#99400 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvinient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Hi Ken H & all, #99081 - I liked the way you put the following. (Back to our discussion when I come across it:-)) --- On Sun, 12/7/09, kenhowardau wrote: K:>I believe that 'going to a library' or 'going to a teacher' (etc) are just concepts. As with all concepts they are, at best, "shadows" of the conditioned dhammas that actually exist. There is no control over conditioned dhammas, and, ultimately there is no control over their shadows either. Just the appearance of control. ------------ --------- ----- K:> If there are only the presently arisen paramattha dhammas, how could practice involve going anywhere? Where would there be to go? ----------- K:> The only part of me that I regard as Buddhist is any glimmer of right understanding there might be of the presently arisen dhammas. Any other kind of a Buddhist would be strictly of the ceremonial variety. **** Metta Sarah ======== #99401 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvinient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Hi Alex, (Jon, Connie & all), >>A: In AN 8.2 one 8 conditions for insight = seclusion > > "Having heard the Dhamma, he achieves a twofold seclusion: seclusion in body & seclusion in mind. This is the third cause, the third requisite condition... > http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ an/an08/an08. 002.than. html > ============ === .... >S: In different contexts, seclusion carries a different meaning. Here in this sutta (and many others), I'm pretty confident that it is referring to seclusion of cittas and cetasikas, i.e to kaaya-passaddhi and citta-passaddhi. I've checked other similar passages before. The Paali in the text is: kaayavuupakaasena ca cittavuupakaasena. Vuupasammati means quieted or calmed. When the citta is wholesome, it is always accompanied by these mental factors of calmness. I think it was Connie who gave a quote on this meaning of seclusion. ... S: This is the quote she gave (# 99076) which I think is relevant to the above: "2. Expositor 130: 'Tranquillity of the kaaya' {Dhs $$40, 41} is the calming of the three groups of mental factors (concomitant with consciousness) ; tranquillity of consciousness is the calming of mind. Kaaya here refers to the three aggregates - feeling, perception and mental activities.^ 7 These two states being taken together have the characteristic of pacifying the suffering of both mental factors and of consciousness; the function of crushing the suffering of both; the manifestation of an unwavering and cool state of both; and have mental factors and consciousness as proximate cause. They are the opponents of the corruptions, such as distraction, which cause the disturbance of mental factors and of consciousness." **** Metta Sarah ========== #99402 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Revisit Sisters, was: The Inconvenient truth sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Mike), --- On Mon, 20/7/09, Scott wrote: Scott: There is no formal 'practice.' Bhaavanaa is development, not 'practice.' Mike very helpfully clarified, off-list, that while jhaana may be attainable in this day and age, as it was before the arrival of the Buddha, vipassanaa after jhaana, using jhaana-citta as object, depends on accumulations not likely present for any or many today.... ... S: I'd be interested to hear any more of Mike's comments as indicated above. I'm sure he has good reasons for them.... I liked this comment he wrote to Phil which I just came across (#98492): M:>As I see it, any understanding of "popular discourse" not absolutely consistent with and conforming to "highest-meaning discourse" is misunderstanding and should be studiously avoided." Metta, Sarah ========= #99403 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhammas, dhammas, dhammas... sarahprocter... Hi Kevin, Good to see you back! Your wrote (#98962)under this good subject heading - yes, that's all there are! --- On Tue, 7/7/09, westbankj@... wrote: >As many of you know, I had some ideas about Mahayana and started practicing Mahayana again. This is partly due to a lot of Mahayana influence that I had when I studied it before coming to Theravada. I think I made some mistakes though (more about that later) in my understanding and have decided to start practicing (that word!) again the way Ajahn Sujin taught. As you might suspect, I am only holding to the Tipitika as a trustworthy source of Buddhist ideas, as well as the input from my fellow dharmins based on the Tipitika, and not holding to other scriptures. .... S: I'm interested to read all your reflections and comments - I was most impressed by your clear articulation and keen studies when we met you in Bangkok. Like the others, I look forward to meeting you again for further discussion sometime. ... >I'd like to talk more later about what led me to accept those Mahayana ideas but unfortunately at the moment I am a little busy bit so I am just going to write this message for now. ... S: I've been reading your subsequent discussions with interest. Meanwhile best wishes with the nursing and psychology courses. (My major was in psychology.) ... >It feels good to write "here". ... S: It feels good to read you "here" too! Metta Sarah ====== #99404 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvinient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Tue, 7/7/09, Alex wrote: >RE: Renunciation >What did the Siddhartha Gotama do? 1)Did he live in his palace when he attained Awakening? No. He sat under a >Bodhi tree (it didn't grow in his backyard either). >2) Where did Ven. Sariputta and Maha Moggallana spend their week(s) after ordaining? Another example of Bodily seclusion (Kaya-Viveka) . ..../ S: Where did they live during their countless lives as Bodhisatta and would-be key disciples? ... >3) Should we disregard comy & sutta passages such as: ... S: Should we disregard