing there for now. > > Well, I can't pause because there are three more posts from you waiting for me. :-) You have unfairly stockpiled them and now I am scurrying to catch up like a hamster on a treadmill. Such is the nature of conditions these days... ;-)), ;-)) I'm afraid there was some unavoidable bunching because of the flight back to Hong Kong just before Easter. You see, I spent much of the flight writing replies to your posts, which then got sent off over the Easter weekend. Now I'm the hamster on the treadmill as I struggle to keep up with your replies to those posts of mine (running about a week behind at the moment; apologies for that). Jon #97441 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:15 pm Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97408) Jumping ahead to this recent message of yours. > > I think you are extrapolating from the literal meaning of anatta. But anatta is simply the label given to a particular characteristic (just like "effort" is the label given to a particular cetasika). > > What *is* the characteristic that this designates. Can you describe or define it a bit more? In the Sammohavinnodanii passage quoted by Scott (at msg #97333, 97334), the 3 characteristics are described as follows: "Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or the mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. ... "The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. ... "The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self. ... "For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements ... the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." To my understanding of this, the characteristics are "modes of alteration" discernable within the span of a single dhamma. Similar definitions are given in the commentary to MN 22 (as quoted in note 3 to Ch XXI of The Path of Purification, at p.845): "Having been, it is not, therefore it is impermanent; ... "It is painful on account of the mode of oppression; ... "It is not-self on account of the mode of insusceptibility to the exercise of power; ...". The commentary to Ch 9, par. 44 of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (STA p.346) has this: "The impermanent-characteristic is the characteristic that is to be characterised by impermanence itself; or it is what is characterized by that [impermanence]. "The suffering characteristic is the characteristic that is itself the state of suffering, reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall [of things]. "The fact of not-self (anattataa) is the non-existence of the self imagined by others; the not-self characteristic is the characteristic constituted by that." You will no doubt be pleased to see the reference here to the "non-existence of the self imagined by others", which I think is close to your "absence of self", but used here in the context of the *fact* of anattaa rather than the *characteristic* of anatta. Note that the characteristic, described as "the characteristic constituted by that [non-existence]", is still clearly a characteristic properly so called and not a relative or time-dependent matter. > > Yes, dhammas are indeed *not self*. But besides that, they also exhibit the characteristic of *not-self*. I think the passage quoted by Scott brings out this distinction very well. > > Which quote was that? What is the difference between a dhamma being "not self" and it having the characteristic of "not self." Please define the distinction. See the extract from the Sammohavinnodanii passage quoted by Scott that I have copied at the end of this message, beginning: "And here the following difference should be understood: impermanence and the characteristic of impermanence, pain and the characteristic of pain, no-self and the characteristic of no-self." To my understanding, the descriptions of impermanence, pain and no-self constitute the three contemplations (anupassanaa) mentioned in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha separately to the characteristics of the same name. Jon Sammohavinodanii (Vol. I, pp. 58-60), as quoted by Scott at #97333, 97334: ************************* "And here the following difference should be understood: impermanence and the characteristic of impermanence, pain and the characteristic of pain, no-self and the characteristic of no-self. "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall and change, or because of their absence having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or the mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words 'what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. "But those same aggregates are no-self because of the words 'what is painful is no-self'(S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self. "That is why the impermanent, the painful and the no-self are one thing and the characteristics of impermanence, pain, and no-self are another. For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." ************************* #97442 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 1:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya sarahprocter... Dear Chew, I was glad to see you write here again. How's everything in Penang with your group and Yamaka studies? The quote you gave from the "Guide to C.R." is a very good summary and answer to the question about these conditions. Thanks for adding it. I'm also interested in Connie's note about all the audio files you have on your website. I plan to check/listen when I have time. Meanwhile, have you listened to any of the discussions with A.Sujin we've edited on www.dhammastudygroup.org? You may find these interesting to listen to as well. Hope to hear more from you. Please join in any threads or add any Abhidhamma detail anytime. Metta, Sarah --- On Fri, 17/4/09, Chew wrote: >Read from book "Guide to Conditional Realations": The definition of sahajata-paccaya: The condition where a conditioning state, on arising, related by causing the associated states, the conditioned states, to arise simultaneously with it is known as sahajata-paccaya. The definition of annamanna-paccaya: The condition where a condiioning state relates by causing the associated states, the conditioned states, to arise simultaneously with it and which are all mutually dependent is known as annamanna-paccaya. <...> #97443 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 5:44 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E., Regarding: R: "Thanks for getting into this. I appreciate it." Scott: You're welcome. Please remember, I don't know much and only make assertions strongly to contribute to providing a clearly stated counter-argument. I always wait for Jon to correct me - although I see he is a bit behind. R: "I don't see any inconsistency at the moment either. I have not criticized Buddhaghosa, have I?..." Scott: I don't think you have - but then that wouldn't be the point of the discussion, anyway. Buddhaghosa's on his own. R: "...'That which consists of...' 'is all...' does not say how the characteristics are realized by panna, does it? It states the obvious facts about all dhammas, with which I have always agreed." Scott: This would then lead to a need to clarify the characteristic and function of pa~n~naa, including a consideration of the development of pa~n~naa and the manner in which an object is 'experienced by pa~n~naa' - the way in which pa~n~naa contributes to a given moment of experience. By the way, what is your stand on the question as to whether a given dhamma can be said to have it's given inherent characteristic? If you don't consider this to be the case then we are comparing apples to oranges. Some consider that it is only conditions, no dhammaa with characteristic. I'm not really interested in trying to demonstrate that a dhamma has a characteristic. If, say, seeing consciousness cannot be considered to have 'seeing' as characteristic, as well as anicca, dukkha, and anatta, then we may as well stop the discussion. R: "I would be very happy for you to explain to me what 'the mode of alteration' means. Does 'alteration' take place in the same moment, or between one moment and another?" Scott: I believe the term is 'aakaaravikaaro' (and this is the term used in the Sammohavinodanii excerpt), where 'aakaara' means 'state, condition' or 'property, quality, attribute' or 'sign, appearance, form' [or 'mode' as in the text]; and 'vikaara' means 'change, alteration.' I think, as Jon mentions elsewhere, that this refers to the alteration within the same moment. Therefore, here what I think is being referred to is the three sub-moments of arising (uppaada), changing while persisting (.thiti), and falling away (bhanga) which are aspects of a single moment of consciousness. Pa~n~naa would penetrate the characteristic of anatta inherent in a given dhamma in the moment. R: "What I believe is being said here, and in one spot in your quote of the Vism said it explicitly, is that anatta is an object of *contemplation,* and as you point out, *not accessible to perception,* which is what I've been saying all along. If something is a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding, and is not a perceptible characteristic, like, as the Vism says in your quote, 'blue or red,' that is quite a different type of characteristic than one which is structurally inherent in the dhamma itself. And this may be a perfectly valid point, but it is as I have been trying to point out, a characteristic *about the dhamma or the way that it functions,* not something that is inherently *a part of it.* If this is understood, then the discussion could be resolved by just agreeing with me, instead of saying I was wrong." Scott: Here's the original quote again: "... It is understanding (pa~n~naa) in the sense of act of understanding (pajaanana). What is this act of understanding? It is knowing (jaanana) in a particular mode separate from the modes of perceiving (sa~njaanana) and cognizing (vijaanana). For though the state of knowing (jaanana-bhaava) is equally present in perception (sa~n~naa), in consciousness (vi~n~naa.na), and in understanding (pa~n~naa), nevertheless perception is only the mere perceiving of an object as, say, 'blue' or 'yellow'; it cannot bring about the penetration of its characteristic as impermanent, painful, and not-self." Scott: I don't see where, in the Visuddhimagga passage, it refers to 'comtemplation'. Have I got the wrong quote? I think you'd need to be clear in the way you define 'contemplation.' Above you seem to suggest that you are referring to 'contemplation' as being synonymous with 'understanding' ('...a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding...'). I'll take this for now, and consider 'contemplation' to refer to the characteristic function of pa~n~naa cetasika. I think that would be correct, if that is indeed what you mean. If you have another meaning for 'contemplation' - one that differentiates it from the function of pa~n~naa, i.e. eg. 'thinking about something' - I'll have to await your definition (and :-( all my marvelous exegesis will have been for naught). From the Sammohavinodanii passage: "When resolving of the compact (ghanavinibbhoga) is effected by resolution into the various elements, the characteristic of no-self appears in accordance with its true essential nature." Scott: You state above that 'anatta is an object of *contemplation*'. If you mean, by 'contemplation' to refer to pa~n~naa, then I'd suggest that a more precise way to say this would be to note that pa~n~naa takes the same object - a dhamma - as citta with which it arises conascently and that pa~n~naa 'sees' that object in its 'true' nature. As far as anatta is concerned, developed pa~n~naa 'sees' that true nature in the mode and alteration of a given dhamma with clear resolution subsequent to the having 'resolved the compact'. R: "Well, the passage doesn't make that distinction. It said basically that it is not the nature of anatta to be perceived, but it is known by contemplation, which I take to be vipassana-bhavana. Panna knows anatta directly, not sanna, and it knows it through contemplation." Scott: Please give your definition of 'vipassana-bhavana'. Please define 'contemplation.' I don't mean a form of 'meditation' - I would mean to refer to the development of pa~n~naa. R: "...If we are talking about panna I consider it a high realization, not nebulous at all." Scott: This goes back to the beginning of this post. Do you consider that a dhamma has characteristic? Or do you think that it is all just flowing indistinctly by - all conditions or some such? Is pa~n~naa a dhamma with characteristic and function? Does it arise and fall away in a moment? If we share this way of understanding things, I'll withdraw the concern about the nebulosity of the view. R: "...Well, let's see - I'm not sure what "the mode of alteration" is technically, but if I *do* understand what it means, it means that the characteristics are revealed as they are undergoing their alterations from moment to moment, which would mean that they are contemplated by panna in the midst of undergoing changes, since it is during the process of change that impermanence, suffering and uncontrollability are revealed. If that is the case, it is one of the assertions I have been making. Maybe Buddhaghosa and I are in agreement as well." Scott: Yes, above I've shown my understanding to be that this refers to 'in the moment', not 'between moments.' I'll assume, again, you write 'contemplated by pa~n~na' as a way of referring to the characteristic of pa~n~naa, and not simply to thinking deeply about things. I'll stop here for now, and work on the rest of the reply over the next day or so. Sincerely, Scott. #97444 From: "colette" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (21) ksheri3 Good Morning Sarah, Your reply to me IS VERY WELCOMED, THANK YOU! While you suggest that I helped you place your conceptions into a perspective you, in turn, actually aided me by helping me to grasp, better, the mere concepts we are/were speaking of. > S: I think you've asked the best questions! The point is that we think of 'seclusion' or 'secluded places' in terms of forests, mountains, quiet temples, lack of media, beautiful beaches with sunsets and so on, whereas in the only 'true' or 'real' sense, 'seclusion' has to refer to the present mental states when there is no attachment, no aversion and no ignorance arising - particularly at moments when there is detachment, non-aversion and wisdom arising. So there can be a 'retreat' from all that is unwholesome right now. colette: Here, for instance, you accent and acentuate my conception of applying technology to invade the space which gives us seclusion as well as modifying it and placing it into a Buddhist context which I'm sure you and Jon, as well as the other moderators, definately see that I make an effort to do with my applications toward actual life. ---------- > .... > >We are living in a world where the progression/ momentum is towards this hypothetical openess. In the USA, here in Chicago, we are struck with cameras on every street corner documenting everything and everybody thus one must ask what is private. <...> > > >What is seclusion? > > >How can anything be secluded? > > >Isn't seclusion the same as EXCLUSION? > ... > S: Again, even whilst in a Chicago (or Hong Kong) crowd, watched by the cameras, there can be seclusion of mind at moments of generosity, kindness and wisdom. There are no thoughts at such times about the 'important ME', about 'inclusion', 'exclusion' or 'exploitation' at such times. > ... colette: This is the part that really caught my eye because you narrow the path down to "seclusion of mind". SPLENDID! EXCELLENT OBSERVATION! THUS, I and the rest of the group, can be certain that it is easy for you to cognize the applications of the movie THE MATRIX, to Buddhism, Buddhist Philosophy, and Buddhist practices. ---------------- > > >AGAIN, > > >What is the stinkin difference between "Private" and "Secret"? How is it possible that they are two different concepts? <....> So, where is privacy and where is security and where is "seclusion" so that you and this hypothetical KS can enjoy a seclude place? > ... > S: Again, at moments of 'peace' or tranquility, when there is freedom from all that stinks by way of attachment, anger and ignorance, there is no concern about what is 'private', 'secret' or 'secure'. **Our lives are 'open books' at such moments without thoughts of ourselves at all.** colette: I seperated that last line and marked it so that we can particularly focus on that sentence that you manufacured from the previous sentences. This is the exact concept I've been constantly trying to get at with people. For instance, when I first began on the net in 2004 I was shown that people in WEstern esoteric forums don't have such a complete grasp of the concepts that I do. <...> --------------------- > .... > >Why how nice, I hear POWER STATION performing their greatest hit. > ... > S: and I'm just back from POWER yoga! colette: I could go off on that thought but since you are in Hong Kong and far more adept at these practices than I, then I shall not bother to jest at your application of the terms "Power Yoga". ---- More stories and dreams at this moment. Such dreaming and enjoyment can be known as mere dhammas too! colette: EXACTLY, they are nothing more than fleeting glimpses of the "clear light" and the potentials of the Bardo states of consciousness. It was very thoughtful of you to give me such a good response to start my day off, here, today! Thank You. toodles, colette #97445 From: "colette" Date: Sat Apr 18, 2009 4:03 pm Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) ksheri3 Good Morning Jon, Just a quicky here: The commentary to Ch 9, par. 44 of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (STA p.346) has this: "The impermanent-characteristic is the characteristic that is to be characterised by impermanence itself; or it is what is characterized by that [impermanence]. "The suffering characteristic is the characteristic that is itself the state of suffering, reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall [of things]. "The fact of not-self (anattataa) is the non-existence of the self imagined by others; the not-self characteristic is the characteristic constituted by that." You will no doubt be pleased to see the reference here to the "non-existence of the self imagined by others", which I think is close to your "absence of self", but used here in the context of the *fact* of anattaa rather than the *characteristic* of anatta. Note that the characteristic, described as "the characteristic constituted by that [non-existence]", is still clearly a characteristic properly so called and not a relative or time-dependent matter. colette: so the reality exists that a person can and does delusion and/or hallucinates that they possess a self and all the characteristics that come with that hallucination/delusion. the only issue I have to raise here, on this subject, is that characteristic or those characteristics which a person imposes upon another person: the individual in question can hallucinate and/or delusion that they have a self and that this delusion/hallucination has characteristics which verify this dreams existance THEREFORE is it possible for that individual that is having a delusion/hallucination to impose those delusions/hallucinations upon another person. For instance I have a very good understanding of what a "self" is supposed to be and how this "self" is supposed to operate (that kindof explains why people have never been willing and wanting to allow me to have 'gainful employment' where my supposed "self" can earn revenue and live the way I choose to live and not live the way a gang of manufacured robots (fraternity, sorority, mob, gang, association, union, etc) dictate I live? And please, this is nothing more than an exact application of the concept of TRANSFERENCE OF CONSCIOUSNESS which is a Dzogchen technique but specifically aimed at the Bardo of death. My theory is that Death does not have to occur to have an actual transference of consciousness. This is another aspect of the invasion of privacy that Sarah and I were discussing. This also relates to the theories on Karma and my theories that a person can and does tranfer "their" karma to others so that the person in question can avoid the suffering and pain that they have accumulated in their own karma. I know that is a totally different subject and concept that could take years to verify. It is just an aspect of what I'm examining with respect to these abstract concepts called "good" and "evil" which the people's of the West are completely subserviant to and how easy it is to pervert or manipulate these concepts for personal gratification. <....> You gave us the wisdom of the misconception, the misinterpretation, and the mislabeling, of a self and all I'm suggesting is that these hallucinations/delusions are ofter transfered upon others as a means of defiling another sentient being without that sentient being's permision. toodles, colette <...> #97446 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:34 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (5), with commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, N: This sutta (5) deals with four developments of concentration (samaadhi-bhaavanaa). As we have seen, the first one (the development of the four stages of jhaana) leads to happiness here and now, and the second one which is the ‘perception of light’ leads to gaining knowledge-and-vision (~naa.na-dassana-pa.tilaabhi). The third development of concentration (c) is mindfulness and clear awareness (sati-sampaja~n~na). Sutta: ‘How does it lead to mindfulness and clear awareness? Here, a monk knows feelings as they arise, remain and vanish; he knows perceptions as they arise, remain and vanish; he knows thoughts (vitakkaa) as they arise, remain and vanish.’ ------ N: The Co refers to the satipa.t.thaanasutta (M, 10) where sati sampaja~n~na , clear comprehension, is expounded in seven or eight phrases : “And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practicing clear comprehension...” N: As to knowing the arising, the persisting and vanishing of feeling, the explanations that follow also pertain to the fourth development of concentration, samaadhi-bhaavanaa, which is the destruction of the cankers by the arahat. Co: This is said of the arahat’s knowledge. He understands the base (vatthu) and the object (aaramma.na) of feeling and in this way he understand that feeling thus arises, persists and falls away. ------ N: Feeling has a physical base, it has the same base as the citta it accompanies, one of the sensebases or the heart-base. Feeling experiences the same object as the citta it accompanies. Without base and object feeling could not arise. --------- Co: He understands not only feeling but also sa~n ~naa, volition (cetanaa) etc. which were not mentioned here. Subco: he understands in this way not only feeling, but also all dhammas. Also ariyans who are not arahats, ‘learners’, understand these, but the arahat has complete understanding of them. The Co refers to the Dependent Origination: dependent on ignorance there is the origination of feeling. Dependent on clinging there is the origination of kamma. Dependent on contact there is the origination of feeling. He realizes the general characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. He realizes that with the cessation of ignorance there is the cessation of feeling etc. The subco gives a more detailed explanation: he realizes the arising and ceasing with regard to the moment of arising and ceasing, and also the arising and ceasing with regard to conditons. The characteristic as to condition, paccayalakkha.na), and the characteristic as to moment (kha.nalakkha.na) are here taken together (ekajjha.m). -------- N: As to the arising and ceasing with regard to conditions, this is in accordance with the method of the Dependent Origination. Subco: He pays attention to the impermanence of feeling after he has defined its arising and falling away and breaking up, and ‘this appears, is understood and is known’. Evenso he pays attention to the characteristic of dukkha: because of its impermanence vedanaa is dukkha, it is oppressed by arising and falling away (udayabbayapa.tipiilita). It is fearful and a foundation of dukkha. Thus, because of impermanence and dukkha it is devoid of self (attarahita), without refuge (asaara), beyond control and empty. He pays attention to the characteristic of anattaa. As to the words of the commentary: because of the ceasing of ignorance there is the ceasing of feeling, the subco explains: by the highest path (aggamaggena) there is the ceasing of feeling, there is no more arising of it since there are no conditions present anymore. As to samaadhi bhaavana, this is vipassanaa samaadhi bhaavanaa that has been learned by the ariyans. The attainment of jhaana should be seen as basis of this. (d) the destruction of the corruptions (aasavaanam khaya). Sutta: How does this practice lead to the destruction of the corruptions? Here, a monk abides in the contemplation of the rise and fall of the five aggregates of grasping (pa~nc'upaadaanakkhandesu udayabbayaanupassii): "This is material form, this is its arising, this is its ceasing; these are feelings ...; this is perception ...; these are the mental formations ...; this is consciousness, this is its arising, this is its ceasing." ----- N: As was said, this should be understood in the same way as was explained under the third way of samaadhi-bhaavanaa. The Co states that this is samaadhi-bhaavanaa with jhaana as basis (paadaka-jhaana) which is the knowledge of the destruction of the cankers. The arahat who has realised the third and fourth kinds of development of concentration, samaadhi, developed jhaana and vipassanaa. ---------- N: In the section on sati-sampaja~n~na it is said that the monk should be aware during all his activities in daily life. After that it is explained that the arahat is mindful and has understanding of feelings and all other dhammas, their arising persisting and falling away. It is said that ‘it appears (upa.t.thaana), it is understood (vidita), it is known (paaka.ta)’. Thus, he is naturally aware of feelings and the other dhammas during all his activities. Moreover he directly understands that feeling arises because of ignorance in the past, and that with the ceasing of ignorance there are no longer conditions for feeling, which means the end of the cycle of birth and death. He directly understands the Dependent Origination, without having to think about it. The Buddha taught the Dependent Origination so that eventually people could directly realize the truth of it. It is not meant as a mere object of thought. However, only pa~n~naa which has been developed is able to realize the truth. When pa~n~naa has matured it will perform its function of directly understanding the truth, there is no self who has to try to understand the truth. ------- Nina. #97447 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:51 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Dear friends, Samatha and vipassanå are two different ways of mental development, bhåvanå. The aim of samatha is to eliminate attachment to sense objects, and the aim of vipassanå is to eradicate ignorance of realities. Some people want to apply themselves to samatha first, because they think that in this way vipassanå can be developed more quickly afterwards. They should realize, however, that both samatha and vipassanå are ways of mental development. The Påli term bhåvanå means: to make become, to produce, to increase. Developing first samatha before vipassanå is certainly not a “short cut” to nibbåna as some people believe. Those who want to develop samatha should do so only if they really have accumulated skill for samatha. If one wants to apply oneself to a meditation subject, one needs a great deal of preparation, one has to lead a secluded life and many conditions have to be fulfilled. Right understanding of the way to develop calm with the meditation subject is essential. If one just sits without any understanding, is that mental development? For the attainment of “access-concentration” and jhåna one needs perseverance with the development and one has to acquire great skill. Samatha, when it is really developed, is a way of kusala which is of a high degree. Jhåna purifies the mind, but the latent tendencies of defilements are not eradicated. After the jhånacitta has fallen away defilements are bound to arise again. As we have seen, those who have attained jhåna should still develop all the stages of insight in order to become enlightened. One may apply oneself to samatha, but if one does not have accumulations for the attainment of jhåna, or even access concentration, one should consider for oneself whether it is beneficial or not to continue developing samatha. Even while one applies oneself to a meditation subject akusala cittas still arise; the hindrances are not suppressed until one has attained access- concentration and jhåna. ****** Nina. #97448 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Conditions nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 18-apr-2009, om 8:51 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > The cittas which are conditioned by way of decisive support of > object are also the same types as in the case of object > predominance-condition. Thus, the realities involved in these two > kinds of conditions are the same, but there is a difference in the > conditioning force of object predominance-condition and of decisive > support-condition of object. In the case of object predominance- > condition the desirable object is highly esteemed by the citta and > cetasikas concerned so that they give preponderance to it. In the > case of decisive support-condition of object the desirable object > is a powerful inducement, a cogent reason, for the arising of the > citta and cetasikas concerned, which are strongly dependent on that > object. Desirable objects which are object predominance-condition > can also, at the same time, be decisive support-condition of > object, a powerful inducement for the arising of the cittas > concerned. Phenomena can be conditioned by several types of > conditions at the same time. " > > Can you help me to grasp the difference between these two conditions? ------- N: Decisive support condition is stronger than object-predominance condition. I have given examples, and here is one: < Desirable rúpas which are object predominance-condition can also be decisive support-condition of object for lobha-múla-citta. Beautiful colours or delicious flavours are a powerful inducement for the arising of lobha-múla-citta wanting such objects again and again. As soon as delicious food is on the tongue its flavour is irresistable for attachment. Someone may highly regard the sound of music which is then object predominance-condition for lobha-múla-citta. The sound of music can also be a decisive support-condition of object, a powerful inducement for the arising again and again of lobha-múla-citta, for example, when someone dedicates his whole life to music. > The words powerful inducement indicate that the influence is very strong. ------ Nina. #97449 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 18-apr-2009, om 7:27 heeft szmicio het volgende geschreven: > so when mahabhuta ruupas arise, they are always conditioned by way > of sahajata and annamanna paccaya, because each ruupa is a > condition to another 3 ruupas? ---- N: Correct. ------- > > And when mahabhuta ruupas condition derived ruupas then it's only > sahajata-paccaya? -------- N: Correct. In 'Guide to Conditiuonal Relations' by U Narada (p. 31) it is explained: In mutuality condition, a conditioning dhamma gives its force to the conditioned dhamma and also receives the force of the conditioned dhamma. > The great Elements do not receive the force of the derived rupas that arise together with them. Nina. #97450 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 6:31 am Subject: The Absent Agent! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: There is No Self, or Actor, but just Activities: Question: If there is neither any "I", nor Ego, nor separate identity, nor self , nor soul, WHAT then thinks, reflects upon, & comes to understanding? What is it that knows? What reflects? The impersonal process of reflection itself reflects... There need be no 'wonderer' for the reflection activity to occur! What understands? The event, state and condition of understanding itself understands...! There need not to be any one, who understands for understanding to emerge... What knows? The distinct impersonal phenomenon of knowledge itself knows... There need not to be any 'knower' for the state of knowledge to occur! The Blessed Buddha Said: Sabbe Dhamma Anatta! All states are Impersonal! There is no Agent, neither behind, nor within, nor without any Appearance... This realization leads to the exquisite void mental release!!! (Suññata-vimokkha)! Please let me out of this prison of assumed personality! It is neither 'I', 'Me', 'Mine', nor 'Belonging to Me', nor 'What I Am'...! Atta = Self; Anatta = No-Self! Anatta: There is no separate or core self. What appears separate, solid & enduring, turns out to be changeable and "composite." What we experience as 'identity' turns out to be a changing constellation of varying momentary influences and activities... Which all are selfless, ownerless, egoless, & soulless passing momentary mental states! & Paradoxically: Never the Same... If what we assume to be 'self' is never the 'same' is this assumed 'self' then not the 'same', but always changed into something 'other'! How can something 'other-than-the-same-self' ever be a real identical 'self'??? IMPERSONALITY! Identical 'Identity' is not found inside, but is just an external labelled badge! A designed designation splashed on... <...> The Blessed Buddha once said: Blissful is solitude for one who is content, learned & who see the True Dhamma. Blissful is harmlessness towards all beings without exception. Blissful is freedom from any sensual urge whatsoever. Yet, the supreme bliss, is the elimination of the abysmal conceit “I amâ€?!’ Udana – Inspiration: II – 1 Have a nice egoless day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄ?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Absent Agent! #97451 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:46 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 10. epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: Robert E. wrote: > I think [realizing anicca] would have to be a combination of observing phenomena over time > and then mindfully registering the properties that they exhibit. Such a > process is not totally inaccessible, even to us. > --------------------------------------------- > Yes, I think that is exactly how our regular knowledge of impermanence > works, but I believe that the grasp of impermanence associated with > awakening goes radically further and deeper than that, and comes, in fact, as an > amazing surprise, with the liberating realization of anicca fully inducing > a thoroughgoing realization of anatta as well. > ---------------------------------------------- Well I am always open to happy surprise, especially liberating ones. Still, the "regular knowledge" of impermanence is not known directly or accepted as such by the average person, or even that realization - that the rug *is inevitably* going to wear out or get a stain, or get scratched up by the cat - and thus there is nothing to cling to -- would lead to a great reduction in clinging and an increase in letting go. Maybe they are on a continuum until a critical mass gives one the vision of continuously flowing unstoppable indefineable anicca creating the illusion of objects like clouds in the sky forming different shapes for a few seconds before they dissolve, and that indefineable absolute temporariness would include anatta since there is not even a real [certainly conventional] object to hang onto in the first place. I think even by focusing on the ordinary frustration one has with objects disappearing, wearing out, turning out to be other than expected or perceived, and most especiallly: borrowed by others and never returned! [:-)] the case for letting go of clinging to the concepts and expectations we have of conventional objects would be greatly reduced, and that is what we have to start out with in any case. I tend to think that all the esoteric realizations we are looking for are already present in everyday life if we were able to focus on them with mindfulness. Otherwise, we would not suffer. It is the fact that those properties are right here, right now that causes the suffering. My former yoga teacher and later Buddhist mentor for a brief but important period once said that the only big difference between a yogi and an ordinary person was that the ordinary person spends most of his life running away in fear from suffering, hoping it will not catch up, and the yogi turns and faces it. I think that's a pretty good "hook" for defining a Buddhist as well. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #97452 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:52 am Subject: Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97292) > > ---------------------- > > > For a start, it seems to me that for anyone taking up meditation in line with the perceived "instructions", the moments of consciousness will be mostly akusala, with relatively few (if any) moments of kusala. > > > > You say "it seems to you" that such meditation will be mostly akusala, but what basis do you have for thinking that? Do you have a scriptural basis? An experiential basis? What is this based on? > > ---------------------- > > I was responding to your question: "Without Abhidhamma, how do you determine whether the Buddha is giving meditation instruction or describing arising cittas that happen to look a certain way?" > > As I'm sure you know, I don't see in the suttas any "giving meditation instruction", and my comments are simply a corollary of that understanding. If someone followed what they took to be a meditation instruction when in fact it was a description of a person of certain attainments, there could hardly be much (or any) kusala > involved. I understand that this is your view, but you didn't really answer the question - which is, what makes you think that is the case? What is the evidence? The basis? > > ---------------------- > I know it is a very popular view in some Abhidhamma circles [though not others, and notwithstanding the fact that the Abhidhamma itself seems to advocate realization of the nature of dhammas within meditation in some books. I did have a reference for that, but can't find it right now, but I believe it was the Patthana as well as one of the other books.] > > ---------------------- > > There is frequent reference in the texts to the attainment of enlightenment with jhana as basis, but that is a description of those who have attained or are within reach of attaining jhana rather than a statement of general doctrine, as I understand it. Can you direct me to a passage where this is demonstrated? I could use some details or facts, rather than just assertions. > > > Well there are also the ancient commentarial writings, which present a similar interpretation to that of the Abhidhamma. And in any event, some of those "raw suttas" have material that is presented in terms very similar to the commentarial/Abhidhamma texts (I am thinking of some of the texts in KN). > > > > Any ones in particular that come to mind? > > Yes, the Patisamphidaa Magga, which is cited here from time to time and has been the subject of some series in the past. For a moment I was thrilled that you gave me a specific reference. It took my breath away for a moment. Then I became deflated again when I realized that it does not seem to exist on the internet, and I have no idea how to find a copy [in English.] Any ideas? > > > Pausing there for now. > > > > Well, I can't pause because there are three more posts from you waiting for me. :-) You have unfairly stockpiled them and now I am scurrying to catch up like a hamster on a treadmill. Such is the nature of conditions these days... > > ;-)), ;-)) > > I'm afraid there was some unavoidable bunching because of the flight back to Hong Kong just before Easter. You see, I spent much of the flight writing replies to your posts, which then got sent off over the Easter weekend. Very kind of you to spend the time. > Now I'm the hamster on the treadmill as I struggle to keep up with your replies to those posts of mine (running about a week behind at the moment; apologies for that). Well, we are keeping each other jumping anyway. I hope it is healthy exercise. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97453 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:14 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97408) > Jumping ahead to this recent message of yours. > > > > I think you are extrapolating from the literal meaning of anatta. But anatta is simply the label given to a particular characteristic (just like "effort" is the label given to a particular cetasika). > > > > What *is* the characteristic that this designates. Can you describe or define it a bit more? > > In the Sammohavinnodanii passage quoted by Scott (at msg #97333, 97334), the 3 characteristics are described as follows: > > "Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or the mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. ... > "The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. ... > "The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self. ... > "For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements ... the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." > > To my understanding of this, the characteristics are "modes of alteration" discernable within the span of a single dhamma. Am I correct that a single dhamma has a duration for several cittas? If so, the state of the dhamma from the beginning to the end could be observed and the "mode of alteration" could be realized by comparison between the cittas. I know the cittas have a secret way of passing on their former info so this would then make sense that a single dhamma can demonstrate the three characteristics during its onset, duration and decline. A citta with sati or vipassana or panna, I take it, would have the awareness to notice the "mode of alteration" and see the three characteristics in action. The definitions of the three marks you have re-posted are very clear and I take them as self-evident as written, so thank you for that helpful info. > Similar definitions are given in the commentary to MN 22 (as quoted in note 3 to Ch XXI of The Path of Purification, at p.845): > "Having been, it is not, therefore it is impermanent; ... > "It is painful on account of the mode of oppression; ... > "It is not-self on account of the mode of insusceptibility to the exercise of power; ...". As a side-note, I don't think there is much attention given to not-self as the inability to exercise power over something. That is a pretty interesting definition which I think is unique to the Buddha and might be worth examining. It seems to me that he is defining self as that which can be controlled and dictated, and then concluding that there is nothing in samsara that fits that description. Therefore all the dhammas/kandhas are 'not-self.' > The commentary to Ch 9, par. 44 of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (STA p.346) has this: > "The impermanent-characteristic is the characteristic that is to be characterised by impermanence itself; or it is what is characterized by that [impermanence]. > "The suffering characteristic is the characteristic that is itself the state of suffering, reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall [of things]. Is the only oppression caused by dhammas that of rising and falling? I would think that even when the dhammas appear to keep still for a few moments, they are still oppressive since they also often cause pain or take away pleasure, or fail to meet expectation, etc. Maybe that is a different category. > "The fact of not-self (anattataa) is the non-existence of the self imagined by others; the not-self characteristic is the characteristic constituted by that." > > You will no doubt be pleased to see the reference here to the "non-existence of the self imagined by others", which I think is close to your "absence of self", but used here in the context of the *fact* of anattaa rather than the *characteristic* of anatta. Yes, I would see that. And yes, I am very pleased, in a "relieved" sort of way, since that actually makes sense to me. > Note that the characteristic, described as "the characteristic constituted by that [non-existence]", is still clearly a characteristic properly so called and not a relative or > time-dependent matter. Well, if they are observed during the duration of a dhamma, they can be time-dependent and still be recognized by citta. So it may not be a problem. I wonder what it is if it is "constituted" by the fact of the non-existence of the imaginary self. Is there any way of further describing what the characteristic is, as opposed to the "fact of?" It seems to me that this means something like: "Having understood that the self imagined by others does not exist, all dhammas are seen to be absent of any such self." That would seem to be the characteristic based on the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. What do you think? > > > Yes, dhammas are indeed *not self*. But besides that, they also exhibit the characteristic of *not-self*. I think the passage quoted by Scott brings out this distinction very well. > > > > Which quote was that? What is the difference between a dhamma being "not self" and it having the characteristic of "not self." Please define the distinction. > > See the extract from the Sammohavinnodanii passage quoted by Scott that I have copied at the end of this message, beginning: > "And here the following difference should be understood: impermanence and the characteristic of impermanence, pain and the characteristic of pain, no-self and the characteristic of no-self." > > To my understanding, the descriptions of impermanence, pain and no-self constitute the three contemplations (anupassanaa) mentioned in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha separately to the characteristics of the same name. Are the characteristics something other than "being that which is described by the facts of the characteristics themselves?" > Sammohavinodanii (Vol. I, pp. 58-60), as quoted by Scott at #97333, 97334: > > ************************* > "And here the following difference should be understood: impermanence and the characteristic of impermanence, pain and the characteristic of pain, no-self and the characteristic of no-self. > > "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall and change, or because of their absence having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or the mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. > > "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words 'what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. > > "But those same aggregates are no-self because of the words 'what is painful is no-self'(S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self. > > "That is why the impermanent, the painful and the no-self are one thing and the characteristics of impermanence, pain, and no-self are another. For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." I'm having a little trouble getting this distinction. I can understand that the "mode of alteration" is a characteristic that is recognized by citta as demonstrating anicca and thus the other two marks, but as for the properties themselves being different as characteristics - it is not really described and I am not sure what is different about them in that mode. It seems like the distinction is perhaps one of action vs. recognition of an inherent property: If I get angry I am demonstrating my "nature" as an angry person. If someone sees me and recognized me as an "angry person" that action is seen to be a characteristic; ie, not only did I get angry once showing that I am capable of anger, but that my nature is such that I am bound to get angry multiple times - that is what makes it a "characteristic" and not just something that occurs here and there randomly. So maybe anatta as a characteristic is that which is recognized as being the nature of dhammas to behave as "not-self," rather than it just being one mode of occurrence. It is inherent, and is bound to always be so. I think this deep recognition of its nature as such may be the distinction between the occurrence of anatta as an arising property of a dhamma, and its recognition as an inherent characteristic, the latter of which would only be fully understood by panna. It makes sense that when it is seen that the three characteristics are deeply such and are never going to go away, that one might be more inclined to "let go of clinging" to dhammas, since they are now seen as totally alien, temporary, and painful. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97454 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:32 am Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > R: "...'That which consists of...' 'is all...' does not say how the characteristics are realized by panna, does it? It states the obvious facts about all dhammas, with which I have always agreed." > > Scott: This would then lead to a need to clarify the characteristic and function of pa~n~naa, including a consideration of the development of pa~n~naa and the manner in which an object is 'experienced by pa~n~naa' - the way in which pa~n~naa contributes to a given moment of experience. Well that would be a great subject for discussion, unless it is already old hat for you folks here... > By the way, what is your stand on the question as to whether a given dhamma can be said to have it's given inherent characteristic? If you don't consider this to be the case then we are comparing apples to oranges. Some consider that it is only conditions, no dhammaa with characteristic. I'm not really interested in trying to demonstrate that a dhamma has a characteristic. If, say, seeing consciousness cannot be considered to have 'seeing' as characteristic, as well as anicca, dukkha, and anatta, then we may as well stop the discussion. I don't really know the answer to that. I do think that seeing consciousness is involved with seeing, there is no doubt about that. Whether it is officially an "inherent characteristic" or just something that it does when seeing occurs, because that is its function, is beyond my pay grade. In fact, I wouldn't be too clear as to what the distinction between seeing consciousness "seeing" and "having seeing as a characteristic" would be. They seem similar to me. If you mean that since it has seeing as its characteristic, it will always function in order to facilitate seeing, I would agree with that. Going further than that would require discussing what is meant by a "characteristic" and how a "characteristic" shows up or behaves. Want to talk about it? > R: "I would be very happy for you to explain to me what 'the mode of alteration' means. Does 'alteration' take place in the same moment, or between one moment and another?" > > Scott: I believe the term is 'aakaaravikaaro' (and this is the term used in the Sammohavinodanii excerpt), where 'aakaara' means 'state, condition' or 'property, quality, attribute' or 'sign, appearance, form' [or 'mode' as in the text]; and 'vikaara' means 'change, alteration.' I think, as Jon mentions elsewhere, that this refers to the alteration within the same moment. Therefore, here what I think is being referred to is the three sub-moments of arising (uppaada), changing while persisting (.thiti), and falling away (bhanga) which are aspects of a single moment of consciousness. Pa~n~naa would penetrate the characteristic of anatta inherent in a given dhamma in the moment. Well, not to quibble, but if you have three sub-moments that demonstrate change, you have the equivalent of three mini-moments within your official moment. To me, those three sub-moments are moments in their own right, since a moment is defined as a "period of time in which one thing takes place." Would you define "moment" differently from that? There is nothing wrong with saying that the "citta moment" breaks down into an arising, enduring and falling-away phase and thus has three sub-moments. My point is that those sub-moments are doing each something different, not standing still, and thus of course they can demonstrate change "over time," "not-self" and "dukkha." That does not go against my point that those things are observed "over time," however minute the time-spans may be. So we may be able to harmonize on this, since those little moments are present to allow anicca to take place. > R: "What I believe is being said here, and in one spot in your quote of the Vism said it explicitly, is that anatta is an object of *contemplation,* and as you point out, *not accessible to perception,* which is what I've been saying all along. If something is a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding, and is not a perceptible characteristic, like, as the Vism says in your quote, 'blue or red,' that is quite a different type of characteristic than one which is structurally inherent in the dhamma itself. And this may be a perfectly valid point, but it is as I have been trying to point out, a characteristic *about the dhamma or the way that it functions,* not something that is inherently *a part of it.* If this is understood, then the discussion could be resolved by just agreeing with me, instead of saying I was wrong." > > Scott: Here's the original quote again: > > "... It is understanding (pa~n~naa) in the sense of act of understanding (pajaanana). What is this act of understanding? It is knowing (jaanana) in a particular mode separate from the modes of perceiving (sa~njaanana) and cognizing (vijaanana). For though the state of knowing (jaanana-bhaava) is equally present in perception (sa~n~naa), in consciousness (vi~n~naa.na), and in understanding (pa~n~naa), nevertheless perception is only the mere perceiving of > an object as, say, 'blue' or 'yellow'; it cannot bring about the penetration of its characteristic as impermanent, painful, and not-self." > > Scott: I don't see where, in the Visuddhimagga passage, it refers to 'contemplation'. Have I got the wrong quote? I think you'd need to be clear in the way you define 'contemplation.' Above you seem to suggest that you are referring to 'contemplation' as being synonymous with 'understanding' ('...a characteristic that is an object of contemplation or understanding...'). My memory is that the quote actually used the word "contemplation," but I may be addled. An "act of understanding separate from the mode of perceiving [in which only such things are blue or yellow can be known]" is fine with me. It shows that there is a form of knowing that is beyond raw perception in panna's realization of the three characteristics. > I'll take this for now, and consider 'contemplation' to refer to the characteristic function of pa~n~naa cetasika. I can go with that. > I think that would be correct, if that is indeed what you mean. If you have another meaning for 'contemplation' - one that differentiates it from the function of pa~n~naa, i.e. eg. 'thinking about something' - I'll have to await your definition (and :-( all my marvelous exegesis will have been for naught). :-) I think it works for now. > From the Sammohavinodanii passage: > > "When resolving of the compact (ghanavinibbhoga) is effected by resolution into the various elements, the characteristic of no-self appears in accordance with its true essential nature." > > Scott: You state above that 'anatta is an object of *contemplation*'. If you mean, by 'contemplation' to refer to pa~n~naa, then I'd suggest that a more precise way to say this would be to note that pa~n~naa takes the same object - a dhamma - as citta with which it arises conascently and that pa~n~naa 'sees' that object in its 'true' nature. As far as anatta is concerned, developed pa~n~naa 'sees' that true nature in the mode and alteration of a given dhamma with clear resolution > subsequent to the having 'resolved the compact'. This latter phrase I don't quite understand. What is "resolving the compact." I just don't know that language in this context. > > R: "Well, the passage doesn't make that distinction. It said basically that it is not the nature of anatta to be perceived, but it is known by contemplation, which I take to be vipassana-bhavana. Panna knows anatta directly, not sanna, and it knows it through contemplation." > > Scott: Please give your definition of 'vipassana-bhavana'. Please define 'contemplation.' I don't mean a form of 'meditation' - I would mean to refer to the development of pa~n~naa. In this context I mean it as a moment of awareness that allows insight to arise regarding the nature of the dhamma. > R: "...If we are talking about panna I consider it a high realization, not nebulous at all." > > Scott: This goes back to the beginning of this post. Do you consider that a dhamma has characteristic? Or do you think that it is all just flowing indistinctly by - all conditions or some such? Is pa~n~naa a dhamma with characteristic and function? Does it arise and fall away in a moment? If we share this way of understanding things, I'll withdraw the concern about the nebulosity of the view. Even if all if is flowing along and doesn't break down into distinct dhammas with real definite characteristics, I still don't think that panna is nebulous. It would still see directly into the nature of realities. As for whether that is the case or not, I am not taking a stand on that at the moment. > R: "...Well, let's see - I'm not sure what "the mode of alteration" is technically, but if I *do* understand what it means, it means that the characteristics are revealed as they are undergoing their alterations from moment to moment, which would mean that they are contemplated by panna in the midst of undergoing changes, since it is during the process of change that impermanence, suffering and uncontrollability are revealed. If that is the case, it is one of the assertions I have been making. Maybe Buddhaghosa and I are in agreement as well." > > Scott: Yes, above I've shown my understanding to be that this refers to 'in the moment', not 'between moments.' I'll assume, again, you write 'contemplated by pa~n~na' as a way of referring to the characteristic of pa~n~naa, and not simply to thinking deeply about things. I would see panna as having direct insight into what is actual at the moment it shines its light on the object, not needing to take time to think about it. > I'll stop here for now, and work on the rest of the reply over the next day or so. Thanks for the effort, and for several helpful clarifications. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97455 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 9:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97293) > ---------------------- > Trust me, I was not advocating the odd view that a camera can see. It was just a physicalistic analogy to make the point in a simple way. > ---------------------- Sorry about that. I must have been distracted by an arriving meal or something ;-)) > ---------------------- > Is it fair to ask how one knows that "that's the way it is," if you cannot ascertain the mechanics of it, nor experience it oneself? If it is based on faith in the authors of the Abdhidhamma and commentaries, then that is something different than it being based on understanding or experience. And why assert it being this way if it is not important to understand how it works or that it works that way? > ---------------------- I understand this point (cetasikas taking the same object as the citta they accompany) to be established Theravada orthodoxy, and I state it as such (rather than as an article of faith on my part). I have no idea as to the mechanics of the matter, as this is not explained in any of the texts I've read. > ---------------------- > So how do you go about investigating it, rather than just accepting such a complex system on faith? > ---------------------- Investigation would have to begin, I think, by finding out what the texts have to say on the subject. There is simply no way that a matter as detailed as this (cetasikas arising together with the citta and thus simultaneously) could be investigated by direct experience. > ---------------------- > That is interesting. I would guess some of the texts go into detail on how this takes place. I now have a copy of Survey thanks to Nina and other friends, so I suppose I should be looking for this kind of detail in there... > ---------------------- Yes, A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas and Nina's own Abhidhamma in Daily Life. Some indicative references: SPD Chs 9 to 11 (esp the table on p.99) ADL Chs 13 to 15 > ---------------------- > I have to read more... > ---------------------- There's no "have to", remember? ;-)) But yes, I'd certainly encourage dipping into these 2 works any time. > ---------------------- > P.S. If someone can remind me of where to find some of the "ancient commentaries" I would appreciate it. Sarah gave me a clue the other week, but I can't find it now... > ---------------------- The commentaries are being mentioned here all the time, served up in bite-sized pieces for your easy digestion ;-)). So just keep reading. If you mean commentaries to individual suttas, there are many available from BPS ("Wheel" series, etc) and also from Wisdom, Amazon and the like. For example, "The Way of Mindfulness" is the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary. The Bodhi translations of the Majjhima and the Samyutta Nikayas have extensive notes from the commentaries. His translation of the SN, under the title "Collected Discourses of the Buddha", is especially useful and at the same time interesting to browse (and good value, I think). If you'd like an overview of the whole Theravada perspective, you might like to consider something like Visuddhimagga or the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, both of which are in effect compilations of all 3 pitakas and their commentaries. Vism: "The Path of Purification", Nanamoli/Bodhi A/S: "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma", Narada/Bodhi Hope this is helpful. Jon #97456 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 8:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/19/2009 3:55:31 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear friends, Samatha and vipassanÃ¥ are two different ways of mental development, bhÃ¥vanÃ¥. -------------------------------------- And a third is in-tandem cultivation. ---------------------------------------- The aim of samatha is to eliminate attachment to sense objects, and the aim of vipassanÃ¥ is to eradicate ignorance of realities. ---------------------------------------- I believe that is correct. Samatha bhavana calms the mind and lessens craving, aversion, and attachment, and vipassana, ultimately, uproots all defilements. Both are required for awakening, and the Buddha has taught that if only one has been mastered, then training should be sought out for the other. ----------------------------------------- Some people want to apply themselves to samatha first, because they think that in this way vipassanÃ¥ can be developed more quickly afterwards. They should realize, however, that both samatha and vipassanÃ¥ are ways of mental development. ------------------------------------------- Calm and insight are mutually supportive. Both are necessary. -------------------------------------------- The PÃ¥li term bhÃ¥vanÃ¥ means: to make become, to produce, to increase. Developing first samatha before vipassanÃ¥ is certainly not a “short cutâ€? to nibbÃ¥na as some people believe. Those who want to develop samatha should do so only if they really have accumulated skill for samatha. If one wants to apply oneself to a meditation subject, one needs a great deal of preparation, one has to lead a secluded life and many conditions have to be fulfilled. -------------------------------------- This is true for all bhavana. Dabbling won't get one far. -------------------------------------- Right understanding of the way to develop calm with the meditation subject is essential. If one just sits without any understanding, is that mental development? For the attainment of “access-concentrationâ€? and jhÃ¥na one needs perseverance with the development and one has to acquire great skill. Samatha, when it is really developed, is a way of kusala which is of a high degree. JhÃ¥na purifies the mind, but the latent tendencies of defilements are not eradicated. After the jhÃ¥nacitta has fallen away defilements are bound to arise again. As we have seen, those who have attained jhÃ¥na should still develop all the stages of insight in order to become enlightened. One may apply oneself to samatha, but if one does not have accumulations for the attainment of jhÃ¥na, or even access concentration, one should consider for oneself whether it is beneficial or not to continue developing samatha. Even while one applies oneself to a meditation subject akusala cittas still arise; the hindrances are not suppressed until one has attained access- concentration and jhÃ¥na. --------------------------------------- Accumulations aren't tropical plants growing in the wild, without careful tending to the garden. What is done now yields the accumulations of the future. Without useful action now, there is no basis for useful results in the future. If not now, when? The past is gone, the future a dream. Now is the time. ---------------------------------------- ****** Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard Hindrances /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) #97457 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 2:29 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 19-apr-2009, om 14:11 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: The aim of samatha is to eliminate attachment to sense > objects, and the aim of vipassanå is to eradicate ignorance of > realities. > ---------------------------------------- > H: I believe that is correct. Samatha bhavana calms the mind and > lessens > craving, aversion, and attachment, and vipassana, ultimately, > uproots all > defilements. Both are required for awakening, and the Buddha has > taught that > if only one has been mastered, then training should be sought out > for the > other. > ----------------------------------------- > N: First sentence correct; second sentence, no, I see it > differently as you know. How is this based on the scriptures? We have to be careful here and understand what is meant by calm and to what degree in this or that text. I find text reading not easy, one can easily be mistaken. Therefore I need the help of the commentaries. Sometimes the text refers to lokuttara citta, and then certainly calm to the degree of jhaana accompanies the lokuttara citta, also for those who did not develop mundane jhaana. For ariyans with dry insight lokuttara citta is accompanied by calm that has the strength of the first stage of jhaana. -------- > N: Some people want to apply themselves to samatha first, > because they think that in this way vipassanå can be developed more > quickly afterwards. They should realize, however, that both samatha > and vipassanå are ways of mental development. > ------------------------------------------- > H: Calm and insight are mutually supportive. Both are necessary. > -------------------------------------------- > N: Again, what degree of calm and which type of citta does it > accompany? ------- > > N: The Påli term bhåvanå > means: to make become, to produce, to increase. Developing first > samatha before vipassanå is certainly not a “short cut” to nibbåna as > some people believe. Those who want to develop samatha should do so > only if they really have accumulated skill for samatha. If one wants > to apply oneself to a meditation subject, one needs a great deal of > preparation, one has to lead a secluded life and many conditions have > to be fulfilled. > -------------------------------------- > H: This is true for all bhavana. Dabbling won't get one far. > -------------------------------------- > N: Agreed. ------ > > N: One may apply oneself to samatha, but if one does not have > accumulations for the attainment of jhåna, or even access > concentration, one should consider for oneself whether it is > beneficial or not to continue developing samatha. Even while one > applies oneself to a meditation subject akusala cittas still arise; > the hindrances are not suppressed until one has attained access- > concentration and jhåna. > --------------------------------------- > H: Accumulations aren't tropical plants growing in the wild, without > careful tending to the garden. What is done now yields the > accumulations of the > future. Without useful action now, there is no basis for useful > results in > the future. If not now, when? The past is gone, the future a dream. > Now is > the time. > ---------------------------------------- N: I agree now is the time, and I agree: what is accumulated now will bear fruit in the future. But I was actually speaking about those who have no inclinations to jhaana. One should know that many conditions have to be fulfilled, and is one prepared to live completely removed from sense pleasures? If not, why not begin now to develop understanding of nama and rupa? This can be developed in any situation, also if one is inclined to enjoy all the pleasures of life. Lobha arises, but also lobha should be known as only a conditioned dhamma. -------- Nina. #97458 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:23 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/19/2009 10:30:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: > N: The aim of samatha is to eliminate attachment to sense > objects, and the aim of vipassanÃ¥ is to eradicate ignorance of > realities. > ---------------------------------------- > H: I believe that is correct. Samatha bhavana calms the mind and > lessens > craving, aversion, and attachment, and vipassana, ultimately, > uproots all > defilements. Both are required for awakening, and the Buddha has > taught that > if only one has been mastered, then training should be sought out > for the > other. > ----------------------------------------- > N: First sentence correct; --------------------------------------------- With regard to that, there is the following sutta: AN 2.30 Vijja-bhagiya Sutta A Share in Clear Knowing Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: A i 61 (II,iii,10) ____________________________________ Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1998 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 1998 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ "These two qualities have a share in clear knowing. Which two? Tranquillity (samatha) & insight (vipassana). "When tranquillity is developed, what purpose does it serve? The mind is developed. And when the mind is developed, what purpose does it serve? Passion is abandoned. "When insight is developed, what purpose does it serve? Discernment is developed. And when discernment is developed, what purpose does it serve? Ignorance is abandoned. "Defiled by passion, the mind is not released. Defiled by ignorance, discernment does not develop. Thus from the fading of passion is there awareness-release. From the fading of ignorance is there discernment-release." ------------------------------------------------- second sentence, no, I see it > differently as you know. How is this based on the scriptures? We have to be careful here and understand what is meant by calm and to what degree in this or that text. I find text reading not easy, one can easily be mistaken. Therefore I need the help of the commentaries. Sometimes the text refers to lokuttara citta, and then certainly calm to the degree of jhaana accompanies the lokuttara citta, also for those who did not develop mundane jhaana. For ariyans with dry insight lokuttara citta is accompanied by calm that has the strength of the first stage of jhaana. =========================== I assume that by "second sentence," you mean my last one. There is a specific sutta that teaches exactly such seeking out as I have specified. The sutta is the following: __________________________ 4.94 Samadhi Sutta Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight) Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: A ii 93 ____________________________________ Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1998 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 1998 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ "Monks, these four types of individuals are to be found existing in the world. Which four? "There is the case of the individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness. Then there is the case of the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "The individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness, but not insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, should approach an individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment and ask him: 'How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "As for the individual who has attained insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, but not internal tranquillity of awareness, he should approach an individual who has attained internal tranquillity of awareness... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "As for the individual who has attained neither internal tranquillity of awareness nor insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, he should approach an individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment... and ask him, 'How should the mind be steadied? How should it be made to settle down? How should it be unified? How should it be concentrated? How should fabrications be regarded? How should they be investigated? How should they be seen with insight?' The other will answer in line with what he has seen & experienced: 'The mind should be steadied in this way. The mind should be made to settle down in this way. The mind should be unified in this way. The mind should be concentrated in this way. Fabrications should be regarded in this way. Fabrications should be investigated in this way. Fabrications should be seen in this way with insight.' Then eventually he [the first] will become one who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment. "As for the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment, his duty is to make an effort in establishing ('tuning') those very same skillful qualities to a higher degree for the ending of the (mental) fermentations. "These are four types of individuals to be found existing in the world." ------------------------------------------------ Also relevant to what we are discussing is the following from the Dhammapada: _______________________________________ 372 There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one with no jhana. But one with both jhana & discernment: he's on the verge of Unbinding. ================================ With metta, Howard Hindrances /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) #97459 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon! My God, you are quick on the uptake. No sooner do I reply to a post [at 4 am in the morning having 'Buddhist Philosophy-based Insomnia'] than you send me a new one in the early morning of the next day. Joking aside, I appreciate the exchange. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97293) > > ---------------------- > > Trust me, I was not advocating the odd view that a camera can see. It was just a physicalistic analogy to make the point in a simple way. > > ---------------------- > > Sorry about that. I must have been distracted by an arriving meal or something ;-)) > > > ---------------------- I am also prone to distraction by the arrival of food. :-) > > Is it fair to ask how one knows that "that's the way it is," if you cannot ascertain the mechanics of it, nor experience it oneself? If it is based on faith in the authors of the Abdhidhamma and commentaries, then that is something different than it being based on understanding or experience. And why assert it being this way if it is not important to understand how it works or that it works that way? > > ---------------------- > > I understand this point (cetasikas taking the same object as the citta they accompany) to be established Theravada orthodoxy, and I state it as such (rather than as an article of faith on my part). I think the point that may be disputed is not whether cetasikas take the same object as citta, but the mechanics of how this occurs. I don't think it is Theravadin orthodoxy that a discrete citta arises for each experient that arises and that the cetasikas are aligned one at a time around a single quality such as hardness and that this is the level of experience that forms a dhamma. I think the way in which this is described is Abhidhamma orthodoxy, rather than for the whole of the Theravadin community. Some take this as doctrine and others not. > I have no idea as to the mechanics of the matter, as this is not explained in any of the texts I've read. Well, that is interesting, in so detailed a teaching. That is too bad. That is like saying that we know which pipes are connected in the plumbing but we have no idea how they get put together. > > ---------------------- > > So how do you go about investigating it, rather than just accepting such a complex system on faith? > > ---------------------- > > Investigation would have to begin, I think, by finding out what the texts have to say on the subject. There is simply no way that a matter as detailed as this (cetasikas arising together with the citta and thus simultaneously) could be investigated by direct experience. Then how was it determined in the first place? I assume an arahant could directly experience this taking place and thus was able to write it down? > > ---------------------- > > That is interesting. I would guess some of the texts go into detail on how this takes place. I now have a copy of Survey thanks to Nina and other friends, so I suppose I should be looking for this kind of detail in there... > > ---------------------- > > Yes, A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas and Nina's own Abhidhamma in Daily Life. Some indicative references: > SPD Chs 9 to 11 (esp the table on p.99) > ADL Chs 13 to 15 Thanks for these references. I will try to look when I am able. > > ---------------------- > > I have to read more... > > ---------------------- > > There's no "have to", remember? ;-)) But yes, I'd certainly encourage dipping into these 2 works any time. I agree. > > > ---------------------- > > P.S. If someone can remind me of where to find some of the "ancient commentaries" I would appreciate it. Sarah gave me a clue the other week, but I can't find it now... > > ---------------------- > > The commentaries are being mentioned here all the time, served up in bite-sized pieces for your easy digestion ;-)). So just keep reading. :-) > If you mean commentaries to individual suttas, there are many available from BPS ("Wheel" series, etc) and also from Wisdom, Amazon and the like. For example, "The Way of Mindfulness" is the > Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary. Well I would be interested in this. Thank you. The commentary on Satipatthana Sutta would be a good place to start. Let's see if I can get permission to add yet another book to my Buddhist library. Thanks to Sarah, Nina and others by the way for the nice volumes I was recently sent: KS's book on the Perfections, and Nina's on dhammas. These valuable volumes are thin enough to sneak into the collection without causing the house guardians to awaken. > The Bodhi translations of the Majjhima and the Samyutta Nikayas have extensive notes from the commentaries. His translation of the SN, under the title "Collected Discourses of the Buddha", is especially useful and at the same time interesting to browse (and good value, I think). I will have to put that in my amazon wish list. If I am "good" and complete reading the coms on the Sattipatthana Sutta, I will give myself permission to get the SN with commentary by BB. That would be a very good read. Thank you. > If you'd like an overview of the whole Theravada perspective, you might like to consider something like Visuddhimagga or the Abhidhammattha Sangaha, both of which are in effect compilations of all 3 pitakas and their commentaries. I think the Sangaha is online, and I think I have a downloaded copy of the Vism as well. I will have to learn to read.... These are all good suggestions... > Vism: "The Path of Purification", Nanamoli/Bodhi > A/S: "A Comprehensive Manual of Abhidhamma", Narada/Bodhi These editions I'm sure would be very valuable. > Hope this is helpful. Indeed, I appreciate it. And a very nice exchange for a Sunday. Now, off to battle sloth and torpor...... Talk to you soon. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #97460 From: "Chew" Date: Sun Apr 19, 2009 3:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya chewsadhu Dear Sarah, Thanks for the link http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ I enjoy listening to the talks and discussions. It is so wonderful. Connie told me that she had uploaded A.Sujin Dhamma Talks to her SkyDrive. I will listen to the Talks. Thanks and Sadhu. My friend went to Myanmar to attend the Sacca Yamaka course last year Nov 2008. It was conducted by Sayadaw U Nandamala. She passed the Talks to me. I am now editing it and uploading to the http://saccayamaka.blogspot.com/ Please visit to the blog when you free. And, we are going to have Citta Yamaka Course on 23 June 2009 till 2 July 2009 in Penang. Would you like to join us? I will put more information about the course in http://cittayamaka.blogspot.com/ Actually, I am thinking to prepare some Pali-English glossary for this subject Citta Yamaka. Hoping that if those participants can familiar with the terms before they attend the class, it would benefit to them. But I am weak in Pali. Nina suggested me to post it here. So that people here can help me. Thanks. Let me draft it out first. Then I will post it here. Alright. Thanks and Sadhu. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew #97461 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:09 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > =========================== > I assume that by "second sentence," you mean my last one. There is a > specific sutta that teaches exactly such seeking out as I have specified. > The sutta is the following: > __________________________ > > 4.94 > Samadhi Sutta > Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight) > > Translated from the Pali by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu This sutta suggests to me that tranquillity and insight cannot be developed in-tandem. It suggests that they are two different skill sets. What do you think? Metta, James #97462 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:06 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James and Howard, Op 20-apr-2009, om 5:09 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Samadhi Sutta > > Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight) > > > > Translated from the Pali by > > Thanissaro Bhikkhu > > This sutta suggests to me that tranquillity and insight cannot be > developed in-tandem. It suggests that they are two different skill > sets. What do you think? ------- N: When someone is very skilled at jhaana, he can enter and emerge at any time. When he has emerged from jhaana he can be aware and have right understanding of the jhaanacitta or accompanying jhaanafactors one at a time and realize these as non-self, impermanent. We can call that in tandem. Enter jhaana, emerge, be aware, enter again, emerge, be aware, etc. Nina. #97463 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 6:16 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 15. nilovg Dear friends, Vipassanå is to be developed in our daily life. If it is not developed in daily life we will not come to know our accumulated inclinations. Also our defilements should be known as they are, as conditioned nåmas, otherwise they cannot be eradicated. Vipassanå leads eventually to the eradication of defilements. It leads to the “ariyan calm” which is the highest degree of calm. We read in the “Discourse on the Analysis of the Elements” (Middle Length Sayings III, number. 140): “For this, monks, is the highest ariyan calm, that is to say the calm with regard to attachment, hatred and ignorance...” It is still felt by some that if they apply themselves to samatha, even if they have not accumulated skill for jhåna, it would help them with the development of vipassanå. If one wants to use samatha as a way to attain enlightenment more quickly one should consider whether this is motivated by lobha or not. We should also know that sati and paññå in samatha are different from sati and paññå in vipassanå. In samatha there should be mindfulness and right understanding of the meditation subject and paññå should know when there is true calm, freedom from akusala. In vipassanå there is mindfulness of the nåma or rúpa which appears at the present moment through one of the six doors, so that paññå can realize them as not self. If one confuses the different ways of development of samatha and vipassanå, there will not be right understanding of cause and effect. One may erroneously think that the development of samatha is the way to obtain a great deal of sati of the Eightfold Path. It is understandable that those who are discouraged about their akusala cittas and lack of mindfulness want to make special efforts to cause mindfulness to arise more frequently. As you wrote in your letter, you thought that concentration on breathing was for you the right condition for mindfulness of the Eightfold Path. You found that after this exercise the six doors were wide open; seeing and hearing seemed so clear. You felt like a spider in a web, ready to catch. If there is mindfulness right now of, for example, sound or hardness, what is the condition for mindfulness? Is it necessary to concentrate on breathing first, in order to become more relaxed? ******** Nina. #97464 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:13 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N: When someone is very skilled at jhaana, he can enter and emerge at > any time. When he has emerged from jhaana he can be aware and have > right understanding of the jhaanacitta or accompanying jhaanafactors > one at a time and realize these as non-self, impermanent. We can call > that in tandem. Enter jhaana, emerge, be aware, enter again, emerge, > be aware, etc. Right. Maybe. Oops, I meant to say "at the same time". To use abhidhamma language, is it possible for the jhana citta to have insight into fabrications? You see, from the Samadhi Sutta, it is apparent that someone who is "skilled in jhana" isn't necessarily skilled in insight, and vice versa. But, the Buddha declares that one should be skilled in both. That raises logistical problems as to how to develop bhavana because one can't be sure as to when to practice samatha or when to practice vipassana. Some solve this by stating that you practice them both in tandem, one after the other (perhaps very quickly)- but that could result in not being proficient in either one. Some state that you practice them both at the same time as is suggested in some suttas- but that could be impossible. Metta, James #97465 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya sarahprocter... Dear Chew, --- On Sun, 19/4/09, Chew wrote: >I enjoy listening to the talks and discussions. It is so wonderful. Connie told me that she had uploaded A.Sujin Dhamma Talks to her SkyDrive. I will listen to the Talks. Thanks and Sadhu. ... S: I don't know what a SkyDrive is, but I listen to them on an i-pod, like this morning in the doctor's surgery, or while at the dentist or hair-dresser or on buses or on longer walks... Also, if I'm not sleeping at night... ... >My friend went to Myanmar to attend the Sacca Yamaka course last year Nov 2008. It was conducted by Sayadaw U Nandamala. She passed the Talks to me. I am now editing it and uploading to the http://saccayamaka. blogspot. com/ Please visit to the blog when you free. And, we are going to have Citta Yamaka Course on 23 June 2009 till 2 July 2009 in Penang. Would you like to join us? I will put more information about the course in http://cittayamaka. blogspot. com/ ... S: Thanks, Chew. Sounds like you keep very busy, sharing Dhamma. Anumodana. Jon and I'll be in Europe for a family gathering at that time. Btw, I remember Jon used to send boxes and boxes of books (mostly Nina's Abhidhamma in Daily Life and Buddhism in Daily Life) to friends in Penang in the 70s. I remember reading some of the correspondence he received at that time. Many people were really interested in the Abhidhamma even then. I wonder if some are still around in your group? Anyway, please keep sharing anything of interest to us here, such as details from the Yamaka for further reflection and discussion. It's not translated into English, so I'm glad to read any of your comments/questions etc. ... >Actually, I am thinking to prepare some Pali-English glossary for this subject Citta Yamaka. Hoping that if those participants can familiar with the terms before they attend the class, it would benefit to them. But I am weak in Pali. Nina suggested me to post it here. So that people here can help me. Thanks. Let me draft it out first. Then I will post it here. ... S: Good idea. Could you post a set of a few words at a time, so we can discuss further and use them as a 'spring-board'. For any unusual words, perhaps you can add a phrase or two? Look forward to further discussions. Metta, Sarah ====== #97466 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Connie's blank sarahprocter... Hi Connie, --- On Fri, 17/4/09, connie wrote: >when am I Not buried in sammoha? lol. just not the books since we spoke! speaking of that particular one, tho, this is where (as usual) I'd gotten hung up (which dsg mp3??) ... S: ???? ... >when you called: second half of Dispeller of Delusion 16 on "Sun":<....> >no mother, no child. no one to mind. or hunger. This example just driving in the point a bit deeper than in the first half, where "sickness due to wind arises and breaks the hands, feet, spine, etc." which, storyline-wise might be more conventionally apparent in our particular circumstances -err, postures - but still just one moment the crumbling and next the accumulating, which must really be the more important. ... S: Yes, never a lack of story lines.... crumbling and accumulating at the same time, surely? ... >so rather than reading, I've been listening to a lot of the dhamma talks from some of our busy friend Chew's blogs... right now it's disc one of the CMA talks.... http://abhidhammatt ha.blogspot. com/ There are links to the other blogs there and well worth anyone's time, I think. Also so far, the sound quality has been surprisingly good. There are two different series of talks on Fundamental Abhidhamma & I think the earliest of those (2005) would be the ones going along with the abhidhamma book link we got from mike the other day. Visuddhimagga lectures, anyone? Patthana? Chew's got 'em out there for us (& if there are any problems getting the talks downloaded, you can get them from me). ... S: Thanks for sharing with all and offering your assistance with downloading talks.... Metta, Sarah ======= #97467 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Wed, 15/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: We think in terms of postures and conventional ideas of pain and impermanence. So we think that when there is a lot of discomfort in one posture, by changing position, the pain is relieved. Of course, this is all true on a conventional level - our knee or hip hurts and we change position and it feels better. ------------ --------- --------- --------- ------ H:> It IS true that the change in experience due to the conglomerate of activities we call "changing position" relieves the discomfort for a while. But this is a passing respite. Pain recurs and the aversion to it, the real suffering, as well. Moreover, the repeated dodging of discomfort and the repeated lurching towards pleasure is, itself, painful and oppressive - tiring and tiresome, and, eventually, after one has "had enough," corrective developments may arise. Only relinquishment, disengagement, and equanimity resulting from clear seeing leads out of this mess. ------------ --------- --------- --------- -------- S: Yes, I agree and only the clear seeing that in fact all dhammas, including those we find very pleasurable, are dukkha on account of their impermanence and the fact that they are beyond anyone's control. ... >>S:However, in reality, there are no postures, there are merely changing dhammas, transient elements which are all dukkha because of such transience. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -- H:> Not only because of the transience. Often, as regards physical pain, for example, transience provides the temporary relief. The fundamental cause of the dukkha is the tanha, the dissatisfaction with what there is. Even what is pleasant becomes unpleasant when boredom sets in, and then there is the craving for change - for things to be other than they are. .... S: As you know, there are 3 kinds of dukkha: i) dukkha dukkha or what we usually think of as suffering or unpleasantness (mental and bodily), associated with unpleasant feeling. ii) vipari.naama dukkha or the dukkha of change. This is what you point to in your last sentence, when even the pleasant feeling passes. iii) sankhaara dukkha or the dukkha pertainting to all conditioned dhammas. this is dukkha in the ultimate sense and which dukkha as one of the ti-lakkhana refers to. .... H:>Ultimately craving and aversion are two sides of the very same coin. It is always a matter of craving - for presence, for absence, for change, ..., for things being different from how they currently are. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---- S: Yes, as you say, it all comes back to tanha as cause. ... >>S:Therefore it is said, as I understand, that the (ultimate) characteristic of dukkha of conditioned dhammas, is 'concealed by postures (iriyaapatha) '. The 'continuous oppression' of all that is conditioned is not seen for what it is because we have the illusion of being able to avoid pain. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ------ H:> Yes, with the side-stepping of pain, our greed for peace enables our repeated forgetting of dukkha and the illusion that "there is no problem." And even if we do see and remember that there is a problem of pain and dissatisfaction, we dream that the solution lies, as you say, in replacing some dhammas by others. The only solution lies in wisdom and relinquishment. ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ------- S: Well said. Good to find so much agreement, these days! While we think in terms of situations, such as 'postures' and take them for reality, we'll continue to be misled into thinking that such 'moving of the deck-chairs' provides the answers. ... .... H:> /"For a monk practicing the Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma, what accords with the Dhamma is this: that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to form, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to feeling, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to perception, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to fabrications, that he keep cultivating disenchantment with regard to consciousness. As he keeps cultivating disenchantment with regard to form... feeling... perception.. . fabrications. .. consciousness, he comprehends form... feeling... perception.. . fabrications. .. consciousness. As he comprehends form... feeling... perception.. . fabrications. .. consciousness, he is totally released from form... feeling... perception.. . fabrications. .. consciousness. He is totally released from sorrows, lamentations, pains, distresses, & despairs. He is totally released, I tell you, from suffering & stress."/ (From the Anudhamma Sutta) ... S: Very appropriate - 'in accordance with the Dhamma', which will lead to enlightenment. If it's the cultivating of attachment, it's not 'in accordance with the Dhamma'. Pa.tipatti, 'practicing the Dhamma''in accordance with the Dhamma' - right understanding and right awareness can 'reach' to the true characteristic of ruupa or naama right now. Even a few words about dhammas as dukkha or anatta, or about seeing and visible object can be a condition for such right understanding and right awareness at this moment. Thanks for your further comments and quote which help me reflect further, Howard. Metta, Sarah ===== #97468 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Connie's blank nilovg Dear Connie, Some poeple like me do not have time to listen to blogs, but if you have point of interest, just a few lines, perhaps you can rendre them here? I like to 'meditate' on Abhidhamma line by line. Nina. Op 20-apr-2009, om 9:37 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > There are links to the other blogs there and well worth anyone's > time, I think. Also so far, the sound quality has been surprisingly > good. There are two different series of talks on Fundamental > Abhidhamma & I think the earliest of those (2005) would be the ones > going along with the abhidhamma book link we got from mike the > other day. #97469 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:54 am Subject: The smoky, deceptive and illusive Ego... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The smoky, deceptive & illusive Ego: The idea or concept of 'Self' inherently assumes that a 'Same Constant Self': 'Self' is the 'Same' from one moment to the next. Belief in ‘self’ therefore assumes that something is: ‘identical’ and there thus defines a core ‘identity’... This is a hidden unseen form of Eternalism to believe that something remains the 'Same' and 'Identical' from one moment to the next! This inherently hidden Eternalism, the 'personalists=egoists=puggalavadins' often both overlook &/or deny! Universal Impermanence: However, the invariably observable & undeniable fact is: Nothing whatsoever remains the same from one moment to the next moment: Form changes, whether own or other; Feeling changes, whether internal or external; Perception changes, whether experienced by eye, ear, nose, mouth, body or mind; Mental Construction changes, whether it is intention, planning, wanting or wishing; Consciousness changes, whether visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile or mental; In short all name-&-form, whether internal or external changes momentarily… There exists thus NOTHING unchanging whatsoever! Neither within nor apart from The 5 clusters of clinging, Neither within nor apart from the duality: Name-&-Form, that ever could possibly qualify as an unchanging, same, constant & identical self… Since both the 5 clusters of clinging and Name-&-Form notify ALL phenomena, internal as external, there cannot truly be said to exist any self anywhere at all… Ego-Adornment = Self-Aggrandizement is rooted in the deep desire to exist: The ‘self’, ‘ego’, ‘I’, ‘me’ we cherish so much and love so deeply thus appears to ‘exist’ only in the conventional sense as an ‘idea’, as a mental construction: A ‘concept’… This central notion nevertheless is the core of all ‘egoism’ and possess therefore the power to drag beings into repeated birth, death, possessiveness, conflict & war… Nothing is thus more Dangerous than the idea of a ‘Self’… A master serial killer!!! The EGO-concept - though immaterial, false and unreal - is the very core of evil... Self as linguistic invention... A pointer without any reference; pointing nowhere! It is pragmatically practical in daily life to operate with notions of ‘I’, ‘Me’, ‘You’, ‘They’ etc. as if these existed as lasting entities, yet this is only a FEATURE of the conventional structure of LANGUAGE & not a part of the factual & actual REALITY! In the ultimate & absolute sense, however, there exist only ever-changing discrete states of mentality and materiality, arising and ceasing every moment… Just a blinking flux…As ephemeral as smoke… Or stroboscopic light… Ceasing in the same moment as it arised! Right there & then! There is No Agent, but there is Activity: There is really the event of action, but no real actor; No one who acts! The occasion of feeling exists, but no feeler exists; No one who feels! The input of perception occurs, but there is no perceiver; No one who perceives! The experienced phenomena IS, but no experiencer is; No one who experiences! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Who_or_what_is_the_Agent.htm The Automatic Egoless Camera: There is a camera filming, but no one who is 'behind' the camera... There is a film projected up upon a screen, but no one who is 'inside' the cinema... http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/The_Selfless_Camera.htm The invisible prison = EGO! Those who are afraid of Nibbana, since it seems the be a loss of ‘Self’ may be relieved by understanding that one cannot loose something that never was there, that never really existed in the first place…Nibbana is real and exists, but no self enters it… The Noble path is real and liberating, but no self completes it… If one does not wish to die – again and again – one must penetrate, comprehend and relinquish this false conceptualization of ‘Self=Me=I’ ... Purging the Ego-Concept! This No-self = Anatta Doctrine: It is the core doctrine of Buddhism & the door to stream-entry! It is particular to Buddhas and never revealed by any other! It is liberating beyond any measure and imagination! Keep digging. There is nothing down or in here! One has to see that for ‘one-self’! Hehehe… ;-) The Blessed Buddha once said: Blissful is solitude for one who is content, learned & who see the True Dhamma. Blissful is harmlessness towards all beings without exception. Blissful is freedom from any sensual urge whatsoever. Yet, the supreme bliss, is the elimination of the abysmal conceit “I amâ€?!’ Udana – Inspiration: II – 1 <...> Have a nice selfless day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄ?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The smoky, deceptive, and illusive Ego... #97470 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Connie's blank sarahprocter... Dear Connie (& Nina), --- On Mon, 20/4/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >Some poeple like me do not have time to listen to blogs, but if you have point of interest, just a few lines, perhaps you can rendre them here? I like to 'meditate' on Abhidhamma line by line. ... S: I agree with Nina's comment - I like to hear what you, Chew or others are finding of particular interest, even just a line or too. Then we can all 'meditate' together and enjoy some 'seclusion' as we wisely reflect on your words:-)). Metta, Sarah ====== #97471 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, Your messages always help me to consider carefully: --- On Sat, 18/4/09, sprlrt wrote: >Most people would agree with the 1st NT, which basically lists different situations where suffering is experienced. ... S: Surely, people agree with the 1st NT because they understand it as you suggest -- different situations where suffering is experienced -- rather than appreciating the deeper meaning of dukkha as referring to all conditioned dhammas and as you stressed before, 'pancuupadaana khandha' as the NT of dukkha. As you indicated before, these are exactly the same dhammas which have to be known with insight. ... >The 2nd NT, establishing the cause of suffering in tanha/lobha, craving/attachment, is not as widely accepted as the 1st is, ... S: Again, isn't that because the 1st isn't really understood? Even now, do we really understand dhammas as dukkha on account of their impermanence? I think it's only theoretical, according to degrees of pariyatti, until insight into the impermanence of dhammas has been developed. ... >it's not that common to blame one's own clinging for one's own suffering, usually it's because of bad health, bad weather, bad people, bad god(s), bad luck, bad food, bad place, bad vibes, etc. ... S: Very true and very guilty!! ... >In the long enumeration of lobha's attributes, Dhs (nikkhepakandam, tikam, (akusala) hetugocchakam) , includes dukkhamuulam and dukkhanidaana. m, root and source of suffering, as well as several aspects of tanha, including craving for what is visible, audible, tastable, smellable, touchable and thinkable (rupa, sadda, gandha, rasa, photabba, dhamma tanha), all the six classes of objects that citta experience through the corresponding 6 doors. A simile for a (pleasant) object being experienced by lobha is given by the Atthasalini as a piece of meat contacting an hot pan. It sticks... ... S: It certainly does stick.... I like the way you highlighted dukkhamuulam and dukkhanidaanam (root and sorce of suffering) as attributes of lobha. And yes, it's just craving for the 6 classes of objects, not understanding such craving as dukkhamuulam and dukkhanidaanam. Thanks for that. ... >And where does tanha arises, when there are conditions for its arising, and where does it fall away, once arisen? To this question the Vibh. basically answers that where there is a pleasant, desiderable thing, piya-saataruupa. m (which includes all the six classes of objects), there is where tanha arise & then falls (when there are conditions for this to happen). ... S: And this is why 'good deeds', even the highest arupa jhanas don't help to dismantle the bricks of samsara. Kusala vipaka, pleasant, desirable objects and then more tanha... .... >Lobha experiences pleasant objects, ittharammana, and through the five sense doors it can only arise in the (akusala) javana series of cittas which follows a pancavinnana vipaka citta, seeing for instance, which has to be kusala, the result of past kusala kamma. ... S: Of course, this is almost always true. I hesitate to say 'always' because of the oft-quoted passages in the Sammohavinodanii (see U.P. under 'rupas - inherent characteristics, desirable etc). Here's a passage I've quoted before from Abbhidhammatthavibhavini, ch1V, the commentary to Abhidhammattha Sangaha, (Summary & Exposition..., PTS). “The resultants, which occur by the power of kamma, acquire a feeling appropriate to the object not because of the existence of choice, but by automatic production, like the reflection of a face in a mirror. However, for the wholesome and unwholesome [impulsions] occurring in the mental continua of those who have not got rid of the distorted views, there are the options, in the case of a very desirable [object] of the modes of the moderately desirable and undesirable, and in the case of the undesirable [object], of the modes of the desirable and moderately desirable. “For it is thus that the unfaithful have impulsions accompanied by equanimity with the very desirable objects, such as the Buddha, and the followers of other religions impulsions accompanied by unhappiness; and (thus that) those of profound sensibilities have impulsions accompanied by equanimity with an unpleasant object, and dogs, etc, impulsions accompanied by happiness; but the initial and subsequent resultants are of exactly the same nature, it is only that dogs, etc, take pleasure in the sight of filth....â€? .... >In the 2nd NT then the vipaka vatta/round is kusala, unlike in the 1st where is akusala, while kilesa/kamma rounds remain the same, akusala. ... S: a very good and interesting point to highlight. I'll look forward to any further reflections or musings, Alberto. Metta, Sarah ========= #97472 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 11:59 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sprlrt Hi Sarah, Lukas & all, The 2nd NT, craving as the cause of suffering, was already known before the enlightenment of the Buddha. And the uncovering of this truth can come, I think, only with panna of the level of the 2nd vipassana-nana, direct knowledge of causes and results, an intermediate level of panna, prior to the 3rd nana, when the arising & falling of dhammas starts to be directly known. And then, as 3rd truth, dukkhanirodha, about the termination of suffering, there wasn't nibbana, the dhamma that only Buddhas can uncover and bring back to light, but the jhanas, rupa and arupa, fine-material and immaterial, and rebirth as a brahma god, the ultimate atman, which the Buddha included in the round of rebirth, samasara. Consequentely the 4th NT, the path leading to the termination of dukkha, would also differ, samatha, with its formal, conventional objects of meditation, in a secluded place away from 5 sense doors contacts, for developing jhana (with an intermediate level of panna as prerequisite), prior to the Buddha enlightenment; satipatthana or the right path thereafter, the development of panna, kusala nana-sampayutta citta (and panna, amoha, is kusala hetu, the root of kusala), the direct understanding of dhammas that it experiences as its objects, as they really are, anatta, anicca and dukkha, no matter whether kusala, akusala or abyakata, as they arise & fall every day, every hour, every minute, every second, all the time. Alberto #97473 From: "gazita2002" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:23 pm Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) gazita2002 hallo Jon, Robert, Scott have been following this very interesting thread; --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > > > I think you are extrapolating from the literal meaning of anatta. But anatta is simply the label given to a particular characteristic (just like "effort" is the label given to a particular cetasika). > > > > What *is* the characteristic that this designates. Can you describe or define it a bit more? > > In the Sammohavinnodanii passage quoted by Scott (at msg #97333, 97334), the 3 characteristics are described as follows: > > "Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or the mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. ... > "The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. ... > "The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self. ... > "For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements ... the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." > > To my understanding of this, the characteristics are "modes of alteration" discernable within the span of a single dhamma. > > Similar definitions are given in the commentary to MN 22 (as quoted in note 3 to Ch XXI of The Path of Purification, at p.845): > "Having been, it is not, therefore it is impermanent; ... > "It is painful on account of the mode of oppression; ... > "It is not-self on account of the mode of insusceptibility to the exercise of power; ...". > > The commentary to Ch 9, par. 44 of the Abhidhammattha Sangaha (STA p.346) has this: > "The impermanent-characteristic is the characteristic that is to be characterised by impermanence itself; or it is what is characterized by that [impermanence]. > "The suffering characteristic is the characteristic that is itself the state of suffering, reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall [of things]. > "The fact of not-self (anattataa) is the non-existence of the self imagined by others; the not-self characteristic is the characteristic constituted by that." azita: 'the suffering characteristic......reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall.. How come oppressed? I can understand dhammas being dukkha because of impermanence, so would appreciate a bit more info about 'oppressed'. thanks. BTW Jon, what on earth did you do to Fiji!!!!! :-0 Patience, courage and good cheer azita #97474 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 8:59 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 4/19/2009 11:09:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > =========================== > I assume that by "second sentence," you mean my last one. There is a > specific sutta that teaches exactly such seeking out as I have specified. > The sutta is the following: > __________________________ > > 4.94 > Samadhi Sutta > Concentration (Tranquillity and Insight) > > Translated from the Pali by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu This sutta suggests to me that tranquillity and insight cannot be developed in-tandem. It suggests that they are two different skill sets. What do you think? ------------------------------------------- I don't think so, though I do agree that tranquillity and insight are not the same skills. The sutta includes "And then there is the case of the individual who has attained both internal tranquillity of awareness & insight into phenomena through heightened discernment." This says nothing of *how* they may have (already) been achieved. The Yuganaddha Sutta, copied below, however, says that one approach IS the in-tandem one: _______________ AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta In Tandem Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu PTS: A ii 156 ____________________________________ Source: Transcribed from a file provided by the translator. ____________________________________ Copyright © 1998 Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight edition © 1998 For free distribution. This work may be republished, reformatted, reprinted, and redistributed in any medium. It is the author's wish, however, that any such republication and redistribution be made available to the public on a free and unrestricted basis and that translations and other derivative works be clearly marked as such. ____________________________________ On one occasion Ven. Ananda was staying in Kosambi, at Ghosita's monastery. There he addressed the monks, "Friends!" "Yes, friend," the monks responded. Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? "There is the case where a monk has developed insight preceded by tranquillity. As he develops insight preceded by tranquillity, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity preceded by insight. As he develops tranquillity preceded by insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk has developed tranquillity in tandem with insight. As he develops tranquillity in tandem with insight, the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." -------------------------- Metta, James =========================== With metta, Howard P. S. I'm not certain of how to understand the 4th case listed in the Yuganaddha Sutta. (This is a case where commentary would be of considerable interest.) I*think* that what this amounts to is the following: The first three cases are cases of awakening attained during meditation, whereas the 4th case is that of one whose mind, due to prior cultivation, is like a ripe fruit ready to drop off the branch, requiring only the slightest breeze of the right sort, i.e. the proper triggering condition. Hindrances /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) #97475 From: "sprlrt" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 1:38 pm Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sprlrt Hi Sarah, No problem, considered it a typo :-) At first glance my reading of the cmy is that it refers to the javana cittas of the mind door (..for the wholesome and unwholesome [impulsions] occurring in the mental continua) "only", and not to the javana of the 5 sense door to which I was referring. I'll have a look at the pali (well, sort of), and post some more comments on this intricate subject. Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > .... > >Lobha experiences pleasant objects, ittharammana, and through the five sense doors it can only arise in the (akusala) javana series of cittas which follows a pancavinnana vipaka citta, seeing for instance, which has to be kusala, the result of past kusala kamma. > ... > S: Of course, this is almost always true. I hesitate to say 'always' because of the oft-quoted passages in the Sammohavinodanii (see U.P. under 'rupas - inherent characteristics, desirable etc). > > Here's a passage I've quoted before from Abbhidhammatthavibhavini, ch1V, the commentary to Abhidhammattha Sangaha, (Summary & Exposition..., PTS). > > “The resultants, which occur by the power of kamma, acquire a feeling > appropriate to the object not because of the existence of choice, but by > automatic production, like the reflection of a face in a > mirror. However, for the wholesome and unwholesome [impulsions] occurring in the mental continua of those who have not got rid of the distorted views, there are the options, in the case of a very desirable [object] of the modes of the moderately desirable and undesirable, and in the case of the undesirable [object], of the modes of the desirable and moderately desirable. > > “For it is thus that the unfaithful have impulsions accompanied by > equanimity with the very desirable objects, such as the Buddha, and the > followers of other religions impulsions accompanied by unhappiness; and > (thus that) those of profound sensibilities have impulsions accompanied by > equanimity with an unpleasant object, and dogs, etc, impulsions > accompanied by happiness; but the initial and subsequent resultants are > of exactly the same nature, it is only that dogs, etc, take pleasure in > the sight of filth....â€? #97476 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, --- On Mon, 20/4/09, sprlrt wrote: >At first glance my reading of the cmy is that it refers to the javana cittas of the mind door (..for the wholesome and unwholesome [impulsions] occurring in the mental continua) "only", and not to the javana of the 5 sense door to which I was referring. I'll have a look at the pali (well, sort of), and post some more comments on this intricate subject. ... S: Thank you. I'm not sure and I wonder if you'd read your previous comment in any of the texts? Let me give the full quote for the extract I gave. This is in Ch 4. Note the reference at the start to 'five sense-consciousnesses': ..from Abbhidhammatthavibhavini, ch1V, the commentary to Abhidhammattha Sangaha, (Summary & Exposition..., PTS). "(26) When it is desirable, they are wholesome resultants. Commentary "'When it is desirable': when it is moderately desirable; the very desirable object will be discussed separately. "'Wholesome resultants' consisting of the five sense-consciousnesses, receiving, investigating, and retention, is how it should be construed. In the case of a moderately desirable [object] he states that investigating and retention are accompanied by equanimity; but in the case of a very desirable [object] they are only accompanied by happiness. The resultants, which occur by the power of kamma, acquire a feeling appropriate to the object not because of the existence of choice, but by automatic production, like the reflection of a face in a mirror. However, for the wholesome and unwholesome [impulsions] occurring in the mental continua of those who have not got rid of the distorted views, there are the options, in the case of a very desirable [object] of the modes of the moderately desirable and undesirable, and in the case of the undesirable [object], of the modes of the desirable and moderately desirable. "For it is thus that the unfaithful have impulsions accompanied by equanimity with the very desirable objects, such as the Buddha, and the followers of other religions impulsions accompanied by unhappiness; and (thus that) those of profound sensibilities have impulsions accompanied by equanimity with an unpleasant object, and dogs, etc, impulsions accompanied by happiness; but the initial and subsequent resultants are of exactly the same nature, it is only that dogs, etc, take pleasure in the sight of filth. The reason why eye-consciousness, etc., occurring with a very desirable object are accompanied by equanimity has already been discussed before.[i.e. Ch 1, #10]"Â? More explanation is given in the CMA Guide to #17, ch IV, p.172. Metta, Sarah ====== #97477 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 2:31 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi Howard and James, yes, discussed before; the co explains that here is someone who develops insight. Howard, all the texts on samatha you gave, we also discused before, and I will not debate about them. I do not read into it: everybody must develop jhana in order to attain enlightenment, but you heard that before. Jhaana is praised by the Buddha. We have to consider to whom he spoke. Nina. Op 20-apr-2009, om 14:59 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta In Tandem ..... > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > concerning > the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. > There > comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and > becomes > unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, #97478 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 10:53 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and James) - In a message dated 4/20/2009 10:32:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard and James, yes, discussed before; the co explains that here is someone who develops insight. ------------------------------------------- I don't understand what you are saying here, Nina. The preceding three cases are those of tranquility before insight, insight before tranquility, and in tandem cultivation. It makes no sense for the 4th to be the case of cultivating insight, for that is included in each of the preceding three, as is also the cultivation of tranquility. The only reasonable meaning is that this 4th case is that of "spontaneous" awakening due to prior cultivation. --------------------------------------- Howard, all the texts on samatha you gave, we also discused before, and I will not debate about them. ---------------------------------------- I don't get your point here, Nina. Does it express annoyance? ------------------------------------------ I do not read into it: everybody must develop jhana in order to attain enlightenment, but you heard that before. Jhaana is praised by the Buddha. We have to consider to whom he spoke. -------------------------------------- I'm not getting your point, Nina. -------------------------------------- Nina. Op 20-apr-2009, om 14:59 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: AN 4.170 Yuganaddha Sutta In Tandem ..... > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > concerning > the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. > There > comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and > becomes > unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, ========================= With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97479 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:14 pm Subject: Re: Need help in Citta Yamaka nilovg Dear Chew, I answer now on dsg. the answer is in Guide through the Abhidhamma Pi.taka, by Nyanatiloka, p. 107. Op 17-apr-2009, om 15:51 heeft Chew het volgende geschreven: > 1. Yassa cittaṃ uppajjati na nirujjhati tassa cittaṃ > nirujjhissati na uppajjissatÄ«'ti: pacchimacittassa uppÄ?dakkhaṇe > tesaṃ cittaṃ uppajjati na nirujjhati, nirujjhissati na > uppajjissati. Itaresaṃ cittassa uppÄ?dakkhaṇe tesaṃ cittaṃ > uppajjati na nirujjhati, nirujjhissati ceva uppajjissati ca. -------- N: To whomsoever Consciousness arises, and not cease (at that very moment), will there be to him Consciousness cease (afterwards), and will no more arise?