comy and sutta passages referring to their previous lives while they were developing the perfections so necessary for enlightenment in their final lives? Metta Sarah ========= #99405 From: han tun Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 9:12 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (31) hantun1 Dear Sarah (Alex and all), The Text: We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (IV, Sa.laayatana- vagga, Fourth Fifty, Ch 3, § 228, The Ocean) [Note 6]: "... The eye, bhikkhus, is the ocean for a person; its current consists of forms. One who withstands that current consisting of forms is said to have crossed the ocean of the eye with its waves, whirlpools, sharks and demons. Crossed over, gone beyond, the brahmin stands on high ground." The same is said with regard to the other senses. ------ Sarah: And nowhere is it suggested that the way to "withstand that current" is to close one's eyes or block the other senses. Even if one's eyes are closed, one thinks and dreams about the objects one is so attached to, the "waves, whirlpools, sharks and demons":-). The only way is the development of sati-sampaja~ n~naa when a visible object, attachment or any other reality appears. ----- Han: Very well said, Sarah. Thank you very muh. I have one weakness. I have many books, but I sometimes read them only when some one pointed out a particular passage. Now that you have pointed out the significance of SN 35, 228 Pathama Samudda Sutta, I study the sutta in detail, and also SN 35, 229 Dutiya Samudda Sutta, together with Notes 161, 162, 163, 164, and 165 by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi. I like the suttas very much and I also thank you for your valuable comment that [The only way to "withstand that current" is the development of sati-sampaja~n~naa when a visible object, attachment or any other reality appears.] I consider your comment as a Dhamma daana for me. Respectfully, Han #99406 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (31) sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Wed, 22/7/09, han tun wrote: >Han: Very well said, Sarah. Thank you very muh. I have one weakness. I have many books, but I sometimes read them only when some one pointed out a particular passage. ... S: It's often the same for me too - they're more interesting when we look at them together and share our various reflections. .... >Now that you have pointed out the significance of SN 35, 228 Pathama Samudda Sutta, I study the sutta in detail, and also SN 35, 229 Dutiya Samudda Sutta, together with Notes 161, 162, 163, 164, and 165 by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi. ... S: I don't have any texts with me, so please share any of your comments or any notes which are not too long to type out. I'm interested to hear more from you as well. ... >I like the suttas very much and I also thank you for your valuable comment that [The only way to "withstand that current" is the development of sati-sampaja~ n~naa when a visible object, attachment or any other reality appears.] I consider your comment as a Dhamma daana for me. ... S: Thanks for all your Dhamma daana too, Han. Lovely to chat to you again:). Wishing you and your wife good health. Metta Sarah ------- #99407 From: "sprlrt" Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:58 pm Subject: Re: Hetu/root, jhŕna, magga/path and other conditions sprlrt Hi, Correction to my previous post, note on the 6 hetus/roots: ..lobha and dosa (with 4 akusala cittas each)... lobha and dosa (arising with 8 and with 2 akusala cittas respectively) Alberto #99408 From: "Dan D." Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Pariyatti, was: The Inconvenient truth onco111 Hi Kevin, Thanks for chiming in. You make a good point that a practice that reinforces the idea of a "self" would be contrary to Buddha's teaching. You say that pańńa will arise when the conditions are right...what are the right conditions for pańńa to arise and how do we distinguish pańńa from Mara's wool? Dan > > Hi Dan, > > Do you mean in a way that conditions and reinforces the idea that there is > a "self" that accomplishes things as opposed to particular dhammas arising > and falling due to various circumstances which we mistakingly see as a > 'self'? > > In particular we should see that reinforcing this self-view cannot > condition panna, but only more ignorance and attachment. When panna arises, based > upon the correct conditions, it can understand dhammas for what they > really are; however, if there is no fuel for that fire, it cannot burn. The > only fire that continues to burn is the fire of self-view as mara throws the > wool over our eyes making us think there is a "self" that can find the > truth. The Buddha explained that that isn't the case and that in fact, there > are just conditioned dhammas rising and falling, like delusion, and > self-view, and panna. Each is conditioned by certain things. When there are > correct conditions for panna to arise, it will naturally arise. It is not > brought about by a "being". To think that would be a silly misunderstanding of > the Buddhas' teaching. > Kevin > > In a message dated 7/20/2009 7:11:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > onco111@... writes: > > Hi Robert, > You ask: "what is practice as you see it?" > > I'd say: observing dhammas or striving to remain alert to their rise and > fall. > > -Dan > #99409 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 11:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Seclusion - "off the mark" for veneration sarahprocter... Hi Alex, >>S: From MN 77, Mahaasakuludaayi Sutta, ~Naa.namoli, Bodhi transl.: >>.... "Venerable Sir, I see five qualities in the Blessed One because of which his disciples honour, respect, revere, and venerate him, and live in dependence on him, honouring and respecting him. What are the five? First, venerable sir, the Blessed One eats little and commends eating little.....Again, venerable sir, the Blessed One is content with any kind of robe and commends contentment with any kind of robe......content with any kind of almsfood.... .content with any kind of resting place.....Again, venerable sir, the Blessed One is ***secluded and commends seclusion*** ; >>... Thus Udaayin, it is not because of these five > qualities that my disciples honour, respect, revere, and venerate me, and live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me. > > "However, Udaayin, there are five other qualities because of which my disciples honour, respect, revere and venerate me, and live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me. What are the five?" > > S: The sutta then proceeds with a description of: > 1. The Higher Virtue > 2. Knowledge and Vision > 3. The Higher Wisdom > 4. The Four Noble Truths > 5. The Way to Develop Wholesome States, beginning with the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. > <...> >A: Again it looks like you are attacking a straw man. Nowhere did I say that physical seclusion is be all end all. It is an important step and in the above sutta it is shown " Now there are disciples of mine who are forest dwellers, dwellers in remote resting places, who live withdrawn in remote jungle-thicket resting places and return to the midst of the Sangha once each half-month for the recitation of the Paatimokkha. ". The physical seclusion does play a good support for deep samadhi, where sati is not hindered by hindrances and manifold sense-object distractions. ... S: I think the sutta quoted from above makes exactly the point that it is NOT *an important step* or a quality to "honour, respect, revere and venerate". As for deep samadhi, there is a right path and a wrong path, there is right concentration and wrong concentration. There is nothing in the physical seclusion itself that is likely to remove hindrances and sense-object distractions or lead to right (rather than wrong) samadhi. This is why those without right understanding and a lot of other defilements were deterred from forest dwelling. Metta Sarah ========= #99410 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: e-card from Casperia, nr Rome sarahprocter... Dear Scott (& Dan in passing), --- On Sat, 18/7/09, Scott wrote: >Scott: Thanks for indulging this 'metacommunication. ' ;-) .... Sarah: A pleasure ;-) (I'm waiting til I'm over the jet-lag before I get back on 'Space' posts!) .... >Yes, all of our styles will, eventually, be unappreciated by someone. Mine is often. I guess, by conditions, I simply don't yet appreciate the ongoing, seemingly 'political,' perpetuation of the 'you must meditate' discussion - if 'discussion' is what it can be called. Maybe I don't like the study-by-warfare methodology any more. .... Sarah: Ah, that's where the setting the example of metta and gentle speech comes in:) Otherwise, surely can't the same can be said by others of the 'you must be aware in daily life' discussion with similar ramifications? ... >Scott: Yes, the views presented offer a chance to look into the suttas and the texts, which is a good thing. I'm not into the whole thing of 'planting seeds of Dhamma' - conditions and 'my own reasons' again. Too much like missionary work to me. .... Sarah: If one tries to share or help with kusala cittas and without expectations or attachment to the result, I don't think the missionary thing applies. It's when we mind about the effect (or lack of effect) of our 'words of wisdom' that we get uptight or cantakerous about what the others say, I feel. As for the 'seeds', I was glad to read Dan's comments about using everyday words and examples to plant a few. (Very imaginative in a good sense, as always, Dan. And btw, I was appreciating the discussion between the two of you when it came to a rather abrupt halt. I look forward to more. You were making good points in it, Scott, esp. on control imho.) .... >And nothing that succeeds by trying to do it. Cultivating mettaa and patience are very important, as you say. Theses arise infrequently for me. ;-) ... Sarah: So now's the opportunity for them to grow:-) ... >If a 'meditator' demonstrated a desire to discuss points of doctrine, and not endlessly tell me to 'meditate,' it might seem different. .... Sarah: Ooh, I'm sure they'd say the same, substituting 'not meditate'. Perhaps you and Alex or Howard have a role reversal discussion:). .... >Ah well, and boo hoo for me. I could always 'seek' seclusion, which, of course, is most meaningfully understood as having an inner location. Then I'd contribute and quit bitching. ... S: :-)) Yes, never enough for any of us of the inner variety. Of the outer variety, it can of course lead to madness.... Glad to see the good humour. I look forward to any more 'metacommunications', Scott! Metta, Sarah ======= #99411 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:00 am Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation jonoabb Hi Dan (99280) > It's great to hear from you! > =============== Yes, good to be talking again. (And sorry for the slow reply.) =============== You raise some questions I haven't thought about for awhile. In particular, I'm still struggling with the meaning of "pariyatti." You say, "intellectual understanding"; Nyanatiloka says [Buddhist Dictionary], "learning the wording of the doctrine"; PTS says, "adequacy, accomplishment, sufficiency, capability, competency...", the Vism [p. 95 PTS] sense is more along the lines of memorization of texts. I see a great deal of affinity among the PTS, Vism, and Nyanatiloka usages, but they seem quite different from your "intellectual understanding." =============== As Nyanatiloka points out, pariyatti is the first of the 3 stages of pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha. Stages here means stages *of understanding*. So what is being referred to is a (beginning) level of understanding of/about dhammas. This is the knowledge or information (to use neutral terms) that is necessary