- (No, only) at the arising of final Consciousness (before the death of the Arahat), Consciousness to such a person arises, does not cease (at that very moment of arising), but will cease (the next moment), and will no more arise; for others at the arising of consciousness for them citta arises, does not cease, but will cease and will arise again. > --------- > Yassa vÄ? pana cittaṃ nirujjhissati na uppajjissati tassa cittaṃ > uppajjati na nirujjhatÄ«ti: Ä?mantÄ?. ------ N:But to whom consciousness will cease. no more arise, does there to him (at that very moment) consciousness arise, not cease? Indeed (aamantaa). ----- > 2. Yassa cittaṃ na uppajjati nirujjhati tassa cittaṃ na > nirujjhissati uppajjissatÄ«'ti: no. ------- N: For whom citta does not arise and does not cease, (can it be said) that for him citta will not cease, will not arise? No. ---------- Your glossary: itara is other. a remark: Rhs Davis said of the Yamaka that it is a vally of dry bones. This is a grave misunderstanding. Why was this book taught? To help us to understand realities of daily life. In Citta Yamaka there is reference to the cittas mentioned in the satipatthaanasutta under mindfulness of citta, these are the cittas occurring in daily life. We read in the text above: < for others at the arising of consciousness for them citta arises, does not cease, but will cease and will arise again. > We are reminded of the arising and ceasing of citta now, such as seeing. The moment of arising is not the moment of it ceasing, but it will cease, it is impermanent. These repetitions are very useful to remind us of the truth. We are in the cycle of birth and death, we are not arahats. Thus, there will be arising and ceasing of citta all the time. If we do not apply the Yamaka now the study of it is not very fruitful. Nina. #97480 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:21 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi Howard, On the Yuganadha Sutta, there is a lot of helpful detail in 'Useful Posts' under 'Yuganadha sutta', starting with Jon's message: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/7821 I hope this helps. It's bed-time for me, so I'll keep this brief. Maybe more tomorrow on your thread with Nina. Metta, Sarah ====== #97481 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:26 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi Howard, Op 20-apr-2009, om 16:53 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't get your point here, Nina. Does it express annoyance? ----- N: Not at all! I find it a good idea to avoid repetitions, but later on I shall look again at your points. Just now I lack time. Nina. #97482 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 12:03 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/20/2009 11:31:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 20-apr-2009, om 16:53 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't get your point here, Nina. Does it express annoyance? ----- N: Not at all! I find it a good idea to avoid repetitions, but later on I shall look again at your points. Just now I lack time. ------------------------------------- :-) Good, Nina. I'm pleased to read this. My apologies for misreading you. ----------------------------------- Nina. ====================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97483 From: "Scott" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 7:06 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E., There is another post which may arrive but I fear it is lost in the ether. Good chance to narrow the focus. In the Gradual Sayings, The Book of Threes, III, 5, 47, is the following: "Monks, there are these three condition-marks of that which is conditioned (sa"nkhatassa sa"nkhalakkha.naani) . What three? Its genesis is apparent (uppaado pa~n~naayati), its passing away is apparent (vayo pa~n~naayati), its changeability while it persists is apparent (.thitassa a~n~naa.thatta.m)..." Scott: Note 'pa~n~naayati'. And consider: This is Abhidhamma in the suttas. Try using: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ Sincerely, Scott. > #97486 From: "colette" Date: Mon Apr 20, 2009 4:12 pm Subject: Theoretical Buddhism ksheri3 "It's a dirty job but somebody's gotta do it" Koko Taylar and Lonnie Brooks Good Morning Group, "As the wise test gold by burning, cutting and rubbing it. So, bhikshus, should you accept my words -- after testing them, and not merely out of respect." A.Berzine in Relating to a Spiritual Teacher where he sites this verse to "The Sutra on (Pure Realms) Spread Out in a Dense Array" That is definately an ACTION PLAN and nothing is wrong with it. Shall we look at the PRAYER OF KUNGTUANGPO by Terton Rigdzin Godem? "My emanations will continuously manifest in billions of unimaginable ways. Appearing in forms to help you beings who can be trained. ... . From the very beginning you beings are deluded because you do not recognize the Awareness of the Ground. Being thus unmindful of what occurs is delusion -- the very state of unawareness and the cause of going astray." This speaks of a "Buddha" doesn't it? A type of "Buddha"? Is the emanation and/or manifestation a RESULTANT PHENOMENA from energy or an energy source? If it is RESULTANT from an energy source then we know that it eventually will deminish and run out of energy. WHEN? Just look at Residual BAckground Noise from the Big Bang, aren't we still recieving that form of communication and that form of emanation from how many billions of years ago? What about sound waves bounced off of the planet Mercury or Venus? thus, isn't the eye consciousness and the ear consciousness EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE MIND-CONSCIOUSNESS? If these Seven Consciousnesses are exactly the same then can't we say that the DharmaKaya or Three Buddha Bodies is the same, singularity, and what about the Past Dharma the Present Dharma and the Future Dharma, aren't they, ESSENTIALLY, a single dharma? We're on a roll girls and boys. toodles, colette #97487 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:36 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > P. S. I'm not certain of how to understand the 4th case listed in the > Yuganaddha Sutta. (This is a case where commentary would be of considerable > interest.) I*think* that what this amounts to is the following: The first three > cases are cases of awakening attained during meditation, whereas the 4th > case is that of one whose mind, due to prior cultivation, Maybe. Really, I don't understand anything about that sutta. I don't understand what constitutes "insight"; I don't understand what constitutes "tranquility"; I don't understand the difference between one "proceeding" the other and then being "in tandem", which are the same to me (prehaps it is related to duration, as in one immediately after the other, but I am not entirely sure). And the last one sounds like someone who has a firm intellectual grasp of the dhamma (as in the opposite of "confusion) and then practices samatha meditation and achieves jhana and becomes enlightened (as the Buddha did). Maybe that could also happen while listening to a sutta or at some other time when the mind is ripe. I really don't know. That is one sutta which leaves me scratching my head. Metta, James #97488 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:38 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard and James, > yes, discussed before; the co explains that here is someone who > develops insight. Then that commentary doesn't offer much guidance because they all develop insight. Metta, James #97489 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:02 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James, Op 21-apr-2009, om 2:38 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > Then that commentary doesn't offer much guidance because they all > develop insight. ------ N: See Sarah's link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/7821 As I understood, the fourth one is the person who develops insight alone. He has the imperfections of insight which should be overcome, so that he can continue on with insight. anyway, here is a warning: those who develop jhaana should not forget to be aware of jhaanacitta and realize its charactreistics of impermanence, dukkha, anattaa. ------ Nina. #97490 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:14 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 21-apr-2009, om 2:38 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > > > Then that commentary doesn't offer much guidance because they all > > develop insight. > ------ > N: See Sarah's link: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/7821 > > As I understood, the fourth one is the person who develops insight > alone. He has the imperfections of insight which should be overcome, > so that he can continue on with insight. Thank you for the link. I read the post and it is just an overly biased presentation by Jon. The commentaries aren't quoted in full and Jon inserts his personal opinions all over the place! If you could give the commentaries in full, without personal opinions inserted, that would be much appreciated. Metta, James #97491 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:41 am Subject: Muni Silence... bhikkhu.sama... Daily Words of the Buddha for 21 April 2009 The Blessed Buddha once said: KÄ?yamunim vÄ?cÄ?munim, manomunimanÄ?savam, munim moneyyasampannam. Ä€hu ninhÄ?tapÄ?pakam. Silent in body, silent in speech, silent in mind, without agitation, blessed with silence is the sage. Such One is truly washed of evil. Itivuttaka 3.67 SILENCED If silent as a broken bell, such one is close to Nibbana, and far away from arrogance. Dhammapada 134 <...> Have a nice quiet day! Friendship is the Greatest * Bhikkhu Samahita * Sri Lanka :-) http://What-Buddha-Said.net http://groups.google.com/group/Buddha-Direct http://groups.google.com/group/What_Buddha_Said May all Beings become thus Happy! #97492 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:52 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Azita > BTW Jon, what on earth did you do to Fiji!!!!! :-0 And I was only trying to help!! Jon #97493 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:12 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E., Regarding: Me: "Pa~n~naa, as with citta and each other mental factor, only have ultimate realities as objects. Pa~n~naa *directly* penetrates this characteristic." R: "How does it do that? What are the steps? ... How is it experienced? Can you describe the process?" Scott: A bit on the coordinated process of the penetration of a dhamma by pa~n~naa. In the Cuu.lavedatta Sutta, MN 44, it states: "The three aggregates are not included by the Noble Eightfold Path, friend Visaakha, but the Noble Eightfold Path is included by the three aggregates. Right Speech, right action, and right livelihood - these states are included in the aggregate of virtue. Right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration - these states are included in the aggregate of concentration. Right view and right intention [thinking] (sammaa-sankappa) - these states are included in the aggregate of wisdom [understanding]." Scott: In the Sammohavinodanii, p. 111: "Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can. How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with the power of the eye only, but by turning it over with his fingers he is able to look at it on all sides; likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc., but with applied thought with its characteristic of focussing the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, it can take what is given and determine it. Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting]." Scott: Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika. The above shows a bit of how conascent mental factors perform separate but coordinated functions, according to characteristic, within the whole of the moment of consciousness and directed at the same object. Sincerely, Scott. #97494 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 12:21 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Robert E., Regarding: Me: "Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika." Scott: On second thought (ha ha) Right Thinking may be vicaara cetasika, or the combined action of vitakka and vicaara. Perhaps Sarah or Nina could correct this. Sincerely, Scott. #97495 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:21 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi James - In a message dated 4/20/2009 8:36:31 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > P. S. I'm not certain of how to understand the 4th case listed in the > Yuganaddha Sutta. (This is a case where commentary would be of considerable > interest.) I*think* that what this amounts to is the following: The first three > cases are cases of awakening attained during meditation, whereas the 4th > case is that of one whose mind, due to prior cultivation, Maybe. Really, I don't understand anything about that sutta. I don't understand what constitutes "insight"; I don't understand what constitutes "tranquility"; I don't understand the difference between one "proceeding" the other and then being "in tandem", which are the same to me (prehaps it is related to duration, as in one immediately after the other, but I am not entirely sure). And the last one sounds like someone who has a firm intellectual grasp of the dhamma (as in the opposite of "confusion) and then practices samatha meditation and achieves jhana and becomes enlightened (as the Buddha did). Maybe that could also happen while listening to a sutta or at some other time when the mind is ripe. I really don't know. That is one sutta which leaves me scratching my head. Metta, James ============================== Admittedly the sutta is ambiguous in many ways, lacking clarifying detail. The problem with such a sutta, of course, is that it leaves the exact meaning up for grabs and dependent on our individual preferences. Ah, well - that's life! ;-) What I will say, however, is that these four approaches are, I think likely, intended to be distinct, and not duplicative! And that may some help. For that reason, I do not think the 4th approach is that of jhana for one with a good intellectual grasp of jhana, though I do understand that reading. I think a more likely reading is that of "falling" or "stumbling" into a jhanic, or jhana-like, state (due to some triggering conditions) for one whose prior training was significant and has long prepared the mind, like a well cultivated and seeded field that is quite fertile and needs only sunlight and water for the seeds to sprout. I don't consider clear intellectual grasp of Dhamma, the seeding, alone adequate for this. Think of Jesus' metaphor, for example, the Parable of the Sower, from Mark, to wit: "Behold, there went out a sower to sow: And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the fowls of the air came and devoured it up. And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth: But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away. And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it, and it yielded no fruit. And other fell on good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and increased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty, and some a hundred. And he said unto them, He that has ears to hear, let him hear." With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97496 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Robert) - In a message dated 4/21/2009 8:13:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Robert E., Regarding: Me: "Pa~n~naa, as with citta and each other mental factor, only have ultimate realities as objects. Pa~n~naa *directly* penetrates this characteristic." ============================== I've read this frequently on DSG - that pan~na only has ultimate realities as object. If that were so, I would wonder what, then, knows concept as merely concept. Any ideas? One possible answer that occurs to me is that pa~n~na can include being aware of, and having insight into the nature of, thinking, a paramattha dhamma, realizing that the objects of that thinking are not realities but just the projecting nature of thinking. What do you think? With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97497 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:08 pm Subject: Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97294) > ---------------------- > > Do you see any correlation between "dhammas", on the one hand, and the khandhas, dhatus (elements), ayatanas (sense-fields) spoken of in the suttas, on the other? > > Sure, they are just other ways of slicing the same cake. In fact I'm not sure what the difference is between khandas and dhammas. > ---------------------- Dhammas are classified in the suttas in a number of ways, each having its particular illustrative purpose. Khandha, dhatu and ayatana are 3 of such ways. So yes different ways of slicing the same cake. > ---------------------- Dhatus and ayatanas are a little less familiar to me as nomenclatures. > ---------------------- Ayatana are very frequently met in the suttas. In the Satipatthana Sutta, for example, they are one of the ways in which the 4th of the 4 'foundations' (dhammanupassana) is described (along with khandhas and the Truths). They also constitute a separate section within both MN (10 suttas) and SN (some 125 pages in the Bodhi translation CDB). Dhatu are perhaps not as frequently met, but are still quiet common (just check the index to any anthology). According to the traditional Theravada view, dhammas are the soil in which understanding (panna) grows (see the passage from Vism quoted at the end of this post). So it is worth spending some time coming to understand at an intellectual level what they are and what the Buddha said about them. > ---------------------- > > The nature of samsara is to cling to imagined objects that have imagined meanings. Perhaps we can agree on that. > > > –––––––––––– > > > > Yes, we can agree, but I don't think that is really getting to the nub of the teachings ;-)) > > Are you saying you agree? I'm always happy if we have a moment of agreement. > ---------------------- Yes, of course I agree that it is of the nature of things that we cling to imagined objects that have imagined meanings. > ---------------------- It seems to me that the nub of the teachings is about clinging to dhammas as either part of self or as a possession of some kind, and that the different associations we have with dhammas, including concepts of self, body, and other forms of identity, cause suffering. What do you think is the nub? > ---------------------- To me, the nub is that it is only by the development of insight into the true nature of dhammas (including, but not limited to lobha and other defilements) that there can be any escape from samsara. Among the defilements, I would say that ignorance and wrong view (one aspect of lobha) are the chief "baddies". Just a personal view, of course ;-)) Jon Vis.: XIV, 32 (talking about understanding/panna) Now the things classed as aggregates [khandha], bases [ayatana], elements [dhatu], faculties [indriya], truths [sacca], dependent origination [paticca-samuppada], etc., are the "soil" of this understanding, ... #97498 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:25 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James, I understand your request which is justified, and I look again when I have time. Just now too many projects! Nina. Op 21-apr-2009, om 11:14 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > The commentaries aren't quoted in full and Jon inserts his personal > opinions all over the place! If you could give the commentaries in > full, without personal opinions inserted, that would be much > appreciated. #97499 From: "connie" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 1:40 pm Subject: Sangiiti Sutta Fours (6-8) nichiconn Dear Friends, CSCD 308. <ti aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m samatikkamma nti vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m samatikkamma ti aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m samatikkamma nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Walshe DN 33.1.11(7) 'Four formless jhaanas. Here, a monk, by passing entirely beyond bodily sensations, by the disappearance of all sense of resistance and by non-attraction to the perception of diversity, seeing that space is infinite, reaches and remains in the Sphere of Infinite Space. And by passing entirely beyond the Sphere of Infinite Space, seeing that consciousness is infinite, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness. And by passing entirely beyond the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness, seeing that there is no thing, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of No-Thingness. And by passing entirely beyond the Sphere of No-Thingness, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception. Olds [4.7 ] For immaterialities[ 4.7 ]: Here friends, a beggar elevating himself above all perceptions of materiality, allowing perceptions of resistance to subside, and not scrutinizing perceptions of diversity, thinking[ 4.7.1 ]: 'Un-ending is space.' enters into and makes a habitat of the Space-dimension. Elevating himself completely above the Space-dimension, thinking: 'Un-ending is consciousness.' he enters into and makes a habitat of the Consciousness-dimension. Elevating himself completely above the Consciousness-dimension, thinking: 'There is nothing.' he enters into and makes a habitat of the No-thing-there[ 4.7.2 ] dimension. Elevating himself completely above the No-thing-there-dimension he enters into and makes a habitat of the Dimension of Neither-perception-nor-non-perception. RDs [ 4.7 ] Four Jhaanas of Aruupa-consciousness, to wit:4.7 -- Herein, brethren, a brother, by passing beyond the consciousness of matter, by the dying out of the sensation of resistance, by paying no heed to the idea of difference, at the thought: 'space is infinite!' attains to and abides in the conceptual sphere of space as infinite. (2) Having wholly transcended this, at the thought: 'Infinite is consciousness!' he attainss to and abides in the conceptual sphere of consciousness as infinite. (3) Having wholly transcended this, at the thought: 'It is nothing!' he attains toand abides in the conceptual sphere of nothingness. (4) Having wholly transcended this, he attains toand abides in the sphere of neither consciousness nor unconsciousness. **olds: [ 4.7 ] Here both Walshe and Rhys Davids insert "jhana", which is not to be found in the terminology. aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m, etc: I normally translate 'ayatana' as 'Sphere' or 'Realm.' But here I have been doing this series as though a-fresh, and looking at this compound I see: 'There is no 'limitless' there.' He thinks (or says): 'Space is Endless, or Limitless,' but the name of the ayatana itself does not contain the term 'limitless or endless.' So we are not justified in saying he enters the sphere, or realm of Limitless Space. We must say he enters the Realm of Space. Given that, I think we have a much more commonly understood description of the phenomena attained, if we use the term 'Dimension.' And I would suggest that this is what is understood by modern physics as the 5th Dimension. We have 'length' and 'width' and 'height' and 'Time' and the 5th Dimension is sort of like looking at the world as though it were a hologram, you can see it all from all directions, but you are not "in" it. '...not scrutinizing perceptions of diversity (naanatta)': then becomes much more easily understood as 'Time' or the phenomena perceived as time, that is, the swift flow of changes in materiality, that like a movie, produces the illusion of continuity...for it is the question: 'How can I be seeing this, from outside, and account for Time?' that causes one to re-enter the ordinary world from this dimension: 'How does one emerge from the aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m? By paying attention to all forms, perceptions of resistance, and scrutinizing perceptions of diversity.' [ 4.7.1 ] ti: 'quote' or 'said'; so maybe not even 'thinking' but 'with the idea of' [ 4.7.2 ] AAki~nca~n~naayatana.m: Given the above discussion, how would one describe the Dimension of No Thing There? I see it like this: The thesis is the world we normally perceive. The antithesis breaks this world into The Material (what in physics is referred to as "space", that which occupies space -- length, width, and height) and Time. Space and Time as separate Dimensions cannot exist independantly of each other and are held together by what the Physicists are calling the 5th Dimension(what I am saying is, in the Pali the Dimension of Space), Space/Time (observed from without). The 5th Dimension becomes the new Thesis. The Antithesis then becomes Materiality and Time and the Dimension of Space. But examining it, one quickly concludes that should this have any actual basis in reality, it would tear itself to shreds. Just look at any one physical apparently unchanging thing in your environment while making yourself simultaneously aware of something else that is clearly changing (such as the second hand of a watch to make it easy). It obviously cannot be happening as it is perceived: The one, apparently unchanging physical thing exists in the same "Time Frame" as the clearly changing thing. This drives the perception that the apparently unchanging thing is in fact changing, but on the molecular level. This then drives one to the conclusion that even the molecules must be changing. If there is nothing there that is not changing, then there is No Thing There. Next up from there is the inevitable conclusion that one must in fact be inhabiting a Dimension in which there is neither perception (you can't perceive what isn't there) nor non-perception (you can't not be perceiving what you are perceiving, or in the Buddhist sense, perception is occuring, but it is an impersonal, mechanical thing, essentially a reaction among elements) (as a matter of record concerning previous discussion of the translation of this term, -- see: Making a Change in Terminology this fits once again with my original understanding of the actual experience of this Dimension the way it was originally taught to me. Snap fingers, just like that. Now I hear a Zen master and a student of the Abhidhamma out there and they are both saying "This is just hocum. Sophistry. Logic and Reasoning. Beating out with the mind some theoretical construct to account for experience!" And to this I say: "Bravo! Exactly! That is all that all this arupajhana stuff is all about, let it go!" ***rd: 4.7Cf. Bud. Psy., 117 f.; Bud. Psy. Eth., §§ 265 f.; Dial., I, 249 f.; II, 119 f. CSCD < Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 2:23 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi Howard and James (for Lukas at the end), Op 20-apr-2009, om 16:53 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I don't understand what you are saying here, Nina. The preceding three > cases are those of tranquility before insight, insight before > tranquility, > and in tandem cultivation. It makes no sense for the 4th to be the > case of > cultivating insight, for that is included in each of the preceding > three, > as is also the cultivation of tranquility. The only reasonable > meaning is > that this 4th case is that of "spontaneous" awakening due to prior > cultivation. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > N: The Thaico: as to the third after emerging from jhaana he is > aware of the jhaanacitta and factors. The fourth: he does not cling neither to samatha nor to vipassanaa when the vipassana kilesas have been overcome. Then in the sutta: Here we have to go to another sutta for the explanation of these words: Ang I, 255 (goldrefiner): it says that this refers to vipassanaa. Also the Path of Discrimination, p. 294, about overcoming the imperfections of insight, then the Path is produced in him. -------- > N: I do not read into it: everybody > must develop jhana in order to attain enlightenment, but you heard > that before. Jhaana is praised by the Buddha. We have to consider to > whom he spoke. > -------------------------------------- > H: I'm not getting your point, Nina. ----- N: He spoke to monks who led a life completely removed from sense pleasures. Here I am, a layperson, having to cope with many kinds of problems. When I have a problem, and I had one today, it would not help me to dive into jhaana. I rather hear the following: Hearing and considering and then it will sink in. ------ Nina. #97501 From: "Scott" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 8:20 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "I've read this frequently on DSG - that pan~na only has ultimate realities as object..." Scott: This is the way I understand it. H: "...If that were so, I would wonder what, then, knows concept as merely concept. Any ideas?" Scott: Not pa~n~naa, that's for sure. There is nothing of a concept that makes it an object for pa~n~naa. I'd say that concepts do not exist as realities with characteristics which can serve as object for pa~n~naa, and therefore, and most certainly, do not exist for pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa knows nothing of concepts; concepts don't enter pa~n~naa's sphere of knowledge. H: "One possible answer that occurs to me is that pa~n~na can include being aware of, and having insight into the nature of, thinking, a paramattha dhamma, realizing that the objects of that thinking are not realities but just the projecting nature of thinking. What do you think?" Scott: I don't think pa~n~naa has thinking as characteristic. What you describe above is thinking, which is not a characteristic of pa~n~naa cetasika in relation to an object. As far as pa~n~naa goes, concepts are not even on the radar, in my opinion. Sincerely, Scott. #97502 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 5:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 4/21/2009 4:20:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "I've read this frequently on DSG - that pan~na only has ultimate realities as object..." Scott: This is the way I understand it. H: "...If that were so, I would wonder what, then, knows concept as merely concept. Any ideas?" Scott: Not pa~n~naa, that's for sure. There is nothing of a concept that makes it an object for pa~n~naa. I'd say that concepts do not exist as realities with characteristics which can serve as object for pa~n~naa, and therefore, and most certainly, do not exist for pa~n~naa. Pa~n~naa knows nothing of concepts; concepts don't enter pa~n~naa's sphere of knowledge. H: "One possible answer that occurs to me is that pa~n~na can include being aware of, and having insight into the nature of, thinking, a paramattha dhamma, realizing that the objects of that thinking are not realities but just the projecting nature of thinking. What do you think?" Scott: I don't think pa~n~naa has thinking as characteristic. What you describe above is thinking, which is not a characteristic of pa~n~naa cetasika in relation to an object. As far as pa~n~naa goes, concepts are not even on the radar, in my opinion. ------------------------------------------------- I don't even understand what "having thinking as a characteristic" would mean. ;-) What I was hypothesizing was that thinking is a real mental operation, a nama, whose nature (of "projecting" merely apparent realities) can be known by pa~n~na. --------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. =========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97503 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 10:53 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. kenhowardau Hi Howard (and James), Re 97495: ------------- H: > Admittedly the sutta is ambiguous in many ways, lacking clarifying > detail. The problem with such a sutta, of course, is that it leaves the exact > meaning up for grabs and dependent on our individual preferences. Ah, well > - that's life! ;-) --------------- I agree. The sutta would have been perfectly clear to its original audience, of course, but people like us do need further explanation. It's refreshing to see you admit that, Howard. :-) Now perhaps you will agree with Nina that other suttas need further explanation too. Such as the ones that seem (to you) to say that every Buddhist disciple must develop mundane jhana? Ken H #97504 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 11:34 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau Hi Scott and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com , "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > Regarding: > > H: "I've read this frequently on DSG - that pan~na only has ultimate realities as object..." > > Scott: This is the way I understand it. --- That's the way I understand it too. However, panna does not always experience those ultimate realities *directly* does it? A *concept* of ultimate reality (e.g., the word 'nama' 'rupa' 'cetasika' 'visible object' 'lobha' etc) could be experienced by panna. (That would be an instance of pariyatti, as I understand it.) ----------------------------- H: "...If that were so, I would wonder what, then, knows concept as merely concept. Any ideas?" ----------------------------- I imagine that the concept "pannatti" could be experienced by panna. Even though it is not exactly a concept of ultimate reality, the word 'pannatti' is a concept of 'whatever is not an ultimate reality' and so it qualifies as Dhamma. I am less certain about other concepts - for example the World Health Organisation. My guess is the thought "WHO" could be followed by the thought "that is just pannatti' and then panna could know the concept 'pannatti.' That's just the way I see it of course! :-) Ken H #97505 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:39 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Ken H., --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Howard (and James), > > Re 97495: > > ------------- > H: > Admittedly the sutta is ambiguous in many ways, lacking clarifying > > detail. The problem with such a sutta, of course, is that it leaves > the exact > > meaning up for grabs and dependent on our individual preferences. Ah, > well > > - that's life! ;-) > --------------- > > > I agree. The sutta would have been perfectly clear to its original > audience, of course, James: That is not necessarily true. The Buddha would sometimes give a sutta "in brief" and the monks who heard it didn't understand what it meant either! They would have to go to Sariputta or some other senior monk to explain what the sutta meant. but people like us do need further explanation. > It's refreshing to see you admit that, Howard. :-) James: There is nothing earth-shattering about admitting that a sutta from the Buddha is ambiguous and "in brief". > > Now perhaps you will agree with Nina that other suttas need further > explanation too. Such as the ones that seem (to you) to say that every > Buddhist disciple must develop mundane jhana? James: I don't know about Howard, but I mainly get that idea from the Noble Eightfold Path which describes concentration as jhana. No matter how much wriggling you do (and Jon has tried many times), there is just no way to talk yourself out of that one! ;-)) > > Ken H > Metta, James #97506 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:45 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > I understand your request which is justified, and I look again when I > have time. Just now too many projects! No problem! It isn't really necessary- I just thought you might already have it on file somewhere. Don't worry about it. Metta, James #97507 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 21, 2009 9:37 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and James) - In a message dated 4/21/2009 6:54:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and James), Re 97495: ------------- H: > Admittedly the sutta is ambiguous in many ways, lacking clarifying > detail. The problem with such a sutta, of course, is that it leaves the exact > meaning up for grabs and dependent on our individual preferences. Ah, well > - that's life! ;-) --------------- I agree. The sutta would have been perfectly clear to its original audience, of course, but people like us do need further explanation. It's refreshing to see you admit that, Howard. :-) --------------------------------------- I'm glad to hear that you're refreshed, Ken! ;-) --------------------------------------- Now perhaps you will agree with Nina that other suttas need further explanation too. ---------------------------------------- Of COURSE some do! --------------------------------------- Such as the ones that seem (to you) to say that every Buddhist disciple must develop mundane jhana? ---------------------------------------- LOLOL! Nah! -------------------------------------- Ken H ============================= With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97508 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:46 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "I don't even understand what 'having thinking as a characteristic' would mean." Scott: Consider vitakka and vicaara. These mental factors are prominent in the so-called 'thinking process'. These are, of course, jhaana factors, and so you might know of them. I also know you don't buy the whole characteristic thing so... H: "What I was hypothesizing was that thinking is a real mental operation, a nama, whose nature (of 'projecting' merely apparent realities) can be known by pa~n~na." Scott: So then pa~n~naa can know the dhamma, the function of which is called 'thinking'. This could be vitakka or vicaara, for example. I don't think the term 'projecting' will be found in the texts. This is a modern concept. I'm pretty sure it is not in Dhammasa.nganii as a descriptor, for example, although you could check. Or pa~n~naa can know moha cetasika, whose function is ignorance. But I still would need to see some textual evidence to help us understand whether a concept can be object of pa~n~naa. I still say, 'no', not in my opinion. Sincerely, Scott. #97509 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Scott and Howard, Op 22-apr-2009, om 3:46 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > But I still would need to see some textual evidence to help us > understand whether a concept can be object of pa~n~naa. --------- N: In the texts the Buddha explained all the time about the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. These are characteristics of the paramattha dhammas, not of concepts. A concept does not arise and then fall away, only the thinking that thinks of it arises and falls away. Nina. #97510 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:02 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 16 nilovg Dear friends, We should remember the sutta in which are mentioned the four conditions, necessary for the attainment of the first stage of enlightenment, the stage of the sotåpanna (streamwinner). We read in the Kindred Sayings (V, Mahå-vagga, Book XI, Kindred Sayings on Streamwinning, Chapter I, § 5) that the Buddha said to Såriputta: ‘ “A limb of stream-winning! A limb of stream-winning!” is the saying, Såriputta. Tell me, Såriputta, of what sort is a limb of stream-winning? Lord, association with the upright is a limb of stream-winning. Hearing the good Dhamma is a limb of stream-winning. Applying the mind is a limb of stream-winning. Conforming to the Dhamma is a limb of stream-winning Well said, Såriputta! Well said, Såriputta! Indeed these are limbs of stream-winning....’ If we had not met the right person and listened to the Dhamma, if mindfulness of nåma and rúpa had not been explained to us, could there be “applying the mind”, which is “wise consideration”, and “conforming to the Dhamma”, which is the practice of the Eightfold Path? Could there be awareness of nåma and rúpa, right at this moment? Mindfulness and understanding are still weak, but, when one has listened to the Dhamma, there can be a beginning of the study of different realities which appear. You felt like a spider in a web, ready to catch. When there is a thought of catching realities, there is a concept of self. Realities appear and if there are conditions for mindfulness it arises. It may arise or it may not, this does not depend on a self. Seeing and hearing seemed so clear to you. When are these realities clear? Only when paññå realizes the characteristics of seeing and hearing as not self, not when we have a sensation that they are clear. Can we say that anything is clear when we do not even know the difference between seeing and visible object, hearing and sound? ******* Nina. #97511 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:26 am Subject: The 10 future Buddhas! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What is known about the next 10 Future Buddhas? The next one is the last in this Universe! His name is Metteyya – The Friendly One! see: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/me_mu/metteyya.htm and indeed http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/Metteyya/arimet00.htm and http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/How-2-Meet_Buddha_Metteyya.htm The Bodhisatta (Lit: Being who will Awaken) Metteyya in Tusita Heaven. Then follows a Universal Cycle (=Aeon=kappa=kalpa ) empty of Buddhas! In that aeon humans will act like animals or worse. Incest & cannibalism will be the rule of the day. Terror, wars, torture & agony! So make effort NOW! Then in the next eon 2 Buddhas will emerge: First RÄ?ma and later DhammarÄ?ja Buddha DhammarÄ?ja was king Pasenadi of Kosala at Gotama Buddha’s time. http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/pa/pasenadi.htm Then in the next eon 1 Buddha AbhibhÅ« will appear. He is now a king of devas. (4th from right above w. halo) Then will come another empty eon. Then will come an eon with 2 Buddhas: DÄ«ghasonÄ« and CankÄ«. http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/c/cankii.htm They will be called: Buddha NÄ?rada and Buddha Ramsimuni. Then will come an eon with 2 Buddhas: Subha and Todeyya. They will be called: Buddha Devadeva and Buddha NarasÄ«ha Then will come another empty eon. Then will come an eon with 2 Buddhas: Tissa and Sumangala. Buddha Tissa was the elephant NÄ?lagiri at Gotamas time. (see the 2 elephants left above) http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/n/naalaagiri.htm Buddha Sumangala was the elephant PÄ?rileyya at Gotamas time. (see the 2 elephants top below) http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/pa/parileyya.htm Source: Details on the 10 future Buddhas: Dasabodhisattuppattikatha (English & Pali) The Birth Stories of the Ten Bodhisattas. Ed. & Tr. Ven. H. Saddhatissa. Sacred Books of the Buddhists Vol. XXIX. Pali Text Society. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130894 See also the explanation of the future: AnÄ?gatavamsa Desana. The sermon of the Chronicle to be. Tr. Udaya Meddegama; Ed. John Clifford Holt. 1993 Buddhist Tradition Series. Vol. 21. Motilal Banarsidass, Delhi. Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄ?hita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The 10 future Buddhas! #97512 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:59 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James, Op 22-apr-2009, om 2:39 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > James: I don't know about Howard, but I mainly get that idea from > the Noble Eightfold Path which describes concentration as jhana. No > matter how much wriggling you do (and Jon has tried many times), > there is just no way to talk yourself out of that one! ;-)) ------ N: There are also suttas where concentration as jhaana is omitted. And again, we have to know whether there is reference to the mundane Path or to the supramundane Path, to mundane concentration or supramundane concentration. If supramundane, as said before: in the case of dry insight people, the concentration is equal in strength to the first stage of jhaana. In the "Human Types", puggaala pa~n~natti (of the Abhidhamma) and in the commentaries there are several references to dry insight. Recently looking at the Thai co to Citta Yamaka, there are many references to the arahat who has not developed mundane jhaana. Before, we looked at the sutta AN 4.170, Yuganaddha Sutta, In Tandem. After the first three possibilities have been mentioned, we see the fourth one: a person who has overcome the vipassanaa imperfections. This is clearly referring to insight, it has to be a possibility different from the first three. In a word explanation in another sutta I read: he clings neither to samatha nor to vipassana. It is not said: to jhaana. In vipassanaa both samatha and vipassanaa are developed. When there is less opportunity for the arising of defeilements there is more calm, samatha. Samatha does not always have to be of the degree of jhaana. Calm grows, as understanding develops. ******* Nina. #97513 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Scott) - In a message dated 4/22/2009 2:49:36 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Scott and Howard, Op 22-apr-2009, om 3:46 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > But I still would need to see some textual evidence to help us > understand whether a concept can be object of pa~n~naa. --------- N: In the texts the Buddha explained all the time about the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. These are characteristics of the paramattha dhammas, not of concepts. A concept does not arise and then fall away, only the thinking that thinks of it arises and falls away. ---------------------------------------- Yes, because a concept is really nothing at all - merely imagined as real (what I mean by "projected," Scott). The thinking, that rises and falls and ebbs and flows, however, is mental activity/nama - something that actually occurs. And it is critically important activity: Right thinking moves us in the right direction, wrong thinking leads us in the wrong direction, and clinging to thinking and "the world" of thoughts - getting captured by it all, especially by heady imagination, fantasy, desires, and "me and mine" sends us to hell. --------------------------------------- Nina. ======================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97514 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The 10 future Buddhas! upasaka_howard Dear Bhikkhu Samahita - In a message dated 4/22/2009 4:05:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, bhikkhu.samahita@... writes: Friends: What is known about the next 10 Future Buddhas? ============================== Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who they are - so, no new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions upon trillions of years, and 2) judging from their names, that they will all be from India (even though the planet earth will be long gone.) For me, this is Buddhist mythology, begun in early Buddhism and going way beyond the due respect and appreciation for our great teacher, and taken to more extreme heights in Mahayana, that makes for iconic religious devotionalism but has no bearing on the liberating Dhamma practice taught by the Buddha and which I consider a treasure. Can you tell me why I am wrong in this, if you think I am? With respect and metta, Howard Hindrances /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) #97515 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 2:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Hi Howard, We agree here. But only heavy akusala kamma patha can have as result rebirth in a hell plane. Nina. Op 22-apr-2009, om 14:01 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Yes, because a concept is really nothing at all - merely imagined as > real (what I mean by "projected," Scott). The thinking, that rises > and falls > and ebbs and flows, however, is mental activity/nama - something that > actually occurs. And it is critically important activity: Right > thinking moves > us in the right direction, wrong thinking leads us in the wrong > direction, > and clinging to thinking and "the world" of thoughts - getting > captured by > it all, especially by heady imagination, fantasy, desires, and "me and > mine" sends us to hell. #97516 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Nina (and Howard), Regarding: N: "In the texts the Buddha explained all the time about the characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. These are characteristics of the paramattha dhammas, not of concepts. A concept does not arise and then fall away, only the thinking that thinks of it arises and falls away." Scott: Agreed. I'd like to know what the relation is between pa~n~naa and a correct conceptual understanding of the Dhamma. This latter must be occurring within the mind-door. There would be thinking about Dhamma and thoughts. Also I'm assuming that the dichotomy is a simple one: there is a right way to understand and think about Dhamma and there is a wrong way. If pa~n~naa, say 'mundane pa~n~naa, leads to a right way of thinking about Dhamma, what is the process whereby this occurs? Sincerely, Scott. #97517 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Howard (97417) > ------------------------------ > What is the activity involved in > "keeping one's life going with right livelihood", as you read that passage > quoted? > ---------------------------------------- > Repeated arisings of intention is the way I see it. When (and if) > one's mind turns to the possibility of a harmful means of support, or to > engaging in an improper action as part of an otherwise proper occupation, that is > an instance of wrong livelihood, but when one avoids such, refrains from > such, or intends to change from a harmful occupation or business practice to > a proper one, that is a moment of right livelihood. > ------------------------------ I agree that restraint from an inclination to act do something tghat would amount to wrong livelihood is an instance of right livelihood (although I wouldn't characterise this as "repeated arising of intention" since, as you yourself point out, it occurs only if and when there is the possibility of a harmful means of support). In general, then, more agreement ;-)). Jon #97518 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:24 pm Subject: Addendum Re: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Howard (97416) > ------------------------------ > If by this you mean that when another person makes the claim that such > & such is genuine Buddhadhamma, it is only the teachings themselves that > can confirm or rebut that, > ------------------------------ Yes, that's what I was talking about. > ------------------------------ I agree. > ------------------------------ Then we agree ;-)) > ------------------------------ > (For me, though I realize not for you, > it is only the teachings recorded in the Sutta Pitaka that I rely on for > such *ultimate* confirmation, for it is these that I consider to be the most > faithful record of what our teacher actually taught. I do look further, > though, even to DSG posts(!) ;-)), for elucidation and aid in understanding.) > ------------------------------ But as you are finding in your thread with James, there's much in the Sutta Pitaka that, although it must have been clear to the listeners at the time, needs further elucidation for us. The commentaries record the accepted understanding at around the time of the Buddha when there were still many, many arahants alive. If reference is not made to the commentaries or other parts of the Canon, there are only personal opinions to exchange (which are bound to be speculative). Jon #97519 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 12:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. jonoabb Hi Robert E (97426) > ------------------------------ > > > "And what is right livelihood? There is the case where a disciple of the > > > noble ones, having abandoned dishonest livelihood, keeps his life going with > > > right livelihood: This is called right livelihood." > > > SN 45.8 > > Jumping in: Wouldn't that mean feeding, clothing and sheltering yourself by Dhamma-approved vocations? I know you're not supposed to rob, cheat or steal, so those livelihoods are probably out. > ------------------------------ There are some occupations that necessarily involve wrong livelihood, such as trading in weapons, and these the Buddha has recommended be avoided. However, wrong livelihood is far wider than the undertaking of one of these occupations. It is any breach of sila committed in the pursuit of one's livelihood. Thus, to my understanding, a doctor who cheats the system would be committing wrong livelihood at the instance of such cheating. Jon #97520 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 1:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/22/2009 10:37:43 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, We agree here. But only heavy akusala kamma patha can have as result rebirth in a hell plane. ---------------------------------------- Of course you're right. I was purposely over-dramatic. I meant it only figuratively. :-) ---------------------------------------- Nina. ========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97522 From: "colette" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:15 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) ksheri3 Hi Nina, Group, I specifically ask you this question, Nina, since you have the most knowledge of the Abhidharma, apparently, and you seem to be better at giving the answers that I'm searching for, ALTHOUGH I INVITE ANY AND EVERY OTHER GROUP MEMBER HERE TO HELP ME OUT WITH THIS QUESTION BY GIVING ME THEIR OPINION AND/OR ADVICE: Isn't nature another word for Svabhava or essence? colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi Howard, > We agree here. But only heavy akusala kamma patha can have as result > rebirth in a hell plane. <...> #97523 From: "Larry" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 5:30 am Subject: Rupa lbidd2 Hi Nina, Thank you very much for the wonderful gift of dhamma. I received your book "The Buddhist Teaching On Physical Phenomena" today and immediately started reading it. Very sweet and good. Anumodana! Actually, the opening verse inspired a rather unconventional thought: Dhammapada (vs. 345) That which is made of iron, wood or hemp is not a strong bond, say the wise; (but) that longing for jewels, ornaments, children and wives is far greater an attachment. L: That _longing_ is a far greater _bond_, holding one in bondage. Freedom from that longing opens up unfettered love of iron, wood, hemp, jewels, ornaments, children and wives. Thanks again, Larry #97524 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "colette" wrote: > > Hi Nina, Group, > > I specifically ask you this question, Nina, since you have the most knowledge of the Abhidharma, apparently, and you seem to be better at giving the answers that I'm searching for, ALTHOUGH I INVITE ANY AND EVERY OTHER GROUP MEMBER HERE TO HELP ME OUT WITH THIS QUESTION BY GIVING ME THEIR OPINION AND/OR ADVICE: > > Isn't nature another word for Svabhava or essence? > > Hi Colette, Thanks for the good question. As one of DSG's other members I'd like to give it a shot. :-) Yes, nature can be a word for essence. However, in the present context (nature of dukkha anicca and anatta) it cannot. Anicca dukkha and anatta are essences. They are part of the inherent nature of every conditioned dhamma. Being essences they cannot, themselves, have an essence. That would be untenable because you would then have to have an essence of the essence of the essence - and so on ad infinitum. When a dhamma (such as 'visible object') is experienced one of its characteristics can potentially be known by panna (right understanding). But that is as far as the examination can go. There is no inherent characteristic of the characteristic. Ken H #97525 From: "colette" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:30 pm Subject: Re: The 10 future Buddhas! or Blasphemous behavior? ksheri3 > What is known about the next 10 Future Buddhas? > colette: the first sentence that functions as a bowling pin setter is nothing but HYPOTHESIS. How do you actually know the Dharmakaya? I have experienced death before in the form of rolling my dad's Caddy end over end three times and in the process I was thrown approx. 370 ft. from the vehicle where I landed on my head, was brought back to life by the EMT's and remained in a coma for approx. 5-7 days, before, they say I regained consciousness but I have no memory of regaining consciousness from the five to seven day, I don't recall, and never did recall after leaving the hospital, the days that they said I was conscious and moving. <...> Isn't it true that a person's body is not the same from one moment to the next moment? The body changes constantly and so is labeled as being a natural function. Zoiks, we've just stated and concluded that the body is like the stream that a person enters for the first time: every aspect of the body and/or stream changes and therefore cannot allow a person to experience the same sensations that the person felt/experienced when they first entered the stream. Are you suggesting that the mind does not change on it's own without any external stimuli? That the mind is not part of the body? <...> you surely must know that you're making a clear distinction that the mind is seperate from the body and outside the body. "I'M ON THE HIGHWAY TO HELL AND ALL MY FRIENDS ARE GONNA BE THERE TOO." AC/DC. How can I change your mind when it is already constantly in a state of flux or change? When is your mind stable and stagnant that would allow me the opportunity to change your mind? <....> toodles, colette > The next one is the last in this Universe! His name is Metteyya â€" The Friendly One! <...> #97526 From: "gazita2002" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:48 pm Subject: Re: The 10 future Buddhas! gazita2002 hallo howard, bhante --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Dear Bhikkhu Samahita - > What is known about the next 10 Future Buddhas? > ============================== > Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who they are - so, no > new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions upon trillions of years, and 2) > judging from their names, that they will all be from India (even though the > planet earth will be long gone.) > For me, this is Buddhist mythology, begun in early Buddhism and going > way beyond the due respect and appreciation for our great teacher, and > taken to more extreme heights in Mahayana, that makes for iconic religious > devotionalism but has no bearing on the liberating Dhamma practice taught by > the Buddha and which I consider a treasure. Can you tell me why I am wrong in > this, if you think I am? > > With respect and metta, > Howard azita:LOL, you have said a little more than me, Howard. My thought was "gosh..thats a detailed story and do I believe it?" I agree with you that it has little bearing on the liberating dhamma as taught by the Buddha. I barely know what NOW consists of let alone eons etc away. However, it is a good reminder that Samsara is a long, long time. Who knows where 'we' are at in this unmerry-go-round! Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97527 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:20 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) gazita2002 Hallo Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Nina (and Howard), > > Regarding: > > N: "In the texts the Buddha explained all the time about the > characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anattaa. These are > characteristics of the paramattha dhammas, not of concepts. A concept > does not arise and then fall away, only the thinking that thinks of > it arises and falls away." > > Scott: Agreed. I'd like to know what the relation is between pa~n~naa and a correct conceptual understanding of the Dhamma. > > This latter must be occurring within the mind-door. There would be thinking about Dhamma and thoughts. Also I'm assuming that the dichotomy is a simple one: there is a right way to understand and think about Dhamma and there is a wrong way. If pa~n~naa, say 'mundane pa~n~naa, leads to a right way of thinking about Dhamma, what is the process whereby this occurs? azita; was listening to MP3 and heard a comment about pariyatti, which I think is what you are asking about. Supposing I am reading a dhamma book eg Nina's book on Rupa, and there is thinking about what I'm reading and also some realisation that what I'm reading about is actually occuring now. The book in reality is not a book but hardness, visible object and then thinking about what is felt or seen - then I call it a book. Its all so momentary really, its difficult to know on that intellectual level if one is developing in the right or wrong way at times. In my case, as soon as there is any thoughts of 'I understand' then there is doubt and clinging and I think I am thinking too much - becomes very messy!!!!!! patience, courage and good cheer azita #97528 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:25 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. kenhowardau Hi James, A couple of remarks from your previous post were: > . . . The Buddha would sometimes give a sutta > "in brief" and the monks who heard it didn't understand what it > meant either! They would have to go to Sariputta or some other > senior monk to explain what the sutta meant. <. . .> > There is nothing earth-shattering about admitting that a sutta from > theBuddha is ambiguous and "in brief". But then, on the subject of the indispensability of jhana, you wrote: > I mainly get that idea from the Noble > Eightfold Path which describes concentration as jhana. No matter > how much wriggling you do (and Jon has tried many times), there > is just no way to talk yourself out of that one! ;-)) But why? What makes suttas describing the NEP different from the others? Especially when there is so much evidence - in all three pitakas - for bare insight development, it seems to me that you are the one doing the eel wriggling. :-) Lukas is doing a thread on the Satipatthana Sutta. When it gets to the NEP we will settle this issue once and for all! :-) Ken H #97529 From: "gazita2002" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 12:29 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) gazita2002 Hallo Jon, Golly gosh, military men behaving badly! Cheers azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Azita > > > BTW Jon, what on earth did you do to Fiji!!!!! :-0 > > And I was only trying to help!! > > Jon > #97530 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:05 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > But why? What makes suttas describing the NEP different from the others? > > Especially when there is so much evidence - in all three pitakas - for > bare insight development, it seems to me that you are the one doing the > eel wriggling. :-) > > Lukas is doing a thread on the Satipatthana Sutta. When it gets to the > NEP we will settle this issue once and for all! :-) This entire response is just another example of more eel wriggling. You don't reference anything specific; you make generalized assertions without any support; and then you change the subject to be about some member named Lukas who I know nothing about. Just smoke and screens...smoke and screens... Metta, James #97531 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:09 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------ > N: There are also suttas where concentration as jhaana is omitted. Could you give me just one example? Give me the best example you know of. And all I would like is the sutta reference- not any personal commentary "explaining" what it means. Metta, James #97532 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:48 am Subject: Re: The 10 future Buddhas! kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com , "gazita2002" wrote: > > <. . .> Howard: > > Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who they are - so, no > > new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions upon trillions of years, <. . .> azita:> LOL, you have said a little more than me, Howard. My thought was "gosh..thats a detailed story and do I believe it?" > > I agree with you that it has little bearing on the liberating dhamma as taught by the Buddha. I barely know what NOW consists of let alone eons etc away. > However, it is a good reminder that Samsara is a long, long time. Who knows where 'we' are at in this unmerry-go-round! ----------- Hi Azita and Howard, There could be an easy way of settling this. Hasn't the Buddha said in the suttas that, during his long journey as a bodhisattha, he had met several Buddhas? (Or have I got that wrong?) If he said how many he had met (maybe 10) then that would answer the question. In that case, at the time the Buddha made his bodhisattha vow there would already have been 10 bodhisatthas ahead of him. So, my next question would be: does the text to which we are referring say that the next 10 buddhas have already made their bodhisattha vows? In that case the time for the next one could be about now. It could be you Howard! :-) Otherwise, no one will be making any such vow until trillions of trillions of years from now. ------------- H: > > > and 2) judging from their names, that they will all be from India (even though the planet earth will be long gone.) -------------- Maybe in the course of many world systems (or many "Big Bang" systems) a planet Earth occurs time and time again - and with a continent know as India inhabited by people just like the Indians we know now. And maybe it is only at such times that a Buddha will arise. I don't know . . . just guessing. :-) Ken H PS: Oh, I see what you mean, Howard: you are not an Indian and so it couldn't be you. Hmm, I'll have to get back to you on that. :-) #97533 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:22 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. kenhowardau Hi James, Wrong side of the bed this morning? I liked you better yesterday. ------------ J: > This entire response is just another example of more eel wriggling. You don't reference anything specific; you make generalized assertions without any support; and then you change the subject to be about some member named Lukas who I know nothing about. Just smoke and screens...smoke and screens... Metta, ----------- Actually I did "reference anything specific." I referenced specifically where you had said suttas could be hard to understand. Then I referenced specifically where you said descriptions of the NEP were easy to understand. So my question was, how did you know that? How could you be sure you were not misunderstanding and simplifying them? If you had read DSG a little more often you would have known Lukas very well. Don't blame me. And please don't put "metta" at the end of your more objectionable posts. It trivialises metta. Ken H #97534 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > However, wrong livelihood is far wider than the undertaking of one of these occupations. It is any breach of sila committed in the pursuit of one's livelihood. Thus, to my understanding, a doctor who cheats the system would be committing wrong livelihood at the instance of such cheating. I would agree that makes sense. However, there are no kusala moments, I would assume, if one's occupation is lying, cheating or stealing. Best, Robert = = = = = = = #97535 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:49 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi James, > > Wrong side of the bed this morning? I liked you better yesterday. James: Look Ken, you jumped into this conversation with your smart ass, sarcastic comments about the commentaries and jhana. It was addressed to me so I responded. First, I was nice and gave you the benefit of the doubt. But then you write another pointless post to me so my patience is at an end. > > ------------ > J: > This entire response is just another example of more eel wriggling. > You don't reference anything specific; you make generalized assertions > without any support; and then you change the subject to be about some > member named Lukas who I know nothing about. Just smoke and > screens...smoke and screens... Metta, > ----------- > > Actually I did "reference anything specific." I referenced specifically > where you had said suttas could be hard to understand. Then I referenced > specifically where you said descriptions of the NEP were easy to > understand. So my question was, how did you know that? How could you be > sure you were not misunderstanding and simplifying them? James: First, you didn't ask that question. Second, you are still not getting to the point. > > If you had read DSG a little more often you would have known Lukas very > well. Don't blame me. James: I am not blaming you. I just expressed surprise that you believe Lukas will somehow "save the day and end all arguments" when I don't even know who Lukas is. Granted, I don't read DSG as often as I used to- and that is partly because I tire of these asinine discussions. > > And please don't put "metta" at the end of your more objectionable > posts. It trivialises metta. James: I will write metta if I want. The fact that you write this shows that you know nothing about metta. But, what I won't do is write to you ever again, EVER! > > Ken H > METTA, METTA, METTA, James #97536 From: "Chew" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 8:50 pm Subject: Re: Need help in Citta Yamaka chewsadhu Dear Nina, You are so wonderful. I had forgotten about that book "Guide through the Abhidhamma Pi.taka". Thank you so much for reminding me. It is really a good introduction to Yamaka and to other subjects as well. F.Y.I, due to the preparation of this Citta Yamaka notes may take longer time, most probably we do not have enough time to complete before the Course start, which is on 23rd June. The organizing committe here has called Sayadaw to change to Ayatana Yamaka. The reason we told Sayadaw is that we have the English translation for the Ayatana Yamaka chapter, we will pass to the participants before they come to the class. So that they will have some idea on what they are going to learn. As the wish of us, Sayadaw is so kind and has agreed to change the topic to Ayatana Yamaka. Hope that we do not cause any inconvenience to Sayadaw. Anyway, we still can continue our Citta Yamaka discussion here. If we have whatever unsolve questions, I can personally ask Sayadaw in the class then. At the same time, I am now also editing the Sacca Yamaka, which they have done in Saing Hill, Myanmar, on Nov 2008 last year. I will try to post whatever interesting part into DSG. I feel very happy to know all of you, and have the opportunity to share the Dhamma together with everyone here. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew P.S.: KhandhaYamaka was done in Penang as well. Please visit to khandhayamaka.blogspot.com for the talks. If you have any questions to discuss on this subject, I can help to ask Sayadaw when in the class. Thanks and Sadhu. #97537 From: "Chew" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: sahajata-paccaya and annamanna-paccaya chewsadhu Dear Sarah, Sorry for my late reply. > Btw, I remember Jon used to send boxes and boxes of books (mostly Nina's Abhidhamma in Daily Life and Buddhism in Daily Life) to friends in Penang in the 70s. I remember reading some of the correspondence he received at that time. Many people were really interested in the Abhidhamma even then. I wonder if some are still around in your group? There are some, not too many people in Penang, like to study Abhidhamma. There are many Abhidhamma teachers came to Penang to conduct Abhidhamma course for the past few years. e.g. Sayadaw U Nandamala, Pak Auk Sayadaw, Sayadaw U Dhammapiya, Sayalay Susila, Dr Menh Tin Mon. (May be there are more which I do not know, sorry for not to be listed at here.) Anyway, I do not have any idea on the Penang people that Jon contacted with. But I saw Nina's books was reprinted in one of the centre called Ehipassiko Buddhist Meditation Society in Penang. That centre teaches Abhidhamma since many years ago (if I am not mistaken, it have been teaching Abhidhamma for more than 20 over years). They are Thai Theravada Vipassana tradition. > > Anyway, please keep sharing anything of interest to us here, such as details from the Yamaka for further reflection and discussion. It's not translated into English, so I'm glad to read any of your comments/questions etc. Thank you so much. I am so happy to know all of you here. And able to learn the Dhamma knowledge from you. > ... > >Actually, I am thinking to prepare some Pali-English glossary for this subject Citta Yamaka. Hoping that if those participants can familiar with the terms before they attend the class, it would benefit to them. F.Y.I, we have requested Sayadaw to change the topic. And Sayadaw has agreed to change the topic to Ayatana Yamaka (Pairs on Bases). Because we have the English translation of this chapter. So that we can distribute to the participants before they come to the class. Beside the topic, everything remain the same. The Course is going to be started on 23rd June 2009 at Santarama, Balik Pulau, Penang. It is a wonderful place. You can go to khandhayamaka.blogspot.com to see the place. Just click on "the participants". I uploaded the participants' photos to the blog. From there you can see the view of Santarama. > S: Good idea. Could you post a set of a few words at a time, so we can discuss further and use them as a 'spring-board'. For any unusual words, perhaps you can add a phrase or two? > > Look forward to further discussions. Yes. I would like to post more interesting Dhamma at here. Since I am now also editing the Sacca Yamaka. It is so interesting. There are the clarification of the terms, such as, dukkha and dukkhasacca, samudaya and samudayasacca, nirodha and nirodhasacca, magga and maggasacca, etc. It tells the dhamma in the 4 Noble Truths, and what are the dhamma out of the 4 Noble Truths (the dhamma which are not to be categorized in the 4 NT), and so on. There are many things to be discussed as here. Let me continue next time. Thanks and Sadhu. With respect, Chew #97538 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:19 pm Subject: The Power of Presence! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: What is the Mental Ability of Awareness (Sati)? The Blessed Buddha once said: Bhikkhus, there are these five mental abilities (indriya). What five? The ability of Faith (saddhÄ ) The ability of Energy (viriya ) The ability of Awareness (sati ) The ability of Concentration (samÄdhi ) The ability of Understanding (pañña ) But what is the mental ability of Awareness (Sati )? That which is Awareness, constant attention, recollection, mental presence, mindfulness, remembering, bearing in mind, alertness, watchful consciousness, non-neglect, non-oblivious, non-forgetfulness, non-carelessness, and non-superficiality. This is called the ability of Awareness, the Power of Awareness, Right Awareness, and the Awareness link to Awakening! But what is the Awareness link to Awakening? Herein a Bhikkhu is mindful, furnished with excellent Awareness, recollection, he remembers, remembers constantly, what has long been done & been said concerning release very long ago. This is called the Awareness link to Awakening... There is Awareness of internal states and there is Awareness of external states. Both Awareness of internal states & Awareness of external states is an Awareness link to Awakening leading to full knowledge, Enlightenment, & to complete emancipating release! The Power of Presence! Source: The Book of Analysis: Vibhanga 124 + 228 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130304 <...> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Power of Presence! #97539 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa nilovg Hi Larry, I am glad to hear from you. I miss you already for a long time on dsg. Ken H once said that if one does not post for a long time, it is hard to come back. Now your remark here is already a good beginning of posting on dsg. Or any remark, even short, is most welcome. Or any questions on my book? See below. Op 22-apr-2009, om 7:30 heeft Larry het volgende geschreven: > Actually, the opening verse inspired a rather unconventional thought: > > Dhammapada (vs. 345) > > That which is made of iron, wood or hemp is not a strong bond, say > the wise; (but) that longing for jewels, ornaments, children and > wives is far greater an attachment. > > L: That _longing_ is a far greater _bond_, holding one in bondage. > Freedom from that longing opens up unfettered love of iron, wood, > hemp, jewels, ornaments, children and wives. ------- N: Love is a difficult word, it can include attachment or metta. Love for things would always be lobha. But only the anaagaami has eradiced this: through the development of understanding of nama and rupa. Love for beings: here one has to scrutinize oneself. Is there selfishness or unselfishness? Nina. #97540 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:55 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Dear James, I remember you once wrote to Sarah and objected to what she said, but you explained that at the same time you were extending metta. That was a very sweet post. I must say to your credit that you mean this. But never say never or ever to Ken. I hope you write again to Ken. I also laughed on the touches of humor of both of you. Anyway, I add grains of salt all the time. You asked me for a sutta that is not mentioning jhaana under right concentration. I remember having read it but it would take a lot of time looking it up. Maybe someone else can assist? Nina. Op 23-apr-2009, om 5:49 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > James: I will write metta if I want. The fact that you write this > shows that you know nothing about metta. But, what I won't do is > write to you ever again, EVER! > > > > > Ken H > > > > METTA, METTA, METTA, > James #97541 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:12 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 17. nilovg Dear friends, You thought that after concentration on breathing, when you were relaxed, awareness was frequent and acute. How much understanding is there? Which realities are understood? If there is no right understanding we may take for awareness what is not the right awareness. The realities which appear through the six doors at this moment have to be understood. They cannot be understood immediately, but we can begin to study them with awareness. Is there not something which appears through the eyes now? We do not have to think about it or to define it in order to experience it. We can call it visible object or colour, it does not matter how we name it; it is just that which appears through the eyes. When we think that it is a particular person or thing, we are thinking of concepts. A concept is not visible object, it is formed up by our thinking. A concept is not a reality and thus it is not the object of right understanding in the development of vipassanå. Do we know the difference between concepts and nåma and rúpa, the realities which can be directly experienced, without there being the need to think about them? It is essential to know the difference, otherwise we will continue confusing thinking and awareness, and then vipassanå cannot be developed. When visible object appears it is evident that there must also be a reality which experiences it, otherwise it could not appear. Seeing which experiences visible object is not self, it is only a type of nåma. Seeing can be studied with mindfulness when there is seeing, and there is seeing time and again. There is seeing now. We used to live in the world of our thoughts, of concepts, but now we can begin to study realities such as seeing, visible object, hearing or sound. We are not used to doing this but when we see the value of knowing what is real, not a concept or idea, there will be conditions to study realities. ******* Nina. #97542 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 2:23 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Scott, Op 22-apr-2009, om 14:06 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > N: A concept > does not arise and then fall away, only the thinking that thinks of > it arises and falls away." > > Scott: Agreed. I'd like to know what the relation is between > pa~n~naa and a correct conceptual understanding of the Dhamma. > > This latter must be occurring within the mind-door. There would be > thinking about Dhamma and thoughts. Also I'm assuming that the > dichotomy is a simple one: there is a right way to understand and > think about Dhamma and there is a wrong way. If pa~n~naa, say > 'mundane pa~n~naa, leads to a right way of thinking about Dhamma, > what is the process whereby this occurs? ------- N: As you say, this is right thinking. There is not all the time direct understanding of realities, but also correct intellectual understanding arises and this is necessary. We learn that this is a concept, that a paramattha dhamma. When there are conditions for direct awareness and understanding there is no doubt, and a paramattha dhamma is the object, a nama or a rupa. Nina. #97543 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Colette, Op 22-apr-2009, om 23:15 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > Isn't nature another word for Svabhava or essence? ------- N: sabhava can be translated as with its own or specific nature. Essence is not so clear, it may suggest a 'self" or atta. or a core. Ken H has elaborated further on the meaning of sabhava. Nina. #97544 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:50 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N: "As you say, this is right thinking. There is not all the time direct understanding of realities, but also correct intellectual understanding arises and this is necessary. We learn that this is a concept, that a paramattha dhamma. When there are conditions for direct awareness and understanding there is no doubt, and a paramattha dhamma is the object, a nama or a rupa." Scott: Thank you, Nina. I have some more questions for clarification. Is 'correct intellectual understanding' a dhamma? In other words, does it arise and fall away, or is this a term referring to a process, or the concepts which are thought about? Which dhammaa, in unison, might compose a moment of 'correct intellectual understanding'? Again, what role does pa~n~naa have as condition for 'correct intellectual understanding'? Sincerely, Scott. #97545 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The 10 future Buddhas! upasaka_howard Hi, Azita (and Bhante) - In a message dated 4/22/2009 7:49:59 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, gazita2002@... writes: hallo howard, bhante --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Dear Bhikkhu Samahita - > What is known about the next 10 Future Buddhas? > ============================== > Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who they are - so, no > new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions upon trillions of years, and 2) > judging from their names, that they will all be from India (even though the > planet earth will be long gone.) > For me, this is Buddhist mythology, begun in early Buddhism and going > way beyond the due respect and appreciation for our great teacher, and > taken to more extreme heights in Mahayana, that makes for iconic religious > devotionalism but has no bearing on the liberating Dhamma practice taught by > the Buddha and which I consider a treasure. Can you tell me why I am wrong in > this, if you think I am? > > With respect and metta, > Howard azita:LOL, you have said a little more than me, Howard. --------------------------------------- I do hope I didn't go TOO far. I meant no disrespect to Ven Samahita. Actually, though this might seem implausible to some, I was motivated by respect for the Buddha and his Dhamma. -------------------------------------- My thought was "gosh..thats a detailed story and do I believe it?" ---------------------------------------- :-) --------------------------------------- I agree with you that it has little bearing on the liberating dhamma as taught by the Buddha. I barely know what NOW consists of let alone eons etc away. However, it is a good reminder that Samsara is a long, long time. ---------------------------------------- True - at least for most of us. ------------------------------------------ Who knows where 'we' are at in this unmerry-go-round! -------------------------------------- ;-) To embellish, and somewhat mix, your excellent metaphor: We're probably just holding tightly onto our seat on the "Earth Samsara Carousel" ride, because, though it's a relatively tame ride, it still seems to be going too fast to risk jumping off, and also because we're really scared of not finding the carnival exit after jumping off but getting lost instead in other really wild parts of this crazy "amusement park" (like the Horror House of Hell ride) which are truly nightmarish - and so, we "play it safe"!! We think "Better safe than sorry" and as a result end up being both sorry and far from safe. --------------------------------------- Patience, courage and good cheer, azita ========================== With metta, Howard /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #97546 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:37 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear azita, Regarding: azita: "...Supposing I am reading a dhamma book eg Nina's book on Rupa, and there is thinking about what I'm reading and also some realisation that what I'm reading about is actually occuring now. The book in reality is not a book but hardness, visible object and then thinking about what is felt or seen - then I call it a book." Scott: So here (and, hey, I'm reading that same book - or rather experiencing that bit of hardness), you are describing some sort of interplay between the conceptual process or 'reading' and the experience of the hardness of the 'book' and more thinking about it. g: "Its all so momentary really, its difficult to know on that intellectual level if one is developing in the right or wrong way at times. In my case, as soon as there is any thoughts of 'I understand' then there is doubt and clinging and I think I am thinking too much - becomes very messy!!!!!!" Scott: Yeah, but sometimes don't you actually understand something and then there is no doubt about that, even thought its 'only' intellectual understanding? I mean I get the bit about 'my understanding' but isn't there only right and wrong? Sincerely, Scott. #97547 From: "sprlrt" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:43 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sprlrt Hi Sarah, I could't find the pali of the Abhidhammattha Vibhavini on CSCD, perhaps you've got it or know where to find it... Alberto --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: ... > I'll have a look at the pali (well, sort of), and post some more comments on this intricate subject. > ... > S: Thank you. I'm not sure and I wonder if you'd read your previous comment in any of the texts? > ... #97548 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 1:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The 10 future Buddhas! upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Azita) - In a message dated 4/22/2009 9:49:23 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com , "gazita2002" wrote: > > <. . .> Howard: > > Apparently 1) that it is all already determined who they are - so, no > > new Buddha's-to-be coming up for trillions upon trillions of years, <. . .> azita:> LOL, you have said a little more than me, Howard. My thought was "gosh..thats a detailed story and do I believe it?" > > I agree with you that it has little bearing on the liberating dhamma as taught by the Buddha. I barely know what NOW consists of let alone eons etc away. > However, it is a good reminder that Samsara is a long, long time. Who knows where 'we' are at in this unmerry-go-round! ----------- Hi Azita and Howard, There could be an easy way of settling this. Hasn't the Buddha said in the suttas that, during his long journey as a bodhisattha, he had met several Buddhas? (Or have I got that wrong?) If he said how many he had met (maybe 10) then that would answer the question. In that case, at the time the Buddha made his bodhisattha vow there would already have been 10 bodhisatthas ahead of him. So, my next question would be: does the text to which we are referring say that the next 10 buddhas have already made their bodhisattha vows? In that case the time for the next one could be about now. It could be you Howard! :-) -------------------------------------- LOL! At the moment, I'll be satisfied with today being relatively "okay"! ;-) -------------------------------------- Otherwise, no one will be making any such vow until trillions of trillions of years from now. ---------------------------------------- I'm satisfied at the moment with vowing to not do too much harm in the world, to do a bit of good, and to become a drop less immersed in craving, aversion and ignorance. ;-) --------------------------------------- ------------- H: > > > and 2) judging from their names, that they will all be from India (even though the planet earth will be long gone.) -------------- Maybe in the course of many world systems (or many "Big Bang" systems) a planet Earth occurs time and time again - and with a continent know as India inhabited by people just like the Indians we know now. And maybe it is only at such times that a Buddha will arise. -------------------------------------------- Hmm, maybe ... Was that the plot of one of L. Ron Hubbard's SciFi novels? ;-) -------------------------------------------- I don't know . . . just guessing. :-) -------------------------------------------- Always fun! ;-) ------------------------------------------ Ken H PS: Oh, I see what you mean, Howard: you are not an Indian and so it couldn't be you. Hmm, I'll have to get back to you on that. :-) ------------------------------------------ LOL! ======================== With metta, Howard Emptiness /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./ #97549 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:21 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (6-8), and commentary, part 1. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta 6: Walshe: DN 33.1.11(6) 'Four boundless states. Here, a monk, with a heart filled with loving-kindness, pervades first one quarter, then the second, the third and the fourth. Thus he stays, [iii 224] spreading the thought of loving-kindness above, below and across, everywhere, always with a heart filled with loving-kindness, abundant, magnified, unbounded, without hatred or ill-will. And likewise with compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. (Catasso appama~n~naa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu mettaasahagatena cetasaa eka.m disa.m pharitvaa viharati. Tathaa dutiya.m. Tathaa tatiya.m. Tathaa catuttha.m. Iti uddhamadho tiriya.m sabbadhi sabbattataaya sabbaavanta.m loka.m mettaasahagatena cetasaa vipulena mahaggatena appamaa.nena averena abyaapajjena pharitvaa viharati. Karu.naasahagatena cetasaa.pe. muditaasahagatena cetasaa.pe. upekkhaasahagatena cetasaa eka.m disa.m pharitvaa viharati. Tathaa dutiya.m. Tathaa tatiya.m. Tathaa catuttha.m. Iti uddhamadho tiriya.m sabbadhi sabbattataaya sabbaavanta.m loka.m upekkhaasahagatena cetasaa vipulena mahaggatena appamaa.nena averena abyaapajjena pharitvaa viharati.) N: The Co: Boundless or without measure. He suffuses beings completely with these states. In the Visuddhimagga is the explanation in detail, in the section on the development of concentration. Pali: Appama~n~naati pamaa.na.m agahetvaa anavasesaphara.navasena appama~n~naava. Anupadava.n.nanaa pana bhaavanaasamaadhividhaana~nca etaasa.m visuddhimagge vitthaaritameva. ------------------ Sutta 7: Walshe: DN 33.1.11(7) 'Four formless jhaanas. Here, a monk, by passing entirely beyond bodily sensations, by the disappearance of all sense of resistance and by non-attraction to the perception of diversity, seeing that space is infinite, reaches and remains in the Sphere of Infinite Space. And by passing entirely beyond the Sphere of Infinite Space, seeing that consciousness is infinite, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness. And by passing entirely beyond the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness, seeing that there is no thing, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of No-Thingness. And by passing entirely beyond the Sphere of No-Thingness, he reaches and remains in the Sphere of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception. (Cattaaro aaruppaa. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu sabbaso ruupasa~n~naana.m samatikkamaa pa.tighasa~n~naana.m attha'ngamaa naanattasa~n~naana.m amanasikaaraa ti aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m samatikkamma nti vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m samatikkamma ti aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m upasampajja viharati. Sabbaso aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m samatikkamma nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana.m upasampajja viharati.) ------ N: pa.tighasa~n~naa is here translated as perception of resistance. However, pa.tigha also refers to the impingement of an object on a sense-door. When one has attained aruupa-jhaana one is free from the perception of sense objects. It is said that the Visuddhimagga gives a detailed explanation of aruupa-jhaana. ----------------- Nina. #97550 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 7:48 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Scott, Op 23-apr-2009, om 13:50 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Thank you, Nina. I have some more questions for clarification. > > Is 'correct intellectual understanding' a dhamma? --------- N: We have heard itmany times: everything is dhamma. Without conditions, namely, hearing the good dhamma, there could not be correct intellectual understanding. This is also pa~n~naa, there are many levels of pa~n~naa. I liked Azita's remarks about the mess we make: as soon as we understand something, there is clinging to 'I understand', and then we forget that it is 'just dhamma'. Good reminder. --------- > > S: In other words, does it arise and fall away, or is this a term > referring to a process, or the concepts which are thought about? ------ N: Sure, this kind of pa~n~naa arises and falls away with the citta it accompanies. It cannot stay on. It can be gradually accumulated. ------- > S: Which dhammaa, in unison, might compose a moment of 'correct > intellectual understanding'? Again, what role does pa~n~naa have as > condition for 'correct intellectual understanding'? ------- N: It is the cetasika pa~n~naa, and it is accompanied by many sobhana cetasikas which all preform their function. There has to be confidence, non-attachment, sati, etc. Listening to the Dhamma as explained by the right friend in Dhamma conditions correct intellectual understanding. Perhaps you hesitate to call also intellectual understanding pa~n~naa. It is pa~n~naa stemming from listening. It grows and then there can be, one day, vipassanaa pa~n~naa, but we need not think of this. I liked Acharn's reminders that understanding is the goal, and we should not think of vipassanaa. We listen, consider, read, hear tapes, discuss, all with the aim to have more understanding of realities. Understanding is a dhamma, a reality. -------- Nina. #97551 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:53 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear James, > I remember you once wrote to Sarah and objected to what she said, but > you explained that at the same time you were extending metta. That > was a very sweet post. I must say to your credit that you mean this. > But never say never or ever to Ken. I hope you write again to Ken. I > also laughed on the touches of humor of both of you. Anyway, I add > grains of salt all the time. James: yeah, you are right, and you are very sweet. But Ken owes me an apology. If he can't lower his ego enough to give that, then that's kamma. > > You asked me for a sutta that is not mentioning jhaana under right > concentration. I remember having read it but it would take a lot of > time looking it up. Maybe someone else can assist? James: Okay, no rush. But I would think that would be a very important sutta to you. I'm surprised you can't place it immediately. > Nina. Metta, James #97552 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:39 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Robert E., > > There is another post which may arrive but I fear it is lost in the ether. Good chance to narrow the focus. > > In the Gradual Sayings, The Book of Threes, III, 5, 47, is the following: > > "Monks, there are these three condition-marks of that which is conditioned (sa"nkhatassa sa"nkhalakkha.naani) . What three? Its genesis is apparent (uppaado pa~n~naayati), its passing away is apparent (vayo pa~n~naayati), its changeability while it persists is apparent (.thitassa a~n~naa.thatta.m)..." > > Scott: Note 'pa~n~naayati'. And consider: This is Abhidhamma in the suttas. Try using: > > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ > > Sincerely, > > Scott. I am not 100% sure what point you are trying to support by quoting this. It all seems perfectly normal to me. Genesis, passing away and changeability while it exists, seem like the ordinary observables of anicca. The fact that it is said that they are "apparent" also seems obvious. I would never deny that one can observe the changeability of the dhamma over the time that it exists, and that its genesis, change and passing away would be the observable sequence of events that would show its nature as "anicca." But there is also no doubt that this description is one that takes place over time, no matter how instantaneous the moments may be, so it does not contradict anything I have said. As far as I can see, there are two aspects to observing anicca, in broad terms: 1. That which is perceptible/observable regarding the change that takes place in a dhamma during the course of its existence -- given that one has the capability to perceive it; and 2. That which is deeply discerned by panna about the implications of this coming to be and passing away, which is discerned through the highest level of understanding or contemplation or bhavana or whatever you want to call it. It makes sense that depending on one's level of understanding one might observe the superficial changes in an object, yet not get deeply that this is the absolute nature of all dhammas, while panna would conversely see in the changing nature of the dhamma the radical truth of anicca in all things. But both levels of understanding are along the same lines, just a matter of depth. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #97553 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:46 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > Scott: Note 'pa~n~naayati'. And consider: This is Abhidhamma in the suttas. Try using: > > http://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/pali/ Love the dictionary! And Paññāyati is a great word - spelled this way in the dictionary by the way, without the second "a." 'Pannayati' shows that anicca is clear and perceptible over time. Great! Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - #97554 From: LBIDD@... Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa lbidd2 Hi Nina, Nina: "Love for beings: here one has to scrutinize oneself. Is there selfishness or unselfishness?" Larry: If there is no selfishness, what then? Larry #97555 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 4:47 pm Subject: The 4 Foundations of Awareness! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Establishing the 4 Foundations of Awareness! What, friends, are the Four Foundations of Awareness? 1: Body as foul frame: While always acutely alert & clearly comprehending, thus removing any lust, urge, envy, frustration & discontent rooted in this world, the intelligent Bhikkhu keeps contemplating & regarding any & all Body as an alien frame of filthy & foul form... As something bound to emerge, decay and vanish... Neither as mine, nor belonging to me, nor as 'what I am', nor as a manifested representation of 'myself'! Neither as lasting, stable safety! Nor as pleasant beauty and pride! 2: Feeling as annoying reaction: The intelligent Bhikkhu keeps contemplating & regarding any & all Feeling as a remote ever recurring reactivity... As something bound to arise, decay & fade away! Not as mine, felt by me, nor belonging to me, nor as what 'I am', nor as something felt by my very self! Neither as lasting, stable & safe! Nor as ever pleasure & only bliss! 3: Mind as passing moods: The intelligent Bhikkhu keeps contemplating & regarding any & all Mind as a habituated set of bizarre mentalities of a weird nature, that appears, dwindles, flutters & flickers... Neither as something that 'I am', nor as a part of 'me', nor making up my ego or my self! Neither as lasting, stable or same! Not as fascinating! Not as soul! 4: Phenomena as momentary appearances: The intelligent Bhikkhu keeps contemplating & regarding any & all Phenomena as mentally constructed appearances of momentary manifestation always ending right where they arised. Not as mine, belonging to me or any self! Not as something lasting, stable or real! Not as existent, enduring, substantial, material, absolute or authentic! This is the fourfold Foundation of Awareness...!!! This - only this - is the sole way to the purification of beings!!! Why is it actually so? It is an indispensable support for a presence, that has to stand near! It has to be made manifest, to be of service as a guarding activity! It has to be established, as a continuous dominance of comprehension! It is essential & absolutely necessary for optimizing any behaviour! It is a crucially needed key, imperative for preventing all mistakes! It is a vitally fundamental prerequisite for guidance & self-control! It is the only thing that can overcome relapses of careless neglect! When not aware of what one is doing, serious mistakes is inevitable! The 4 Great Frames of Reference! <..> Have a nice clearly comprehending day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The 4 Fine Foundations of Awareness! #97556 From: "colette" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:18 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) ksheri3 Hi Ken H. and Nina, Thank you, both, for taking a stab at the issue I presented. As if you guys didn't know or couldn't see, I'm heavy into the Madhyamikas at the moment. Another obvious condition or state of consciousness that I'm experiencing is the simple "conditionality of words": "And just because words and concepts have a certain utility, as Bertrand Russell pointed out, we ought not to conclude that because we can say a word or phrase, that it actually confers existence. We all know that a description without any reference is a fabrication: it is like the expression 'a barren woman's daughter'." I speak of this in terms of the Western concept of "good" and "evil" which sooooooo much of Western phychology and philosophy is based, since these terms, "good" and "evil", are such baubles and trinkets constantly employed by people in positions of authority to vindicate their actions or acts. These are fundamental concepts of behavior and cannot exist without SUBSTANTIATION therefore is the, what I term Svabhava of this concept "good" or "evil", is it EXISTANT WITHOUT THE INDIVIDUAL MANIFESTING THIS "good" or this "evil"? A concept, then, such as "good" and such as "evil", cannot possibly be of any concern since it's nothing but pure insanity to rationalize it as: I think therefore it is. <...> Thanks for trying to give me your help but at the moment I'm actually EXPERIENCING and overwhellming flood of data or information concerning things that I could not have studied nor had studied because of their immensity in "THOUGHT BASIS" or possibly Mind-Only conception. As the first card of the Major Arcana denotes: I am juggling. And I gotta do it fast since the "process" of that which I juggle is a given and is continuous. PONDER THIS: Is veridical perception the same as prajnapti? Translation of foriegn words/concepts is another one of my greatest failures or inabilities. Thanx. toodles, colette #97557 From: "colette" Date: Thu Apr 23, 2009 10:53 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) ksheri3 Hi Nina, Thank you for giving it a shot. I'm not saying that the effort you put forth is wrong, I am saying or suggesting that there certainly may be misinterpretations or misunderstandings. Allow me: > Essence is not so clear, colette: without a doubt, "essence" is at the very least AMBIGUOUS. > N: sabhava can be translated as with its own or specific nature. colette: here is where my problems begin to multiply. You suggest that "sabhava" or svabhava actually has something or is in possession of something which means or implies that some thing actually has some other thing. To complicate matters, this supposed "other thing" is somehow directed as having conditions or qualities. My point is: How can a hallucination have or possess the qualities of manifesting "feelings" or "consciousnesses" in a sentient being? <...> Thanx for trying. I hope you can see the inconsistantcies and incongruencies I speak of here. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Colette, > Op 22-apr-2009, om 23:15 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > > > Isn't nature another word for Svabhava or essence? > ------- > N: sabhava can be translated as with its own or specific nature. > Essence is not so clear, it may suggest a 'self" or atta. or a core. > Ken H has elaborated further on the meaning of sabhava. <...> #97558 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 1:59 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James, Op 23-apr-2009, om 17:53 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > N: I hope you write again to Ken. I > > also laughed on the touches of humor of both of you. Anyway, I add > > grains of salt all the time. ------ > > James: yeah, you are right, and you are very sweet. But Ken owes me > an apology. If he can't lower his ego enough to give that, then > that's kamma. ------- N: Did you not see the humorous side: saying, 'your objectionable posts'? Sometimes he answers in the same firm, spirited language as you write. Nothing ugly is meant, just as in your writing style. You do not mean anything ugly. You should meet Ken H, he is the most soft spoken, kind person you can imagine. -------- > > > N: You asked me for a sutta that is not mentioning jhaana under right > > concentration. I remember having read it but it would take a lot of > > time looking it up. Maybe someone else can assist? -------- > > James: Okay, no rush. But I would think that would be a very > important sutta to you. I'm surprised you can't place it immediately. ------ N: I do not place it immediately because I do not find it a problem that the jhaanas are mentioned under right concentration. I do not feel that I have to defend anything or come with arguments to prove something. But here is one sutta: S V, 18, (the Great Chapter, Mahavagga, Kindred Sayings on the Way, § 8, concentration (samaadhi): I learn from this sutta that right concentration must be accompanied by right understanding and the other factors of the eightfold Path. Lodewijk said that he would like to send you my book on rupa (physical phenomena). In case you want it please give your postal address. Nina. #97559 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa nilovg Hi Larry, Op 24-apr-2009, om 7:16 heeft LBIDD@... het volgende geschreven: > Nina: "Love for beings: here one has to scrutinize oneself. Is there > selfishness or unselfishness?" > > Larry: If there is no selfishness, what then? ------ N: Unselfish love, thinking with considerateness of others, helping them is kusala. But soon after that there can be attachment to one's kusala, or one takes it for self. Kusala citta and akusala citta alternate and it is not easy to have precise understanding of these moments. Nina. #97560 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:22 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fours (6-8), and commentary, part 2. nilovg Dear friends, Sutta 8: Walshe: DN 33.1.11(8) 'Four supports (apassenaani): Here a monk judges that one thing is to be pursued, one thing endured, one thing avoided, one thing suppressed. (Cattaari apassenaani. Idhaavuso, bhikkhu sa'nkhaayeka.m pa.tisevati, sa'nkhaayeka.m adhivaaseti, sa'nkhaayeka.m parivajjeti, sa'nkhaayeka.m vinodeti.) ----------- The Co gives an explanation about the four supports or bases of conduct. He follows (pa.tisevati) what is suitable to be followed, having considered (this) (sa”nkhaaya), having known (this) with understanding (~naa.nena ~natvaa). He uses his robe with wise discrimination. As to enduring: he endures (adhivaaseti) what is proper to be endured. In detail: with wise discrimination he endures thirst etc. Subco mentions patience with regard to one’s surroundings, adhivaasana khanti. Co: As to avoiding: with wise discrimination he avoids (parivajjeti) a fierce elephant. As to suppressing, the Co states: he dispells (vinodeti) , he dispells what should be dispelled, he drives it away, does not allow it to enter. In detail: he does not give in to thoughts of sense pleasures that have arisen. The subco states that he is able to train himself in the three trainings. N: Higher siila, higher citta (concentration) and higher pa~n~naa. Through satipa.t.thaana these three trainings reach fulfilment. Subco: By following what should be followed akusala dhammas are eliminated and kusala dhammas increase. This is the meaning of following what is suitable to be followed. It is the same with regard to enduring or patience. N: One can be patient with regard to whatever object appears, pleasant or unpleasant. When there is patience the citta is kusala. One does not have attachment nor aversion towards the object that appears. One sees it as a mere dhamma. The subco elaborates on the term ‘having considered’, sa”nkhaaya: it appears, it is understood, it is evident. He considers, with understanding. -------- N: With each of these four bases of conduct, understanding is emphasized. With each one it is repeated: having considered (this) (sa”nkhaaya), having known (this) with understanding (~naa.nena ~natvaa). With understanding and mindfulness of whatever nama or rupa appears as non-self, there are the right conditions to follow what is suitable, to be patient with regard to whatever reality appears, to avoid and to dispell what is akusala. -------- Apassenaaniiti apassayaani. Sa"nkhaayaati ~naa.nena ~natvaa. Pa.tisevatiiti ~naa.nena ~natvaa sevitabbayuttakameva sevati... --------- Nina. #97561 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 2:28 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. nilovg Dear friends, We are ignorant about all the realities of our daily life. It seems to us that there are seeing and thinking about what is seen at the same time, but in reality they are different realities arising at different moments. Do we realize this? It seems to us that there are hearing and thinking of the meaning of what is heard at the same time but they are different realities. When we do not clearly distinguish between different realities, can we say that any reality is clearly understood? If there is still doubt it is evident that paññå is weak. It is beneficial to realize what one does not know yet. Ignorance and doubt can only be very gradually eliminated through the development of paññå which directly knows nåma and rúpa. We may not be aware of one object at a time yet, there may be a notion of self who is watching realities. When there is an idea of “watching” we are not on the right path. Realities such as hardness or sound appear already, because of their own conditions. They can be studied with mindfulness which also arises because of its own conditions, namely, as we have seen, listening to the Dhamma and considering it. When we remember that the realities which appear one at a time have to be studied in order to have more understanding of them, there will be less worry about the frequency of sati. If one erroneously believes that nåma and rúpa are known already there is no development of paññå. When there is right mindfulness realities appear one at a time and there is no self who is watching. If there cannot be awareness of all kinds of nåma and rúpa which appear in our daily life, no matter whether we are busy or agitated, we will not really know ourselves. If we think that we have to be relaxed first we limit the objects of awareness. ******* Nina. #97562 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 3:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, (Back to #97472) Thanks for your further comments in this thread. --- On Mon, 20/4/09, sprlrt wrote: >The 2nd NT, craving as the cause of suffering, was already known before the enlightenment of the Buddha. And the uncovering of this truth can come, I think, only with panna of the level of the 2nd vipassana-nana, direct knowledge of causes and results, an intermediate level of panna, prior to the 3rd nana, when the arising & falling of dhammas starts to be directly known. .... S: Hmmmm.....I think the NTs, including the first two, can only be realised by the development of the 8-fold path. It is only by understanding dhammas - namas and rupas - directly, that the arising and falling away of them can be known, and thereby dhammas as dukkha. As you say, such panna begins to uncover these truths as the vipassana-nanas are attained. I don't believe such 'uncovering' to be able to occur without a Buddha's teaching. So any knowledge of suffering and craving as cause, prior to hearing the Teachings, has to refer to a more conventional, conceptual knowledge of suffering and its cause, but not to the direct understanding of sankhara dhammas as dukkha. .... >And then, as 3rd truth, dukkhanirodha, about the termination of suffering, there wasn't nibbana, the dhamma that only Buddhas can uncover and bring back to light, but the jhanas, rupa and arupa, fine-material and immaterial, and rebirth as a brahma god, the ultimate atman, which the Buddha included in the round of rebirth, samasara. >Consequentely the 4th NT, the path leading to the termination of dukkha, would also differ, samatha, with its formal, conventional objects of meditation, in a secluded place away from 5 sense doors contacts, for developing jhana (with an intermediate level of panna as prerequisite) , prior to the Buddha enlightenment; .... S: I have to say with regard to the discussions on panna, that I'm more inclined to the idea of different kinds of panna as well as different levels of panna. So the panna as developed in samatha bhavana is different from the panna developed in vipassana bhavana. It's not just an 'intermediate level' of the latter. This is why the understanding of realities has to be 'right' from the beginning. ... >satipatthana or the right path thereafter, the development of panna, kusala nana-sampayutta citta (and panna, amoha, is kusala hetu, the root of kusala), the direct understanding of dhammas that it experiences as its objects, as they really are, anatta, anicca and dukkha, no matter whether kusala, akusala or abyakata, as they arise & fall every day, every hour, every minute, every second, all the time. .... S: Such dhammas arise and fall away all the time, but of course they are not going to be understood 'all the time'! Metta, Sarah ======= #97563 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 4:08 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi James (Nina & Howard), I've been glad to read your 'spirited' comments in this and other threads:-). --- On Mon, 20/4/09, buddhatrue wrote: >You see, from the Samadhi Sutta, it is apparent that someone who is "skilled in jhana" isn't necessarily skilled in insight, and vice versa. But, the Buddha declares that one should be skilled in both. That raises logistical problems as to how to develop bhavana because one can't be sure as to when to practice samatha or when to practice vipassana. ... S: I think that we sometimes forget about such dhammas being conditioned, not belonging to any self who decides what to practise. For example, just as we can't decide at this moment what seeing consciousness will see or what hearing will hear, so we cannot determine whether 'to practice samatha' now or 'to practice vipassana'. Even for the Buddha, it depended entirely on conditions which dhammas would arise at any moment. All are anatta. ... >Some solve this by stating that you practice them both in tandem, one after the other (perhaps very quickly)- but that could result in not being proficient in either one. Some state that you practice them both at the same time as is suggested in some suttas- but that could be impossible. ... S: Again, I think the Buddha was pointed to the different kinds of accumulations which may manifest. He wasn't indicating that one could choose how and when to become enlightened. Just my reflections on this topic. Metta, Sarah ======== #97564 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi Nina & Howard, --- On Sun, 19/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >N: The Paali term bhaavanaa means: to make become, to produce, to increase. Developing first samatha before vipassanaa is certainly not a “short cut†to nibbaana as some people believe. Those who want to develop samatha should do so only if they really have accumulated skill for samatha. If one wants to apply oneself to a meditation subject, one needs a great deal of preparation, one has to lead a secluded life and many conditions have to be fulfilled. ------------ --------- --------- -------- >H:This is true for all bhavana. Dabbling won't get one far. ------------ --------- --------- -------- S: Well, now you both agree, I'd like to rephrase it (to avoid misunderstandings) and suggest that samatha will only be developed if there are the accumulations for such. In fact no one ever develops it - there are just dhammas which arise or not depending on conditions. The most important condition for the development of any bhavana is the (prior)right understanding. In the case of samatha, there has to be the undersanding of kusala and akusala and an understanding about how the object conditions calm. In order to attain jhana, as Nina writes, there have to be many particular conditions in place. .... >N: One may apply oneself to samatha, but if one does not have accumulations for the attainment of jhÃ¥na, or even access concentration, one should consider for oneself whether it is beneficial or not to continue developing samatha. Even while one applies oneself to a meditation subject akusala cittas still arise; the hindrances are not suppressed until one has attained access- concentration and jhÃ¥na. ------------ --------- --------- --------- >H: Accumulations aren't tropical plants growing in the wild, without careful tending to the garden. What is done now yields the accumulations of the future. Without useful action now, there is no basis for useful results in the future. If not now, when? The past is gone, the future a dream. Now is the time. ------------ --------- --------- --------- - S: Again, I think it could be stressed that whether or not samatha develops depends on conditions, rather than choice by a self. Yes, now is the time for bhavana, if the conditions are in place. Again, it depends on whether there is the right understanding of samatha or vipassana arising, rather than on special tending, actions or other kinds of 'doing', as I see it. In other words, any sankhara dhammas whatsoever, arise by conditions. This applies to samatha development too. Metta, Sarah ======== #97565 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 3:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) sarahprocter... Hi Azita, --- On Mon, 20/4/09, gazita2002 wrote: >azita: 'the suffering characteristic. .....reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall.. How come oppressed? I can understand dhammas being dukkha because of impermanence, so would appreciate a bit more info about 'oppressed'. thanks. .... S: 'being oppressed by rise and fall' - udayabbayapii.litattaa udayabbaya - rise and fall pii.lana - oppression, injury, damage pii.leti - to oppress, to crush, to molest, to subjugate. All conditioned dhammas are as if 'subjugated' or 'crushed' by their inherent nature to rise and fall. It is because of such 'subjugation' or 'oppression' that they are dukkha. As the text says, even the magga and phala cittas are thus include in the Truth of Suffering. Is that any clearer? Metta, Sarah ====== #97566 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 4:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (21) sarahprocter... Hi Colette. --- On Sat, 18/4/09, colette wrote: >Your reply to me IS VERY WELCOMED, THANK YOU! While you suggest that I helped you place your conceptions into a perspective you, in turn, actually aided me by helping me to grasp, better, the mere concepts we are/were speaking of. ... S: Thanks for mentioning that and you're welcome anytime. .... >> S: Again, even whilst in a Chicago (or Hong Kong) crowd, watched by the cameras, there can be seclusion of mind at moments of generosity, kindness and wisdom. There are no thoughts at such times about the 'important ME', about 'inclusion', 'exclusion' or 'exploitation' at such times. > ... >colette: This is the part that really caught my eye because you narrow the path down to "seclusion of mind". SPLENDID! EXCELLENT OBSERVATION! THUS, I and the rest of the group, can be certain that it is easy for you to cognize the applications of the movie THE MATRIX, to Buddhism, Buddhist Philosophy, and Buddhist practices. .... S: I haven't seen the movie, but will take your word for it! I'm glad you appreciate that 'seclusion' has to be in the mind. We don't need to be concerned about how others are behaving or treating us when we appreciate this. >> S: Again, at moments of 'peace' or tranquility, when there is freedom from all that stinks by way of attachment, anger and ignorance, there is no concern about what is 'private', 'secret' or 'secure'. >**Our lives are 'open books' at such moments without thoughts of ourselves at all.