to be gained in order for direct understanding to be able to arise. (Personally I see nothing wrong with using the term "intellectual understanding" for this level of panna, but if you have some other preferred translation of the Pali 'pariyatti', please feel free to suggest it.) =============== > "Intellectual understanding" brings to mind a thinking about dhammas and trying to make rational sense of the texts. This would be a reasonable approximation to "learning the doctrine", but Nyanatiloka consciously and carefully avoids that formulation with "learning the WORDING OF the doctrine." There's a critical difference. Memorization does not require very much intellectual understanding, but it plays an important role in learning Dhamma. With a rudimentary understanding of the words and a quick and ready formulation of how they fit together, the "wording of" Dhamma student will be better prepared to observe dhammas as they arise and pass away than will the "intellectual understanding" Dhamma student who has become so accustomed to conceptualizing dhammas and theorizing about them that it becomes more difficult to see beyond the manufactured conceptual realities to catch a glimpse of the real realities. Much more important than thinking about dhammas is observing them live without preconceived notions of what they look like. =============== I think Nyanatiloka's "learning the wording of the doctrine" is his translation of the term "pariyatti" rather than a description of what the term means in practical terms. But in any event, that phrase need not necessarily refer to memorisation of the texts. In the suttas, the emphasis is on hearing the teachings from one of superior knowledge and reflecting on what has been heard and understood. =============== > J: "Intellectual understanding is that which is necessary to be understood intellectually in order for direct understanding to be able to arise. For example, someone who has not heard the teachings in this lifetime cannot develop the awareness/insight spoken of by the Buddha." > > --> I don't like that definition, Jon. It doesn't mesh with the normal connotations of "intellectual understanding," and it unduly prejudices "pariyatti" to intellectualization and theorizing as a practice rather than learning of cues for observation. =============== I can see that for you the word "intellectual" carries too many negative connotations (must be the academic background ;-)). But forgetting about the label, I hope we can agree that there are certain things that need to be heard and grasped before there can be any arising of awareness and direct understanding (as taught by the Buddha) in this lifetime. I think this is what the Pali "pariyatti" refers to. To my understanding, the matters that need to be heard and grasped concern, among other things, the meaning and nature of dhammas (aka khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc) Jon #99412 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:00 am Subject: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 5, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, The Buddha explained realities in different ways so that people would be able to know them as nĺma elements and rúpa elements, as not self. We read in “An Exhortation from Nandaka” Middle Length Sayings (III, no.146) that the monk Nandaka had to preach to the nuns. Then the Buddha asked him to repeat to them exactly the same sermon. Why? Their “faculties”, indriyas [1], were developed and hearing the same sermon again would be the right condition for them to attain the degree of enlightenment for which they were ripe. How could that happen? Could it be just because they were listening and thinking about what they heard, or rather because there would be mindfulness while listening? While listening mindfulness can arise and it can be aware of seeing, hearing, thinking or feeling, of any reality appearing through one of the six doors. When I quote what Nandaka said, one may think, “Is that all?” However, when one listens, considers what one has heard and there can be mindfulness of realities one can come to know them as they are. The conversation between Nandaka and the nuns reads: “What do you think about this, sisters? Is the eye permanent or impermanent?” “Impermanent, revered sir.” “But is what is impermanent anguish or happiness?” “Anguish, revered sir.” “Is it right to regard that which is impermanent,anguish and liable to alteration as, ‘This is mine, this am I, this is myself ’?” “No, revered sir.” “What do you think about this, sisters? Is the ear…the nose…the tongue…the bodysense…the mind permanent or impermanent?…Is it right to regard that which is impermanent, anguish and liable to alteration as, ‘This is mine, this am I, this is myself ’?“ “No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? Already, revered sir, by means of perfect intuitive wisdom it has been well seen by us as it really is that,’These six internal sense-fields are impermanent’ ”. The six “internal sense-fields” (ĺyatanas) are the five senses and the mind. The same is said about the six “external sensefields”: colours, sounds, smells, flavours, tangibles and mental objects (dhammĺyatana). The same is said about the “six classes of consciousness” which experience these objects. ******* Nina. #99413 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:03 am Subject: Re: Supramundane Jhaana jonoabb Hi Alex (99286) > > Every Buddha achieves enlightenment with jhana as basis. So for the Bodhisatta, the attainment of jhana (which he had eschewed because of the associated pleasant feeling) was the way to go. > > Not just the Buddha. Anagamis must have perfected samadhi. > AN 9.12 > =============== Well we were discussing the comment in MN36 about the Bodhisatta's recalling of his childhood jhana experience and recognising that as being the "path to enlightenment". The point is that, for a Buddha, that is undoubtedly the case. But it does not mean that jhana is a prerequisite for enlightenment generally. As regards Anagamis, the anagami is perfected in samadhi, just as the sotapanna is perfected in sila and the arahant in panna. In each case, however, the perfection is attained *by virtue of* the attainment of the relevant path consciousness, rather than being a prerequisite for that attainment. =============== > ALL Arhants possess at least 1st Jhana. Destruction of taints depend on Jhana. AN 9.36 =============== This sutta explains the sense in which it can be said that "The ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana ... the second jhana ... the third jhana ... the fourth jhana ...". In each instance it is the case of a monk who (a) has attained the respective level of jhana (first to fourth) and who (b) regards "whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications and consciousness as inconstant, stressful, a disease ... etc. As I read the sutta, the point being made is that it's not so much to do with the first of these factors as the second. =============== > > Again, this has to be understood as referring to the non-arising of >the hindrances. This does not depend on jhana. > > Jhana temporarily suppresses hindrances and stronger jhana causes them to be suppressed for longer time. MN68 =============== Yes, but temporary suppression of the hindrances does not mean more likelihood of awareness or understanding. The awareness of satipatthana taught by the Buddha is something that may arise at any time and take any object: a rupa (such as visible object), vipaka consciousness (such as seeing consciousness), a kusala citta (such as everyday consideration or kindness) or an unwholesome citta (such as annoyance or irritation), or of course any mental factor accompanying any of those 3 kinds of citta. =============== > > Every moment of kusala is a moment of the non-arising (abandoning) >of the hindrances. > > And that kusala moment cannot possibly happen until akusala (hindrances are suppressed). =============== Moments of kusala occur during the day anyway, despite the fact that the hindrances are not suppressed. There is no reason why kusala of the level of awareness should not occur, if the appropriate conditions are in place. Jon #99414 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:06 am Subject: Re: Concentration for mindfulness. jonoabb Hi Alex (99289) > =============== > Do you agree with me that at the exact moment of lets say lust, or hatred, or restlessness or remorse there is no panna? > =============== Yes, of course I agree that a given moment of consciousness cannot be accompanied by both wholesome and unwholesome mental factors. =============== > Panna cannot coexist with the hindrance, and while one is in Jhana the hindrances are knocked out for good. =============== Yes, panna cannot coexist with akusala mental factors. But akusala consciousness can be known by panna arising just afterwards. Otherwise, it would not be possible for the hindrances themselves to be seen as anicca, dukkha and anattaa. =============== > > What we are discussing is the conditions for the development of >awareness/insight at any level (no matter how weak), not the >conditions for being the perfect contemplative. > > Eventually, when the conditions are right, I hope to be a perfect contemplative. I hope the same for you. =============== Whether contemplative or lay-person, perfection comes with highly developed awareness and understanding. The time to begin the development of such awareness and understanding is right now. =============== > The importance of concentration for deeper and subtler mindful awareness: > > When you take a magnifying glass, or microscope, you sacrifice the width of the area seen for the depth & clarity of analysis [quantity of space for quality of the image studied]. You see less area, but you see finer and subtler detail that otherwise you would not possible be able to see. =============== The development of awareness does not come by choosing a particular object to examine in greater detail. This is because the object that would be thus chosen (e.g., the mind, mental states) would not in fact be one of the dhammas spoken of by the Buddha (cittas, cetasikas) but would only be our idea of what those dhammas are. To my reading of the texts, only consciousness accompanied by panna (true awareness) may directly experience dhammas in the sense of being aware of them. The development of awareness is all about seeing dhammas as they truly are, not examining in more detail what we now take for dhammas, since that will only compound our present misperception. =============== Our usual attention is dissipated out over 6 "fields" so to say. It is impossible to give simultaneously 100% of bare attention to all 6. But when you start to let go off attention for the 5 sense objects you can have more and more attention freeing > up for 1 object, one sense. Rather than attention being dissipated > around the large field, you make it be mindful and aware of one thing but with greater penetration into finer and finer detail. First you let go off thoughts about past & the future and focus on present moment bare awareness. Then you switch off thinking and silently just be aware of nama-rupa happeninging now. Then you are aware only of the object of concentration, example the breath. You pay attention at air making contact with the nose and the feeling that is caused. =============== To my understanding, panna cannot be "made" to arise by following a specific technique such as you describe here. The Buddha did not proclaim a step 1 of "letting go of thoughts about the past and the future". I don't think there's any possibility of being able to control one's thinking in this way; it goes against everything in the suttas about the conditioned nature of dhammas. =============== > EVEN THE SATIPATTHANA SUTTA HAS: > "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself? > > [1] "There is