** >colette: I seperated that last line and marked it so that we can particularly focus on that sentence that you manufacured from the previous sentences. >This is the exact concept I've been constantly trying to get at with people. For instance, when I first began on the net in 2004 I was shown that people in WEstern esoteric forums don't have such a complete grasp of the concepts that I do. <...> ------------ --------- S: I don't think we have to be concerned whether others have the same 'complete grasp of concepts'. Let's put more emphasis on sharing whatever reflections we have and showing kindness to others. ... >>S:More stories and dreams at this moment. Such dreaming and enjoyment can be known as mere dhammas too! >colette: EXACTLY, they are nothing more than fleeting glimpses of the "clear light" and the potentials of the Bardo states of consciousness. ... S: I think such dreaming is just thinking about concepts of whatever kind. 'Clear light' and 'Bardo' are ideas too, quite different from realities which can be known now, such as hearing or sound, seeing or visible object. ... >It was very thoughtful of you to give me such a good response to start my day off, here, today! Thank You. ... S: I appreciate your kind response and thoughtful reply as well. Metta, Sarah ======== #97567 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 3:25 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com , Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear James, > I remember you once wrote to Sarah and objected to what she said, but > you explained that at the same time you were extending metta. That > was a very sweet post. I must say to your credit that you mean this. > But never say never or ever to Ken. I hope you write again to Ken. I > also laughed on the touches of humor of both of you. Anyway, I add > grains of salt all the time. Hi Nina (and James), Thanks for your words of wisdom. This has reminded me of another thread in which I have a half-finished reply to you. You will remember we were talking about 'where would we be if we hadn't heard about dhammas?' I said I would still be caught up in political arguments - still thinking that they had an ultimately right side and an ultimately wrong side. They haven't of course, only conditioned dhammas can be kusala or akusala. (And conditioned dhammas are such worthless things - unfit for worrying about either way.) Even more commonly people get caught up in minor fallings-out such as mine with James: "Has someone has offended me, have I caused offence: who started it, who was right, who was wrong . . ?" I think the fable about 'the man the boy and the donkey' sums up conventional life very well because we all have different ideas about how to handle these things. Some will say "Whether you are right or wrong just apologise and have done with it." Others will recommend different courses of action - none of them entirely right or entirely wrong. Where would we be if we didn't heard about dhammas? :-) Ken H #97568 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 3:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/24/2009 7:25:27 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Nina & Howard, --- On Sun, 19/4/09, upasaka@... wrote: >N: The Paali term bhaavanaa means: to make become, to produce, to increase. Developing first samatha before vipassanaa is certainly not a “short cut†to nibbaana as some people believe. Those who want to develop samatha should do so only if they really have accumulated skill for samatha. If one wants to apply oneself to a meditation subject, one needs a great deal of preparation, one has to lead a secluded life and many conditions have to be fulfilled. ------------ --------- --------- -------- >H:This is true for all bhavana. Dabbling won't get one far. ------------ --------- --------- -------- S: Well, now you both agree, I'd like to rephrase it (to avoid misunderstandings) and suggest that samatha will only be developed if there are the accumulations for such. In fact no one ever develops it - there are just dhammas which arise or not depending on conditions. The most important condition for the development of any bhavana is the (prior)right understanding. --------------------------------------- There is no "one" who, literally, does anything, and no "one," for that matter, who has accumulations. But what is also true is that without the intentional setting up of current requisite conditions - physical and mental seclusion, attending primarily to a restricted field of attention such as the body or breath, and monitoring the process to avoid getting lost in thought, excitement, or lethargy, no samatha or vipassana bhavana will occur. Predilection for jhana attainment does not develop by study only, and those who are facile with jhanas don't typically enter them while scuba diving, surfing, or tennis playing. --------------------------------------- In the case of samatha, there has to be the undersanding of kusala and akusala and an understanding about how the object conditions calm. In order to attain jhana, as Nina writes, there have to be many particular conditions in place. ---------------------------------------- Yes, there sure do. -------------------------------------- .... >N: One may apply oneself to samatha, but if one does not have accumulations for the attainment of jhÃ¥na, or even access concentration, one should consider for oneself whether it is beneficial or not to continue developing samatha. Even while one applies oneself to a meditation subject akusala cittas still arise; the hindrances are not suppressed until one has attained access- concentration and jhÃ¥na. ------------ --------- --------- --------- >H: Accumulations aren't tropical plants growing in the wild, without careful tending to the garden. What is done now yields the accumulations of the future. Without useful action now, there is no basis for useful results in the future. If not now, when? The past is gone, the future a dream. Now is the time. ------------ --------- --------- --------- - S: Again, I think it could be stressed that whether or not samatha develops depends on conditions, rather than choice by a self. --------------------------------------- Whenever I speak of choosing, you bring up "self." The Buddha made choices, Sarah. This bringing up "self" whenever one wishes to put down someone's opinion is something that I find annoying. I love you, Sarah, really, but I'm not fond of this approach. --------------------------------------- Yes, now is the time for bhavana, if the conditions are in place. Again, it depends on whether there is the right understanding of samatha or vipassana arising, rather than on special tending, actions or other kinds of 'doing', as I see it. In other words, any sankhara dhammas whatsoever, arise by conditions. This applies to samatha development too. Metta, Sarah =========================== With metta, Howard The Body Field /Monks, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing. Just as whoever pervades the great ocean with his awareness encompasses whatever rivulets flow down into the ocean, in the same way, whoever develops & pursues mindfulness immersed in the body encompasses whatever skillful qualities are on the side of clear knowing./ (From the Kayagata-sati Sutta) #97569 From: "gazita2002" Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 4:09 am Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) gazita2002 hallo Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear azita, > azita: "...Supposing I am reading a dhamma book eg Nina's book on Rupa, and there is thinking about what I'm reading and also some realisation that what I'm reading about is actually occuring now. The book in reality is not a book but hardness, visible object and then thinking about what is felt or seen - then I call it a book." > > Scott: So here (and, hey, I'm reading that same book - or rather experiencing that bit of hardness), you are describing some sort of interplay between the conceptual process or 'reading' and the experience of the hardness of the 'book' and more thinking about it. azita: mayb interplay is a good word to use - what I'm trying to convey is the realisation that what is read is about realities that are/can be occuring now at this moment. > > g: "Its all so momentary really, its difficult to know on that intellectual level if one is developing in the right or wrong way at times. In my case, as soon as there is any thoughts of 'I understand' then there is doubt and clinging and I think I am thinking too much - becomes very messy!!!!!!" > > Scott: Yeah, but sometimes don't you actually understand something and then there is no doubt about that, even thought its 'only' intellectual understanding? I mean I get the bit about 'my understanding' but isn't there only right and wrong? azita: yes to the first sentence. I presume you mean right/wrong understanding, and yes there is only right or wrong and "my understanding" is probably attachment, to me, mine, myself. patience, courage and good cheer, azita #97570 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:35 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------ > N: I do not place it immediately because I do not find it a problem > that the jhaanas are mentioned under right concentration. James: They are not just "mentioned" under right concentration; they are defined as right concentration. I do not > feel that I have to defend anything or come with arguments to prove > something. James: I'm surprised. I thought that was your main focus. > > But here is one sutta: > S V, 18, (the Great Chapter, Mahavagga, Kindred Sayings on the Way, § > 8, concentration (samaadhi): > associated and equipped. Do you listen to it. > And what, monks is the Ariyan right concentration., which is > associated and equipped? It is (associated with) right view, right > aim [N: Thinking], right speech, right action, right living, right > effort, right mindfulness and right concentration....> > > I learn from this sutta that right concentration must be accompanied > by right understanding and the other factors of the eightfold Path. James: I agree. Very important. > Lodewijk said that he would like to send you my book on rupa > (physical phenomena). In case you want it please give your postal > address. James: That is very strange. I wonder why Lodewijk would want me to read that book. Anyway, no offense, but I'm not really interested in reading that book. I'm pretty sure it would bore me to death. And, I don't want you to go to that trouble anyway. > > Nina. Metta, James #97571 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:45 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Sarah, Thanks for your input: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi James (Nina & Howard), > > I've been glad to read your 'spirited' comments in this and other threads:-). James: I guess that's one way to put it. :-) > ... > S: I think that we sometimes forget about such dhammas being conditioned, not belonging to any self who decides what to practise. For example, just as we can't decide at this moment what seeing consciousness will see or what hearing will hear James: I don't agree. If I want to see a Vincent Van Gogh painting, I can look one up on the Internet and see it. I have just controlled what I see. If I want to listen to Vivaldi, I can put in a CD and listen to it. I have just controlled what I hear. , so we cannot determine whether 'to practice samatha' now or 'to practice vipassana'. James: Yes we can. We can sit down and practice either/or. Even for the Buddha, it depended entirely on conditions which dhammas would arise at any moment. All are anatta. James: This has nothing to do with the first statements. (Goodness, this whole conversation feels familiar, somehow. :-) > ... > > >Some solve this by stating that you practice them both in tandem, one after the other (perhaps very quickly)- but that could result in not being proficient in either one. Some state that you practice them both at the same time as is suggested in some suttas- but that could be impossible. > ... > S: Again, I think the Buddha was pointed to the different kinds of accumulations which may manifest. James: That could be. Again, I don't quite get that sutta. It's too vague to me. He wasn't indicating that one could choose how and when to become enlightened. James: Well, I believe that one can choose the "vehicle" of enlightenment; but of course, no one can choose "when". > > Just my reflections on this topic. James: Thanks. It feels like we have danced this dance many times before. :-) > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Metta, James #97572 From: LBIDD@... Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 10:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Rupa lbidd2 Hi Nina, Nina: "Kusala citta and akusala citta alternate and it is not easy to have precise understanding of these moments." Larry: I agree. Akusala makes it difficult. Larry #97573 From: "colette" Date: Fri Apr 24, 2009 12:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place. Discussions with Khun Sujin (21) ksheri3 Hi Sarah, I believe that there are those in the Kagyu order that are full of delusions of grandeur in that they are waiting for me to gratify them by applying their work towards MYOPIA or a MYOPIC WORLD as my means or mode of operation/application. None-the-less, I am gladly willing to apply this "concept" here in a Theravadan application. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > --- On Sat, 18/4/09, colette wrote: > >> S: Again, even whilst in a Chicago (or Hong Kong) crowd, watched by the cameras, there can be seclusion of mind at moments of generosity, kindness and wisdom. There are no thoughts at such times about the 'important ME', about 'inclusion', 'exclusion' or 'exploitation' at such times. > > ... > >colette: This is the part that really caught my eye because you narrow the path down to "seclusion of mind". SPLENDID! EXCELLENT OBSERVATION! THUS, I and the rest of the group, can be certain that it is easy for you to cognize the applications of the movie THE MATRIX, to Buddhism, Buddhist Philosophy, and Buddhist practices. > .... > S: I haven't seen the movie, but will take your word for it! I'm glad you appreciate that 'seclusion' has to be in the mind. We don't need to be concerned about how others are behaving or treating us when we appreciate this. colette: that's once that "other's" have been DENIED. -- > >> S: Again, at moments of 'peace' or tranquility, when there is freedom from all that stinks by way of attachment, anger and ignorance, there is no concern about what is 'private', 'secret' or 'secure'. > > >**Our lives are 'open books' at such moments without thoughts of ourselves at all.** > > >colette: I seperated that last line and marked it so that we can particularly focus on that sentence that you manufacured from the previous sentences. > > >This is the exact concept I've been constantly trying to get at with people. For instance, when I first began on the net in 2004 I was shown that people in WEstern esoteric forums don't have such a complete grasp of the concepts that I do. <...> > ------------ --------- > S: I don't think we have to be concerned whether others have the same 'complete grasp of concepts'. colette: ouch, the 2nd time that "other's" are partially denied in the this time they have no cognition since you suggest that my grasp of a concept is the only grasp. <...> Your view of "other's" implies that my view is the only view and that I should be a follower of the way my view is since my view is created by those that follow or are my shadow (those walking behind me as I enter the light and block the light <...> BAck on track, if it was not for your concept of leadership and dependence then any and all other concepts would be impossible to manifest as real: concepts, themselves, do not exist therefore it is a continuum of concepts which is manifesting the reality which we are partaking of, THE DEPENDENCE OF ONE CONCEPT UPON ANOTHER CONCEPT. This may be CAUSUALITY but it only serves to gratify Dependent Origination and not Svabhava or Self-Existance. ---------------------------------------------- Let's put more emphasis on sharing whatever reflections we have and showing kindness to others. > ... > colette: Lets Play with your concepts, juggle your concepts, get to know some of the characteristics of your concepts through the act of juggling and applying basic laws of Physics and/or economics. "Chandrakirti makes a distinction between general relativity and specific relativity. Relativity as a basic tendency of mind may be compared to a field which is given to the mind to play in. Within this relatitiy-field our mind encounters other things, but, conditioned as it is by the relativity-field our mind encounters other things, but conditioned as it is by the relativity-field, it takes those specific objects in the light of relativity. To say that this relativity is associated with mind without any beginning is to assert indirectly that it cannot go beyond its field. Mind is confined to the field of relativity; only concepts and not things can be legitimately relative; hence, mind cannot know the thing-in-itself." First you deny "other's" as being, then you re-interpret your definition of the being of others as actually being but are now having their consciousness manufactured or in the process of your SUPERIORITY, as a DEITY TO BE WORSHIPPED, as a DEITY FOR OTHERS TO BE ENSLAVED TO, etc, you are the being that is generating these hypotheticals which we call others but you keep changing the manufacturing process with your different rules and regulations as to the end product after it comes out of the facility and is going to be sold to the public for consumption. You certainly do not have much of a control over your thought process when you simply spew words that others have written for you, and you show your lack of understanding by getting caught in security systems like this one that the Madhyamaka clearly distinguishes. If you are going to restrict the mind's freedom to COGNIZE then you too must adhere to that restriction, to that parameter, to that qualification, to that standard, to that ... ! I like this one: "Pandeya points out that metaphysicians are given to jumping from the concept to the actual things of which these concepts are supposed to be replicas. (If there is a concept of the other, then they think that there must b e an actual other.) [I'll give myself away here] "Similarly, if two things are conceived as coordinating, a metaphysician would tend to conclude that there are two actual things. But Madhyamikas chide these metaphysicians by saying that the coordination of things is not possible, and relativity leaves any actual reality untouched." ---------------------------------- OOOOOOPS gotta go, yesterday I saw, on PBS, WYCC, at approx. 5 or 6 a.m. two shows both called THE EXAMINED LIFE, the first having the segment "What is Art" the second having the segment "What is the meaning of life". I just mentioned it as a qualifying standard to another group and today I was intending on elaborating on the meaning of the show and of Art. I've clearly gone over my available time, here, to be able to get to the full depiction of the show to the other group. But, I shall try. THEREFORE: toodles, colette > >>S:More stories and dreams at this moment. Such dreaming and enjoyment can be known as mere dhammas too! > > >colette: EXACTLY, they are nothing more than fleeting glimpses of the "clear light" and the potentials of the Bardo states of consciousness. > ... > S: I think such dreaming is just thinking about concepts of whatever kind. 'Clear light' and 'Bardo' are ideas too, quite differernt from realities which can be known now, such as hearing or sound, seeing or visible object. > .. > >It was very thoughtful of you to give me such a good response to start my day off, here, today! Thank You. > ... > S: I appreciate your kind response and thoughtful reply as well. > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > #97574 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 12:02 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James, Op 25-apr-2009, om 5:35 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > James: That is very strange. I wonder why Lodewijk would want me to > read that book. Anyway, no offense, but I'm not really interested > in reading that book. I'm pretty sure it would bore me to death. > And, I don't want you to go to that trouble anyway. ------ N: I have to laugh. I said so to Lodewijk, knowing your inclinations, and he answered: I do not care whether James likes it or not, I want to send him a book. It is OK, we shall not send it. Yes, you are right, the right concentration is defined as jhaana in the suttas mentioned before. The word mentioned is not so good. Nina. #97575 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 12:05 am Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sprlrt --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Alberto, > > (Back to #97472) > > Thanks for your further comments in this thread. > > --- On Mon, 20/4/09, sprlrt wrote: > >The 2nd NT, craving as the cause of suffering, was already known before the enlightenment of the Buddha. And the uncovering of this truth can come, I think, only with panna of the level of the 2nd vipassana-nana, direct knowledge of causes and results, an intermediate level of panna, prior to the 3rd nana, when the arising & falling of dhammas starts to be directly known. > .... > S: Hmmmm.....I think the NTs, including the first two, can only be realised by the development of the 8-fold path. It is only by understanding dhammas - namas and rupas - directly, that the arising and falling away of them can be known, and thereby dhammas as dukkha. > > As you say, such panna begins to uncover these truths as the vipassana-nanas are attained. I don't believe such 'uncovering' to be able to occur without a Buddha's teaching. So any knowledge of suffering and craving as cause, prior to hearing the Teachings, has to refer to a more conventional, conceptual knowledge of suffering and its cause, but not to the direct understanding of sankhara dhammas as dukkha. > .... > Hi Sarah, From The shorter discourse on the lion's roar, MN 11, trans. Nm-BB - Alberto ... 6. Bhikkhus, there are these two views: the view of being (bhava ditthi) and the view of non-being (vibhava ditthi)... 7. Any recluse or brahmins who do not understand as they actually are the origin, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger and the escape in the case of these two views are affected by lust, affected by hate, affected by delusion, affected by craving, affected by clinging, without vision, given to favouring and opposing, and they delight in and enjoy proliferation. They are not freed from birth, ageing and death; from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair; they are not freed from suffering. I say. 8. Any recluse and brahmins who understand as they actually are the origin, the disappearance, the gratification, the danger and the escape in the case of these two views are without lust,without hate, without delusion, without craving, without clinging, with vision, not given to favouring and opposing, and they do not delight in and enjoy proliferation. They are freed from birth, ageing and death; from sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair; they are freed from suffering. I say. 9. Bhikkhus, there are these four kinds of clinging, what four? Clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self. .... 12. Though certain recluses and brahmins claim to propound the full understanding of all kinds of clinging they do not completely describe the full understanding of all kinds of clinging. They describe the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasure, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. Why is that? Those good recluses and brahmins do not understand one instance of clinging as it actually is. Therefore they describe only the full understanding of clinging to sensual pleasure, clinging to views, and clinging to rules and observances without describing the full understanding of clinging to a doctrine of self. ... #97576 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 12:10 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. nilovg Hi James (and Sarah) Op 25-apr-2009, om 5:45 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > James: I don't agree. If I want to see a Vincent Van Gogh painting, > I can look one up on the Internet and see it. I have just > controlled what I see. If I want to listen to Vivaldi, I can put in > a CD and listen to it. I have just controlled what I hear. ------- N: When looking at Van Gogh there are many moments of just seeing colour and then thinking about the landscape. We have to distinguish between such moments. It is more complicated then you think: many, many different cittas and these cannot be manipulated. We may think that we can control cittas by doing this or that, but: past kamma conditions the seeing, and past accumulated kusala or akusala conditions the thinking of the landscape that is motivated either by kusala cittas or akusala cittas, but mostly by akusala cittas. When we consider this very moment we can understand how complex each moment is. We just believe that we can control cittas, but in fact many conditions are necessary for each moment of citta. Nina. #97577 From: "Chew" Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 3:55 am Subject: Upcoming Ayatana Yamaka Course in Penang, Malaysia chewsadhu Dear all Dhamma friends in DSG, We are going to have "Ayatana Yamaka Course" in Penang. Duration: 23rd June 2009 (Tuesday) - 2nd July 2009 (Thursday) Course fee: FREE (including course notes, accommodation, breakfast, lunch, and tea break.) Please register for Âyatana Yamaka Course before 19th June 2009 (Friday). For more information, please visit to http://ayatanayamaka.blogspot.com/ or download the flyer at http://chewdhamma.googlepages.com/AyatanaYamakaCourseForm.pdf Thanks and Sadhu. Hope to hear from you soon. May all beings be well and happy. With respect, Chew #97578 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 12:56 pm Subject: [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) scottduncan2 Dear azita, Regarding: azita: maybe interplay is a good word to use - what I'm trying to convey is the realisation that what is read is about realities that are/can be occuring now at this moment. Scott: Oh, you mean like when this particular idea comes to mind: What is read is about realities? Or do you refer to some moment, perhaps sometime after reading, when a moment of reality comes and goes out of focus, and then the come thoughts about that moment and what has been read come to mind? This occurs to me from time to time. Sincerely, Scott #97579 From: "buddhatrue" Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:38 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 25-apr-2009, om 5:35 heeft buddhatrue het volgende geschreven: > > > James: That is very strange. I wonder why Lodewijk would want me to > > read that book. Anyway, no offense, but I'm not really interested > > in reading that book. I'm pretty sure it would bore me to death. > > And, I don't want you to go to that trouble anyway. > ------ > N: I have to laugh. I said so to Lodewijk, knowing your inclinations, > and he answered: I do not care whether James likes it or not, I want > to send him a book. Well, okay. I like Lodewijk and don't want to make him pissed off or anything. I will send you my address off-list. Thanks! :-) Metta, James #97580 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 9:54 pm Subject: Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Robert E., > > Regarding: > > Me: "Pa~n~naa, as with citta and each other mental factor, only have ultimate realities as objects. Pa~n~naa *directly* penetrates this characteristic." > > R: "How does it do that? What are the steps? ... How is it experienced? Can you describe the process?" > > Scott: A bit on the coordinated process of the penetration of a dhamma by pa~n~naa. In the Cuu.lavedatta Sutta, MN 44, it states: > > "The three aggregates are not included by the Noble Eightfold Path, friend Visaakha, but the Noble Eightfold Path is included by the three aggregates. Right Speech, right action, and right livelihood - these states are included in the aggregate of virtue. Right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration - these states are included in the aggregate of concentration. Right view and right intention [thinking] (sammaa-sankappa) - these states are included in the aggregate of wisdom [understanding]." > > Scott: In the Sammohavinodanii, p. 111: > > "Also as regards Right View and Right Thinking, understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can. How? Just as a money-changer, having had a coin placed in his hand and being desirous of looking at it on all sides equally, cannot turn it over with the power of the eye only, but by turning it over with his fingers he is able to look at it on all sides; likewise understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as impermanent, etc., but with applied thought with its characteristic of focussing the mind and its function of striking and threshing, as it were beating and turning over, it can take what is given and determine it. Therefore Right View only is included here in the understanding group as being of the same kind, but Right Thinking is included because of its action [of assisting]." > > Scott: Right View is pa~n~naa cetasika. Right Thinking is vitakka cetasika. The above shows a bit of how conascent mental factors perform separate but coordinated functions, according to characteristic, within the whole of the moment of consciousness and directed at the same object. Well, first of all, I most appreciate these excerpts from the relevant suttas and associated texts; those are indeed the kinds of specifics I've been craving [not best word?] in this kind of discussion. Having said that, I wonder if one can really say that these functions are operating "within the same moment." If one takes the analogy of turning the coin over to see all sides as a fairly apt analogy, in that one is seeing more fully the nature of that which is discerned rightly by panna through "Right Thinking," it seems that the way in which Right Thinking is able to gain deeper or more complete insight into the dhamma is by investigating its aspects more thoroughly and examining and "beating upon it" from a number of different angles, or at least a number of different attempts, to plumb its full measure. How on earth could that "further investigational" function take place in the same moment conascently with the immediate discernment of panna? It seems that it would necessarily have to take at least a number of moments, or at least a minimum of two or three in order to look at the dhamma more thoroughly. Since each dhamma lasts for more than a moment, but for a number of moments, as it goes through its stages of arising, persisting/changing and dissipating, it seems that it would be precisely through tracking these stages of the existence of the dhamma that Right Understanding would see directly into the characteristics of the dhamma. At any given moment, panna can see clearly what the nature of the dhamma is directly, but Right Understanding seems to have more of an overview of its nature, by considering it over time. Just to quote a portion of the sutta above: "...understanding cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can." "Repeatedly beating" cannot take place in a single moment, can it? How many times can it 'beat' in a single moment? That would seem to fly in the face of any meaning that "a single moment" could possibly have. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97581 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sat Apr 25, 2009 10:31 pm Subject: Dhammas (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > Vis.: XIV, 32 (talking about understanding/panna) > Now the things classed as aggregates [khandha], bases [ayatana], elements [dhatu], faculties [indriya], truths [sacca], dependent origination [paticca-samuppada], etc., are the "soil" of this understanding, ... Seeing into the nature of the impersonal elements that are ordinarily taken for self is certainly of great importance. Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - #97582 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:37 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) nilovg Dear Rob Ep, Op 26-apr-2009, om 6:54 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > Just to quote a portion of the sutta above: "...understanding > cannot of its own nature determine an object as 'impermanent, > painful, and no-self', but with applied thought giving [assistance] > by repeatedly beating [upon an object] it can." > > "Repeatedly beating" cannot take place in a single moment, can it? > How many times can it 'beat' in a single moment? That would seem to > fly in the face of any meaning that "a single moment" could > possibly have. -------- N: The Pathfactors arise together while they perform their functions simultaneously. Vitakka hits the object, namely the nama or rupa that appears so that pa~n~naa can understand it, right at that moment. And also sati is aware of it, so that pa~n~naa can understand it. Many sobhana cetasikas perform their functions when a citta with pa~n~naa arises. The citta, and all the assisting sobhana cetasikas arise just for a moment and then fall away to be succeeded by a following citta. Vitakka, right thinking, assists pa~n~naa, arising and falling away. Also pa~n~naa arises and falls away with the citta. Nina. #97583 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 12:41 am Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 19. nilovg Dear friends, The development of paññå should be very natural. There should be no excitement about awareness, no thoughts about its frequency or acuteness. Is there still doubt about the reality which appears now? If there is awareness doubt can gradually be eliminated. If one believes that one has to calm down first before there can be awareness there cannot be awareness of whatever reality naturally appears. If the development of paññå is not natural one hinders its development. If you are inclined to concentrate on breathing when you are agitated or have aversion, it would be very helpful if you could be aware of realities appearing at such moments. Are there not akusala cittas and should these realities not be known? When you wish to become relaxed through concentration on breathing is there no attachment? It is a reality and it can be object of mindfulness. Are there not different feelings: pleasant feeling, unpleasant feeling and indifferent feeling? These can be object of mindfulness. If there can be awareness when you feel tense you can find out that there are nåmas and rúpas at such moments. Insight can only be developed if there is mindfulness of any reality which appears. If you believe that there cannot be awareness of aversion this reality will not be known as only a nåma, arising because of conditions. If there can be awareness in your daily life you will start to know yourself. You will be able to find out whether concentration on breathing is beneficial or not, whether it helps you to develop right understanding or not. ******* Nina. #97584 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 2:14 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) jonoabb Hi Robert E (97453) > ---------------------- > > To my understanding of this, the characteristics are "modes of alteration" discernable within the span of a single dhamma. > > Am I correct that a single dhamma has a duration for several cittas? > ---------------------- A citta is a "single dhamma" (you are perhaps thinking of a rupa, which has a duration of several cittas). > ---------------------- > The definitions of the three marks you have re-posted are very clear and I take them as self-evident as written, so thank you for that helpful info. > ---------------------- I'm glad the descriptions are clear. > ---------------------- > > "It is not-self on account of the mode of insusceptibility to the exercise of power; ...". > > As a side-note, I don't think there is much attention given to not-self as the inability to exercise power over something. That is a pretty interesting definition which I think is unique to the Buddha and might be worth examining. It seems to me that he is defining self as that which can be controlled and dictated, and then concluding that there is nothing in samsara that fits that description. Therefore all the dhammas/kandhas are 'not-self.' > ---------------------- I think the description assumes that implicit in the idea of a "self" is the idea that anything that is part of that is within the control of the "self". > ---------------------- > > "The suffering characteristic is the characteristic that is itself the state of suffering, reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall [of things]. > > Is the only oppression caused by dhammas that of rising and falling? I would think that even when the dhammas appear to keep still for a few moments, they are still oppressive since they also often cause pain or take away pleasure, or fail to meet expectation, etc. Maybe that is a different category. > ---------------------- Yes, I would say that is something other than the characteristic of dukkha. > ---------------------- > > Note that the characteristic, described as "the characteristic constituted by that [non-existence]", is still clearly a characteristic properly so called and not a relative or > > time-dependent matter. > > Well, if they are observed during the duration of a dhamma, they can be time-dependent and still be recognized by citta. So it may not be a problem. > > I wonder what it is if it is "constituted" by the fact of the non-existence of the imaginary self. Is there any way of further describing what the characteristic is, as opposed to the "fact of?" > ---------------------- Not that I have come across. As I think I mentioned in another post, what is being described here is an extremely high level of understanding. > ---------------------- > It seems to me that this means something like: > "Having understood that the self imagined by others does not exist, all dhammas are seen to be absent of any such self." That would seem to be the characteristic based on the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. What do you think? > ---------------------- I think that the direct experience of the characteristic is of course dependent on a proper intellectual grasp of the nature of the characteristic, and this would include the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. > ---------------------- > > To my understanding, the descriptions of impermanence, pain and no-self constitute the three contemplations (anupassanaa) mentioned in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha separately to the characteristics of the same name. > > Are the characteristics something other than "being that which is described by the facts of the characteristics themselves?" > ---------------------- Sorry, but I haven't understood the question. > ---------------------- > > "That is why the impermanent, the painful and the no-self are one thing and the characteristics of impermanence, pain, and no-self are another. For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." > > I'm having a little trouble getting this distinction. I can understand that the "mode of alteration" is a characteristic that is recognized by citta as demonstrating anicca and thus the other two marks, > ---------------------- I am reading the reference to "modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid" as being a reference to each of the 3 descriptions, and not just that of impermanence. > ---------------------- but as for the properties themselves being different as characteristics - it is not really described and I am not sure what is different about them in that mode. > ---------------------- To my understanding, one is directly known as a characteristic of a dhamma, while the other is something known about dhammas. But I haven't really read anything further on this than I've quoted to you already, so I'm afraid I can't really answer your question. As I mentioned in my message, the Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives as separate classifications the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta and the 3 contemplations of anicca, dukkha and anatta. > ---------------------- > It seems like the distinction is perhaps one of action vs. recognition of an inherent property: > ---------------------- To me the distinction seems like one of an inherent property that is known by direct experience vs. a property that is know by observation (i.e., a form of deduction). > ---------------------- > So maybe anatta as a characteristic is that which is recognized as being the nature of dhammas to behave as "not-self," rather than it just being one mode of occurrence. It is inherent, and is bound to always be so. I think this deep recognition of its nature as such may be the distinction between the occurrence of anatta as an arising property of a dhamma, and its recognition as an inherent characteristic, the latter of which would only be fully understood by panna. > ---------------------- I would agree with "recognition as an inherent characteristic ... by panna". This would be a direct, rather than a deduced, recognition. > ---------------------- > It makes sense that when it is seen that the three characteristics are deeply such and are never going to go away, that one might be more inclined to "let go of clinging" to dhammas, since they are now seen as totally alien, temporary, and painful. > ---------------------- To my understanding, the seeing at this level is so powerful that the clinging is less likely to arise in the first place. But yes, for the reasons you give, this is the path to the eradication of all clinging. Jon #97585 From: "sarahprocterabbott" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Threes (54-56) , sutta 56 and commentary. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Connie & Scott, A bit behind, but I wished to say I found this extract (#96730) particularly interesting, because it concerns the three kinds of aadhipateyya which K.Sujin is always talking about and which I don't recall reading in a text before: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > 56. sutta: Walshe > DN 33.1.10(56) 'Three predominant influence: oneself, the world, the > Dhamma > (Tii.ni aadhipateyyaani :attaadhipateyya'm, lokaadhipateyya'm, > dhammaadhipateyya'm). > -------- > N: The co. explains that someone makes himself the predominant > influence, the foremost influence in not doing evil, thinking, "I am > freed to this extent by siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa." > ------ > The subco: this is worldly freedom. > N: Thus, not the freedom which is the eradication of akusala by > lokuttara pa~n~naa. > ------- > Co: He can make the world the predominant influence in not doing evil. > As to having dhamma as predominant influence in not doing evil, this > is lokuttara dhamma. .... S: when we abstain from harm, are we concerned with ourselves and our akusala, concerned for others and the world in so abstaining or is it simply for the sake of developing the path, understanding dhammas that leads to enlightenment? As Phil would say, if we're honest, most the time, it's the first or second, occasionally appreciating that all such dhammas are anatta and that there is no self or others or world. Metta and many thanks for all the helpful extracts. Sarah ====== #97586 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m sarahprocter... Hi Alberto, --- On Thu, 23/4/09, sprlrt wrote: >I could't find the pali of the Abhidhammattha Vibhavini on CSCD, perhaps you've got it or know where to find it... ... S: No, I don't have it and also checked without success. Perhaps Connie or Nina may have some idea. Metta, Sarah ======= #97587 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:44 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. sarahprocter... Hi James (& Nina), --- On Fri, 24/4/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >N: I do not place it immediately because I do not find it a problem that the jhaanas are mentioned under right concentration. I do not feel that I have to defend anything or come with arguments to prove something. >But here is one sutta: S V, 18, (the Great Chapter, Mahavagga, Kindred Sayings on the Way, § 8, concentration (samaadhi): >I learn from this sutta that right concentration must be accompanied by right understanding and the other factors of the eightfold Path. ... S: Yes, there are many suttas like this one which don't specifically mention jhana as I recall. I was going to quote another from AN, but my eye just caught the following one which is also interesting because it clearly indicates that when nibbana is the object of the lokuttara cittas, there cannot be mundane jhana at such moments: AN, 10s, 6 "The Meditative Experience of Nibbaana - 1" (Bodi transl): "Once the Venerable Aananda approached the Blessed One and asked: " 'Can it be, Lord, that a monk attains to such a concentration of mind that in earth he is not percipient of earth, nor in water is he percipient of water, nor in fire....air...the base of the infinity of space.....the base of the infinity of consciousness....the base of nothingness...the base of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is he percipient of these; nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyond - but yet he is percipient?' " 'Yes, Aananda, there can be such a concentration of mind that in earth a monk is not percipient of earth...nor is he percipient of this world or a world beyone - but yet he is percipient.' " 'But how, Lord, can a monk attain to such a concentration of mind?' " 'Here, Aananda, the monk is percipient thus: 'This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, namely, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana.' It is in this way, Aananda, that a monk may attain to such a concentration of mind.' " Metta, Sarah ======= #97588 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > If there cannot be awareness of all kinds of nåma and rúpa which > appear in our daily life, no matter whether we are busy or agitated, > we will not really know ourselves. If we think that we have to be > relaxed first we limit the objects of awareness. I agree with this - I don't think there's any Buddhist approach that does not advocate application to daily life. That is where the attainment of any higher quality is tested. If one has equanimity in jhana but has a temper tantrum in the marketplace, that is an unbalanced attainment that is not ingrained. But the question is whether one starts out with the most distracting conditions possible, or has some sort of laboratory to develop qualities which are then developed in daily life; and these can be simultaneous as well. If a baby eagle is thrown out of the nest before its wings are developed it will fall not fly. If one tries to play an etude before playing scales and finger exercises, it will just be a mess. Many things are tested and developed in the laboratory before they are sent out into the general population. Likewise, undistracted meditation, which is often described throughout sutta, allows certain qualities to develop. It is a more advanced exercise to notice what is arising while many different demands are being met. Why not have both types of practice, without the illusion that secluded practice is the final or most natural situation? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #97589 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:05 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 14. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: Again, I think the Buddha was pointed to the different kinds of accumulations which may manifest. He wasn't indicating that one could choose how and when to become enlightened. If you don't mind, I would like to put in a request to be enlightened sooner rather than later, and with very little additional suffering. Thank you, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97590 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:15 am Subject: Rupa and Nama (was: Re: [dsg] The Secluded Place...) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: ...realities which can be known now, such as hearing or sound, seeing or visible object. This is a basic question, but where exactly is the line drawn between rupa and nama in the hearing or seeing process? Visible object is rupa, is seeing nama? Is sense-door rupa or nama? A bit confused on some of these distinctions. I am sure that recognition of what is seen is nama, and any thought-process beyond that is nama. Is awareness of visible object nama? If you can put these in order for me I would appreciate it. I know this is all laid out in many places but not sure where to look at the moment for a good summary. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #97591 From: "szmicio" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:21 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta Analysis - Uddeso with commentaries szmicio Dear friends, Satipatthana Sutta starts with these words: 9. Mahaasatipa. t.thaanasutta. m 372. Eva.m me suta.m eka.m samaya.m bhagavaa kuruusu viharati kammaasadhamma. m naama kuruuna.m nigamo. Tatra kho bhagavaa bhikkhuu aamantesi bhikkhavoti. Bhaddanteti [bhadanteti (sii. syaa. pii.)] te bhikkhuu bhagavato paccassosu.m. Bhagavaa etadavoca Uddeso 373. Ekaayano aya.m, bhikkhave, maggo sattaana.m visuddhiyaa, sokaparidevaana. m samatikkamaaya dukkhadomanassaana. m attha"ngamaaya ~naayassa adhigamaaya nibbaanassa sacchikiriyaaya, yadida.m cattaaro satipa.t.thaanaa. Katame cattaaro? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu kaaye kaayaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m, vedanaasu vedanaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa, vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m, citte cittaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m, dhammesu dhammaanupassii viharati aataapii sampajaano satimaa vineyya loke abhijjhaadomanassa. m. Uddeso ni.t.thito. ---------------- And few commentaries: Ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo = "This is the only way, O bhikkhus." Why did the Blessed One teach this Discourse? Because of the ability of the people of the Kurus to take in deep doctrine. The inhabitants of the Kuru country -- bhikkhus, bhikkhunis, upasakas, upasikas -- by reason of their country being blessed with a perfect climate, and through their enjoyment of other comfortable conditions, were always healthy in body and in mind. They, happy with healthy minds and bodies, and having the power of knowledge, were capable of receiving deep teachings.... Blessed One, perceiving their ability to appreciate this profound instruction, proclaimed to them this Discourse on the Arousing of Mindfulness, which is deep in meaning.... "The only way" = The one way [Ekayanoti ekamaggo]. There are many words for "way". The word used for "way" here is "ayana" ("going" or road). Therefore, "This is the only way, O bhikkhus [ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo]" means here: "A single way ("going" or road), O bhikkhus, is this way; it is not of the nature of a double way [ekamaggo ayam bhikkhave maggo na dvedhapathabhuto]". ...Accordingly the Master declared: "Subhadda, only in this Doctrine-and-discipline is the Eightfold Way to be found." And further, "ekayana" means: It goes to the one [ekam ayati] -- that is, it (the way) goes solely to Nibbana. Although in the earlier stages this method of meditation proceeds on different lines, in the latter, it goes to just the one Nibbana. And that is why Brahma Sahampati said: Whose mind perceiving life's last dying out Vibrates with love, he knows the only way That led in ancient times, is leading now, And in the future will lead past the flood.[6] ---- Sattanam visuddhiya = "For the purification of beings." For the cleansing of beings soiled by the stains of lust, hatred and delusion, and by the defilements of covetise, called lawless greed and so forth. All reach the highest purity after abandoning mental taints. By way of physical taints, however, there is no cleansing of impurities taught in the Dhamma. By the Great Seer it was not said That through bodily taints men become impure, Or by the washing of the body they become pure. By the Great Seer it was declared That through mental taints men become impure, And through the cleansing of the mind they become pure. Accordingly it is said: "Mental taints soil beings; mental cleansing sanctifies them." ---- Sokaparidevanam samatikkamaya = "For the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation." If this Way is developed it will lead to the casting out of sorrow similar to that experienced by the Minister Santati, and the casting out of lamentation similar to that of Patacara. With analytical knowledge did Santati reach arahantship after hearing this stanza: Purge out the things belonging to the past; Let there be naught in the world to rise in future times. If what's twixt past and future you don't grasp, You will be one who wanders forth serene.[11] Patacara reached the fruition of the first stage of arahantship after hearing the following: For one who is by death oppressed there is No safety seen in children, father, friends Or others close to one. A shelter true Amongst one's kinsfolk one does never find.[12] Since there is nothing called spiritual development [bhavana] without laying hold on something whatsoever in material form, feeling, consciousness and mental objects [kaya vedana citta dhammesu kici dhammam anamasitva] they (Santati and Patacara) too overcame sorrow and lamentation just by this Way of Mindfulness. ------------------------------------------ My best wishes Lukas #97592 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:28 am Subject: Q. [dsg] Nature of anicca, dukkha and anatta (was, Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob Ep, > Op 26-apr-2009, om 6:54 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > > ... "Repeatedly beating" cannot take place in a single moment, can it? > > How many times can it 'beat' in a single moment? ... > -------- > N: The Pathfactors arise together while they perform their functions > simultaneously. Vitakka hits the object, namely the nama or rupa that > appears so that pa~n~naa can understand it, right at that moment. ... > The citta, and all the assisting sobhana cetasikas arise just for a > moment and then fall away to be succeeded by a following citta. > Vitakka, right thinking, assists pa~n~naa, arising and falling away. ... The part that you have left out is the "repeatedly" which is clearly stated in the text. I can certainly understand that vipaka could "beat" the object for the benefit of giving a greater understanding to panna in the moment; however this wonderful function of vipaka "repeatedly beating" the object in order to get the full story out of it, could not take place in a single moment. If you propose that it can, please describe how "several or repeated" beatings could take place in a single moment? I have no problem with the description of these wonderful functions coordinating together, which I have begun to get a slightly better understanding of lately; however I think that sometimes the doctrine of single-ness can fly in the face of the description of the cetasikas and their functions, even as they are described in Abhidhamma. Again, "repeated beatings," vs. "single moment." How can it be? If you say that the "repeated beatings" can take place in successive moments for successive arisings of panna, then I will be content. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #97593 From: Ken O Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. ashkenn2k Dear Robert <> k: there are five khandhas. without clinging there is still dukkha, Buddha still experience dukkha due to unpleasant body feeling in his physical body. My point is not that these characteristics do not exist, or that they are not important, but that they don't come with the dhamma itself; they are part of the relation between citta and dhamma. If there was no citta, there would be no temporariness to observe because the dhamma would not arise and fall for citta. Without a citta that thinks there is a self, there is no "anatta" in the dhamma, because anatta is the realization by citta that there is no "self" in the dhamma. Anatta points to an absence, not a presence. So it is not something present in the dhamma, it is something realized that is missing from the dhamma. Without citta that clings there would be no dukkha. Dukkha doesn't emanate off the dhamma, it is created by the citta that clings and then has the dhamma disappoint it or disappear on it k: look at the sutta again. Feeling is not self. This is a clear illustration that anatta is present in the feeling which is a dhamma. Cheers Ken O #97594 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:14 am Subject: Not self vs. not-self: clarification requested (was: Re: effort.) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (97453) > > ---------------------- > > > To my understanding of this, the characteristics are "modes of alteration" discernable within the span of a single dhamma. > > > > Am I correct that a single dhamma has a duration for several cittas? > > ---------------------- > > A citta is a "single dhamma" (you are perhaps thinking of a rupa, which has a duration of several cittas). Please describe how an "alteration" can be noted within a single moment? The only way that this could be so if within that same single moment is retained the comparison of the state of the dhamma in the preceding moment. I suppose this is possible through the cetasika responsible for memory of what has just occurred. Is that how this takes place? Does vipaka note the "alteration" from what has just occurred to the state of the dhamma now? "Mode of alteration" has to have a meaning, it cannot just be a blank term. > > ---------------------- > > The definitions of the three marks you have re-posted are very clear and I take them as self-evident as written, so thank you for that helpful info. > > ---------------------- > > I'm glad the descriptions are clear. > > > ---------------------- > > > "It is not-self on account of the mode of insusceptibility to the exercise of power; ...". > > > > As a side-note, I don't think there is much attention given to not-self as the inability to exercise power over something. That is a pretty interesting definition which I think is unique to the Buddha and might be worth examining. It seems to me that he is defining self as that which can be controlled and dictated, and then concluding that there is nothing in samsara that fits that description. Therefore all the dhammas/kandhas are 'not-self.' > > ---------------------- > > I think the description assumes that implicit in the idea of a "self" is the idea that anything that is part of that is within the control of the "self". It is not implicit in all ideas of the self. Our Western idea of self includes being out of control and moving towards greater control; having parts of self that are subconscious and are not controlled or which control us without our awareness, and many other factors. It is the Buddha's own definition of self, in the sense of "true self" which says that anything out of control is "not self." He is promoting this definition, not taking it as a given. In the world of the Buddha's time, self was defined as "eternal self," "personality self vs. higher self," "internal self or Atman," "Higher Self," or Brahman, etc., all of which had different characteristics. Atman/Brahman were seen as eternal, beyond control or change, but they themselves did not exercise control over anything at all, having nothing to do with illusory reality, and being the Hindu equivalent of Nibbana - unconditioned reality. In other philosophical frameworks, the self is seen as the experiencer or observer, not something that has control, but which merely undergoes whatever arises. So, I don't think that such a definition can be taken as a "given" at all. What Buddha is saying is that the self-concept which is dependent on keeping things under control, but cannot control anything in reality, is not a true self and should be abandoned, along with its clingings. > > ---------------------- > > > "The suffering characteristic is the characteristic that is itself the state of suffering, reckoned as the oppression that consists of the rise and fall [of things]. > > > > Is the only oppression caused by dhammas that of rising and falling? I would think that even when the dhammas appear to keep still for a few moments, they are still oppressive since they also often cause pain or take away pleasure, or fail to meet expectation, etc. Maybe that is a different category. > > ---------------------- > > Yes, I would say that is something other than the characteristic of dukkha. So, if you are stuck by a thorn and this causes extreme physical suffering, and in addition you are reactive to this pain and go into a state of fear and anxiety, that has nothing to do with dukkha? What about the parable of the two arrows which the Buddha delivered to show the difference between the suffering caused by physical pain and the additional suffering caused by akusala cittas arising around the pain? > > ---------------------- > > > Note that the characteristic, described as "the characteristic constituted by that [non-existence]", is still clearly a characteristic properly so called and not a relative or > > > time-dependent matter. > > > > Well, if they are observed during the duration of a dhamma, they can be time-dependent and still be recognized by citta. So it may not be a problem. > > > > I wonder what it is if it is "constituted" by the fact of the non-existence of the imaginary self. Is there any way of further describing what the characteristic is, as opposed to the "fact of?" > > ---------------------- > > Not that I have come across. As I think I mentioned in another post, what is being described here is an extremely high level of understanding. That doesn't mean that it is not required to make basic sense. If one can't even explain how it is defined, what is there to have a higher understanding of? Saying something that is just self-contradictory does not mean that it requires higher understanding, but that it is not properly understood now. If I say "I can see movement taking place when everything is completely still" that is just plain wrong, not a higher understanding. If one says "I can see the quality of "change in a dhamma" in "a single moment during which nothing is changing" that is self-contradictory. It is simply not possible. One has to explain how that is even proposed on the level of pariyatti, or it is a wrong understanding. If you tell me that there is a cetasika that is responsible for registering the former state and another that compares it to the present state, then at least that is plausible. But to say it "just knows it" with no idea how that can be, is not a viable understanding. Now if you say that anatta, as the "characteristic of self not existing" is a positive characteristic that can be perceived in a single moment, then tell me how it works. It has to be specified somewhere. Is there a cetasika which probes the dhamma for a "self" and registers that it is not there? Or does a cetasika note the changes that have been undergone and register via some quality of their change that control is impossible, thus understanding deeply that the dhamma is not-self because it cannot possibly be subject to control? If these things are said to actually take place, I would like to at least have some rudimentary idea of how they occur. K. Sujin says in her Survey [p.379] that understanding the characteristic of anatta is developed by investigating dhammas over and over again and realizing that a nama is "only an element which experiences, only a reality, not a being, person or self." I can understand this; I can understand coming to see that a nama has the characteristic of "only being an element" and nothing more, and that this would be a realization of anatta. But if you say that anatta is itself a "something" to be recognized, then you are making this lack of being anything other than "an element which experiences" into something. To see that anatta is the fact that a nama is "only an element" and not a self, is perfectly understandable, as this does not make anatta a thing in its own right. It identifies the true characteristic of a nama, that it is "just this" and nothing more. > > ---------------------- > > It seems to me that this means something like: > > "Having understood that the self imagined by others does not exist, all dhammas are seen to be absent of any such self." That would seem to be the characteristic based on the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. What do you think? > > ---------------------- > > I think that the direct experience of the characteristic is of course dependent on a proper intellectual grasp of the nature of the characteristic, and this would include the fact of the nonexistence of the imagined self. And when you directly experience it, what do you experience? An absence? A gap? A nothingness? What? Pariyatti wants to know. :-) > > ---------------------- > > > To my understanding, the descriptions of impermanence, pain and no-self constitute the three contemplations (anupassanaa) mentioned in the Abhidhammattha Sangaha separately to the characteristics of the same name. > > > > Are the characteristics something other than "being that which is described by the facts of the characteristics themselves?" > > ---------------------- > > Sorry, but I haven't understood the question. Well, it was just repeating back what you said and trying to separate out what is the characteristic as a fact, as opposed to as a characteristic. It seems artificial to me. See your quote below: > > ---------------------- > > > "That is why the impermanent, the painful and the no-self are one thing and the characteristics of impermanence, pain, and no-self are another. For that which consists of the five aggregates, the twelve bases, the eighteen elements is all impermanent, painful and no-self; the modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid are the characteristics of impermanence, pain and no-self." Wow, that is a mouthful. So, the reality of the three characteristics is not the same thing as the characteristics as characteristics, because the characteristics as characteristics are known not through their occurrence in the various forms of the kandhas, but are known as characteristics in their "modes of alteration" within the same aforementioned kandhas. So what does this mean? It seems that the convoluted quote is talking about understanding the characteristics rather than merely experiencing or undergoing them in their various forms; ie, "getting" what they are through understanding their modes of alteration and how the mode of alteration is the cause of their existence. Changability causes non-permanance; it also causes suffering/oppression; it also means that the dhamma is uncontrollable and thus not-self. And so the understanding of the "mode of alteration" gives you right understanding; whereas merely undergoing the characteristics as they occur merely gives you the experience of impermanence, suffering and not-self, though you may not recognize them for what they are. It seems like this is a standing-back of panna or vipaka to see the nature of the characteristics and how they are all tied to the "mode of alteration" that gives rise to them, rather than being subjected to them without insight into their existence or nature. > > I'm having a little trouble getting this distinction. I can understand that the "mode of alteration" is a characteristic that is recognized by citta as demonstrating anicca and thus the other two marks, > > ---------------------- > > I am reading the reference to "modes of alteration of the kind aforesaid" as being a reference to each of the 3 descriptions, and not just that of impermanence. I see that too; but the distinction between "description" and "characteristic" is a pretty abstruse one. I've tried to flesh it out above. What do you think? > > > ---------------------- > but as for the properties themselves being different as characteristics - it is not really described and I am not sure what is different about them in that mode. > > ---------------------- > > To my understanding, one is directly known as a characteristic of a dhamma, while the other is something known about dhammas. But I haven't really read anything further on this than I've quoted to you already, so I'm afraid I can't really answer your question. Well...see above and see what you think... I reserve the right to try to understand what the heck I am reading, even if it is written by someone who probably ate metaphysical concepts for lunch, and washed them down with erudite nomenclatural distinctions. These arahants had a lot of time on their hands... I don't think they got out much... > As I mentioned in my message, the Abhidhammattha Sangaha gives as separate classifications the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta and the 3 contemplations of anicca, dukkha and anatta. That's nice. What does that mean? If you are contemplating them, aren't you contemplating their characteristics? I mean, gee! > > ---------------------- > > It seems like the distinction is perhaps one of action vs. recognition of an inherent property: > > ---------------------- > > To me the distinction seems like one of an inherent property that is known by direct experience vs. a property that is known by observation (i.e., a form of deduction). I can accept that theoretically and thanks for that clear statement of that possibility. > > ---------------------- > > So maybe anatta as a characteristic is that which is recognized as being the nature of dhammas to behave as "not-self," rather than it just being one mode of occurrence. It is inherent, and is bound to always be so. I think this deep recognition of its nature as such may be the distinction between the occurrence of anatta as an arising property of a dhamma, and its recognition as an inherent characteristic, the latter of which would only be fully understood by panna. > > ---------------------- > > I would agree with "recognition as an inherent characteristic ... by panna". This would be a direct, rather than a deduced, recognition. Okay. > > > ---------------------- > > It makes sense that when it is seen that the three characteristics are deeply such and are never going to go away, that one might be more inclined to "let go of clinging" to dhammas, since they are now seen as totally alien, temporary, and painful. > > ---------------------- > > To my understanding, the seeing at this level is so powerful that the clinging is less likely to arise in the first place. But yes, for the reasons you give, this is the path to the eradication of all clinging. Thanks, I think we have reached a reasonable mutual understanding on this point. That is nice. I will now rest my brain, or at least the concept of such. I still think those arahants should have occasionally gone to a party or something. Best, Robert E. = == = = = = = = = = = = #97595 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: effort. epsteinrob HI Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Dear Robert > > > <> > > k: there are five khandhas. without clinging there is still dukkha, Buddha still experience dukkha due to unpleasant body feeling in his physical body. Okay, there is first-arrow dukkha, if one calls it that. There is sometimes dispute over whether dukkha refers to unpleasant physical sensation or only suffering caused by attachment. In any case, if Buddha were in jhana he would not feel physical suffering either. I guess it would depend on what he was up to at the time. Even if I grant you that dukkha is present in physical discomfort, it is not the rupas of the body that experience suffering, but the namas that still cling to perception, sensation, etc. When all sensory experience is relinquished in jhana or nibbana, there is no dukkha. > My point is not that these characteristics do not exist, or that they are not important, but that they don't come with the dhamma itself; they are part of the relation between citta and dhamma. If there was no citta, there would be no temporariness to observe because the dhamma would not arise and fall for citta. Without a citta that thinks there is a self, there is no "anatta" in the dhamma, because anatta is the realization by citta that there is no "self" in the dhamma. Anatta points to an absence, not a presence. So it is not something present in the dhamma, it is something realized that is missing from the dhamma. Without citta that clings there would be no dukkha. Dukkha doesn't emanate off the dhamma, it is created by the citta that clings and then has the dhamma disappoint it or disappear on it > > k: look at the sutta again. Feeling is not self. This is a clear illustration that anatta is present in the feeling which is a dhamma. If 'feeling is not self,' then how is 'anatta present?' Is it a ghost that flies around and emanates out of feeling? What is it? If I have an empty water bottle, the bottle is 'empty,' for sure, but there is no 'emptiness' in the water bottle, or 'present' in any way. That is absurd. And it is an absurdity that has been taken to great heights, rather than seeing anatta as the mere absence or nonexistence of self. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #97596 From: "Robert Epstein" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 8:18 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Metta and ANAPANASATI: no 14. epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > " 'Here, Aananda, the monk is percipient thus: 'This is the peaceful, this is the sublime, namely, the stilling of all formations, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbaana.' It is in this way, Aananda, that a monk may attain to such a concentration of mind.' " This is also interesting in that it suggests that in the stilling of all formations, there is still awareness of the stilling of all formations. If a conditioned citta is aware of the unconditioned Nibbana, how is it that all formations and acquisitions are never-the-less relinquished and stilled? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #97597 From: "nichiconn" Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 10:19 pm Subject: Re: dukkha jati punappuna.m - samudayasacca.m nichiconn > >I could't find the pali of the Abhidhammattha Vibhavini on CSCD, perhaps you've got it or know where to find it... Hi Alberto, Sarah, that makes three of us. sorry! peace, connie #97598 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:16 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 18. nilovg Dear Rob Ep, Op 26-apr-2009, om 18:02 heeft Robert Epstein het volgende geschreven: > If one tries to play an etude before playing scales and finger > exercises, it will just be a mess.Many things are tested and > developed in the laboratory before they are sent out into the > general population. Likewise, undistracted meditation, which is > often described throughout sutta, allows certain qualities to > develop. It is a more advanced exercise to notice what is arising > while many different demands are being met. Why not have both types > of practice, without the illusion that secluded practice is the > final or most natural situation? -------- N: True, we cannot expect the immediate arising of awareness amidst disturbing situations. First we have to listen and consider what awareness and direct understanding are: whatever nama or rupa appears now through one of the six doorways, one at a time. We have to listen and consider again and again. Most important, we have to understand that sati and pa~n~naa cannot be directed, manipulated, controlled. They arise in their own time. We listen to have more understanding of realities, and also the cittas arising while listening and understanding what one hears are elements, devoid of self, beyond control. We do not have to worry about daily life distractions, it all depends on understanding which will work its own way. ------ R: But the question is whether one starts out with the most distracting conditions possible, or has some sort of laboratory to develop qualities which are then developed in daily life. ------ N:If one is inclined to samatha, also then one has to listen and understand first the correct way of developing. Listening and considering in both samatha and vipassana are indispensable. Also when a person develops samatha he needs sati and pa~n~naa which are aware of and know when the citta is kusala and when akusala. There should not be any idea of developing first certain good qualities which are then developed in daily life. In that case one thinks of "doing" something first, and the question is, who is doing? ******* Nina. #97599 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 26, 2009 11:23 pm Subject: [dsg] ANAPANASATI: no 20. nilovg Dear friends, When there are many akusala cittas we may be inclined to look for a way to eliminate them quickly. Those who think that they want to apply themselves to samatha in order to have less akusala cittas, should find out whether they really have accumulations to develop samatha and whether the circumstances of their lives are such that the conditions which are necessary for its development can be fulfilled. It is important to know which cause brings which effect in life. If samatha is developed in the right way and jhåna can be attained, there will be the temporary elimination of defilements. If jhånacitta can arise shortly before dying there will be a happy rebirth in a higher plane of existence. However, the development of jhåna, as we have seen, is extremely difficult and very few people can do it. One may take for jhåna what is merely an unusual experience, not jhåna. Even if one develops samatha in the right way and one attains jhåna, one still has to develop insight in order to become detached from the concept of self and in order that all latent tendencies of defilements can be eradicated. Jhåna can lead to a happy rebirth, but vipassanå can lead to the end of birth, to the end of dukkha. The growth of insight knowledge cannot be forced, it has to be developed stage by stage. ******* Nina.