the case where a monk — having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building — sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html =============== In the Satipatthana Sutta, the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" has a 14-part answer, only one of which deals with the case of the monk who is already well developed in samatha and mindfulness. Jon #99415 From: han tun Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:46 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (31) hantun1 Dear Sarah, Sarah: I don't have any texts with me, so please share any of your comments or any notes which are not too long to type out. I'm interested to hear more from you as well. Han: The Notes 161 and 162 concern with SN 35, 228 Pathama Samudda Sutta. Note 161 is on [The eye, bhikkhus, is the ocean for a person; its currents consists of forms.] Quote: [The eye is the ocean for a person: both in the sense of being hard to fill and in the sense of submerging (samudda-na.t.thena). (i) It is an ocean in the sense of being hard to fill because it is impossible to fill it (satisfy it) with visible objects converging on it from the earth up to the highest brahmaa world. (ii) And the eye is an ocean in the sense of submerging because it submerges (one) among various object, that is, when it becomes unrestrained, flowing down, it goes in a faulty way by being a cause for the arising of defilements. Its current consists of forms: As the ocean has the countless waves, so the *ocean of the eye* has countless waves consisting of the various visible objects converging on it.] End Quote. Han: The note is self-explanatory. -------------------- Note 162 is on [One who withstands that current consisting of forms is said to have crossed the ocean of the eye with its waves, whirpools, sharks, and demons.] Quote: [At It 114, 15-18 the following explanation of these dangers is given: waves (uumi) are anger and despair (kodhuupaayaasa); whirlpools (aava.t.ta) are the five chords of sensual pleasure; sharks and demons (gaaharakkhasa) are women.] End Quote. Han; Here also, the note is self-explanatory. Of the dangers listed above, I think the five chords of sensual pleasure (kaama-gu.na) are the most dangerous. I would refer to Buddhist Dictionary to get the full meaning of *kaama*. Quote: [Kaama may denote: 1. subjective sensuality, 'sense-desire'; 2. objective sensuality, the five sense-objects. (1). Subjective sensuality, or sense-desire, is directed to all five sense-objects, and is synonymous with kaama-cchanda, 'sensuous desire', one of the 5 hindrances (niivara.na, q.v.); kaama-raaga, sensuous lust', one of the ten fetters (sanyojana, q.v.); kaama-ta.nhaa, 'sensuous craving', one of the 3 cravings (ta.nhaa, q.v.); kaama-vitakka, 'sensuous thought', one of the 3 wrong thoughts (micchaa-sankappa; s. vitakka). Sense-desire is also one of the cankers (aasava, q.v.) and clingings (upaadaana, q.v.). (2). Objective sensuality is, in the canonical texts, mostly called kaama-gu.na, 'cords (or strands) of sensuality'. There are 5 cords of sensuality: the visible objects, cognizable by eye-consciousness, that are desirable, cherished, pleasant, lovely, sensuous and alluring; the sounds ... smells ... tastes ... bodily impressions cognizable by body-consciousness, that are desirable .... " (D. 33; M. 13, 26, 59, 66).] End Quote. -------------------- Sarah: Thanks for all your Dhamma daana too, Han. Lovely to chat to you again:). Wishing you and your wife good health. Han: I also thank you very much, Sarah. We are still doing well, i.e., as well as old persons can be. Respectfully, Han #99416 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:54 am Subject: Re: Meta-communication/Mettaa-communication scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: Sarah: "Ah, that's where the setting the example of metta and gentle speech comes in:) Otherwise, surely can't the same can be said by others of the 'you must be aware in daily life' discussion with similar ramifications?" Scott: Yes, definitely. This problem is mine for sure. I recall, long ago it seems, that I wanted to stop replying to posts when dosa was present - or some such sort of impossible asceticism. I think it was Nina who suggested I may as well reply anyway. At times I can feel an impatient and angry reply form itself in my thoughts quickly, which I rarely write or send. Often no reply at all is forthcoming after such a reaction. Sometimes, later, I do reply. There are many thoughts about 'someone' as this goes on. I think I still reply when dosa is coming and going or never far away. I've not yet found a way to discuss with patience. I think it is good to notice the whole struggle, since it is a way to keep an eye on the akusala count of the day, as it were. Sarah: "If one tries to share or help with kusala cittas and without expectations or attachment to the result, I don't think the missionary thing applies. It's when we mind about the effect (or lack of effect) of our 'words of wisdom' that we get uptight or cantankerous about what the others say, I feel..." Scott: Ah, but 'trying in such a fashion' - that's the problem isn't it? I can't make uphekkha arise, or kusala in general. I can wait until I notice it, which is the opposite of not replying if I notice akusala, and then were back into that whole thing. How does one 'try to help with kusala/' I think it would amount to being able to reply when kusala is present. I find I get 'cantankerous' when I imagine I'm being told what to do or talked down to or 'taught' by someone. Some people remain rebels without a cause. ;-) The trouble with the first statement above, at least for me, is the 'who-am-I-to-help' thing. I certainly don't know enough to do that. I know that I didn't seem to do much to find the sort of basic 'DSG' fodder to be palatable and to be a clear expression of the Dhamma. I don't yet know what to say, really, to someone else. Alex and I are really very much alike stylistically, I suppose, and for example. We both like the texts. I find that we offer quotes to each other, and repeat our views. I find that, over time, I clarify that it isn't jhaana S: "...As for the 'seeds', I was glad to read Dan's comments about using everyday words and examples to plant a few. (Very imaginative in a good sense, as always, Dan. And btw, I was appreciating the discussion between the two of you when it came to a rather abrupt halt. I look forward to more. You were making good points in it, Scott, esp. on control imho.)" Scott: What were you appreciating? What did you see as seeds for a future good discussion? For me, its dosa again, I'm afraid. I pulled the plug on that discussion (and I've done it before). Its like I see where its going and get bored. I think 'boredom' would be akin to dosa. I imagined I could see where Dan was coming from - what his points were, could imagine a long backing-and-forthing which would end in me seeing where Dan was coming from, which I already did. I think I stop, in part, because I have absolutely no interest in trying to change someone's mind. I want to get a sense of the views and leave it at that. I imagine that happened quickly with Dan. Part of the problem is that I read a lot of stuff in U.P. and Dan was a respondent years ago. I've read a lot of his stuff and it does remain quite similar. A sort of weird effect of using the archives, I guess. Maybe Dan's views have changed. I don't know, he wouldn't let me fence him in, as it were, being an old cowboy maybe. ;-) I'm so odd and self-centered in this way, I think. I have this naive idea about being left to think what I think - which, in this case, is what is thought about on the list (as per the home page) - and just don't get why there would be a need to express contrary opinions which I experience as some sort of military incursion or something. I even tried to get Ken H. to differ with me, since we share the same basic ideas, but dropped that one too. I know: A lot of stories. I can't yet, or often enough, experience a potential discussion as something which offers a chance for pariyatti. Instead, I'm thinking of me and someone else, and yet again being told how to think - all things I do myself. Hmmph. Now I'm back to that fall-back option of not responding at all... No, really, I think it would be cool to experience the views alone and respond only to these. I tried that to - just useless technique, right? Dhammaa do what they do. Ah well, enough of this rant. Thanks, Sarah. Sincerely, Scott. #99417 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:25 am Subject: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, all - If concentration is always in effect, then how is it a conditioned dhamma, how is it contingent, since it never fails to be present? As you will see at the end of this post, concentration is dependent on pleasure, which in turn depends on serenity, that on rapture, that on joy, that on freedom from remorse, and that on sila. Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a universal. How then can concentration be a universal? With metta, Howard Path to Full Awakening /Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose, joy as its reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as its reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose, concentration as its reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as its reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose, knowledge & vision of release as its reward./ (From the Kimattha Sutta) #99418 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:55 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...As you will see at the end of this post, concentration is dependent on pleasure, which in turn depends on serenity, that on rapture, that on joy, that on freedom from remorse, and that on sila. Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a universal. How then can concentration be a universal? Kimattha Sutta Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose, joy as its reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as its reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose, concentration as its reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as its reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose, knowledge & vision of release as its reward." Scott: Check the Paa.li first, so you can see what dhammaa are being referred to. See what word is being translated as 'concentration.' The universal is, as I understand it, citass'ekaggataa - a cetasika. I'll find another translation when I have time: Iti kho, aananda, kusalaani siilaani avippa.tisaaratthaani avippa.tisaaraanisa.msaani, avippa.tisaaro paamojjattho paamojjaanisa.mso, paamojja.m piitattha.m piitaanisa.msa.m, piiti passaddhatthaa passaddhaanisa.msaa, passaddhi sukhatthaa sukhaanisa.msaa, sukha.m samaadhattha.m samaadhaanisa.msa.m, samaadhi yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanattho yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso, yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m nibbidattha.m nibbidaanisa.msa.m, nibbidaa viraagatthaa viraagaanisa.msaa, viraago vimutti~naa.nadassanattho vimutti~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso. Iti kho, aananda, kusalaani siilaani anupubbena aggaaya parentii 'ti. Pa.thama.m. Sincerely, Scott. #99419 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Meta-communication/Mettaa-communication nilovg Dear Scott (and Howard), I read your interesting post to Sarah. Op 22-jul-2009, om 13:54 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Ah, but 'trying in such a fashion' - that's the problem > isn't it? I can't make uphekkha arise, or kusala in general. I can > wait until I notice it, which is the opposite of not replying if I > notice akusala, and then were back into that whole thing. How does > one 'try to help with kusala/' I think it would amount to being > able to reply when kusala is present. ------- N: I would repeat: do reply. Often I see the humor, you poking at Howard: stay calm, stay calm. Howard: I will, if you do not poke at me. People get to know you and will not mind. If Howard would correspond with you off line he would see that you are a kind person. It is the writing style on the list that may be misunderstood. We all know that kusala cittas are alternated with akusala cittas and that more often akusala cittas arise. There is simply no time to wait for kusala citta. Maybe you think too much. ---- Scott: The trouble with the first statement above, at least for me, is the 'who-am-I-to-help' thing. ----- N: So, that is of no use; "who-am-I", unnecessary thinking. ------- See you again on the list, Nina. #99420 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nilovg Hi Howard, Op 22-jul-2009, om 14:55 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Howard: Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a > universal. How then can concentration be a universal? ------ N: Being a universal means: it can be of many kinds and levels, depending on which citta and cetasikas it accompanies. It can be akusala, kusala or neither kusala nor akusala. ----- Nina. #99421 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/22/2009 8:55:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...As you will see at the end of this post, concentration is dependent on pleasure, which in turn depends on serenity, that on rapture, that on joy, that on freedom from remorse, and that on sila. Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a universal. How then can concentration be a universal? Kimattha Sutta Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose, joy as its reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as its reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose, concentration as its reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as its reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose, knowledge & vision of release as its reward." Scott: Check the Paa.li first, so you can see what dhammaa are being referred to. See what word is being translated as 'concentration.' The universal is, as I understand it, citass'ekaggataa - a cetasika. ------------------------------------------- Thank you for the Pali Scott. It seems that the word is 'samadhi' (as in "samaadhi yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanattho yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso"). That word 'samadhi' is standardly translated as 'concentration', and in the suttas it is presented as important to the process of awakening. What are you asserting? That samadhi is something other than the one-pointedness cetasika? What is it then do you think? A different cetasika or a concept/compound or something else? -------------------------------------------------- I'll find another translation when I have time: Iti kho, aananda, kusalaani siilaani avippa.tisaaratthaani avippa.tisaaraanisa.msaani, avippa.tisaaro paamojjattho paamojjaanisa.mso, paamojja.m piitattha.m piitaanisa.msa.m, piiti passaddhatthaa passaddhaanisa.msaa, passaddhi sukhatthaa sukhaanisa.msaa, sukha.m samaadhattha.m samaadhaanisa.msa.m, samaadhi yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanattho yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso, yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m nibbidattha.m nibbidaanisa.msa.m, nibbidaa viraagatthaa viraagaanisa.msaa, viraago vimutti~naa.nadassanattho vimutti~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso. Iti kho, aananda, kusalaani siilaani anupubbena aggaaya parentii 'ti. Pa.thama.m. Sincerely, Scott. ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99422 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Nina (and Scott) - In a message dated 7/22/2009 10:33:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 22-jul-2009, om 14:55 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Howard: Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a > universal. How then can concentration be a universal? ------ N: Being a universal means: it can be of many kinds and levels, depending on which citta and cetasikas it accompanies. It can be akusala, kusala or neither kusala nor akusala. ----- Nina. =============================== I understand 'universal' to mean "occurring at all times" (in all mind states), and my point is that if concentration is dependent on pleasure, but pleasure is sometimes absent, then how would not concentration sometimes be absent? In the sutta AN 4.94, the Buddha teaches "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? ... " Now, if the mind can be made to settle down, be unified, and be concentrated, how then can concentration be a universal - unless, as Scott seems to imply, the samadhi the Buddha speaks of in the suttas is something other than the one-pointedness cetasika? With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99423 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Howard, I hope you don't mind my butting in here... The Pali canon is vast and diverse. The meanings of many terms vary, depending on context. I understand the ekaggata (one-pointedness) of the "universals" simply to mean that citta has one object at a time. As a jhana factor, I take ekaggata to mean successive cittas have the same object--over and over again. -Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina (and Scott) - > > In a message dated 7/22/2009 10:33:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > Op 22-jul-2009, om 14:55 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > > > Howard: Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a > > universal. How then can concentration be a universal? > ------ > N: Being a universal means: it can be of many kinds and levels, > depending on which citta and cetasikas it accompanies. It can be > akusala, kusala or neither kusala nor akusala. > ----- > Nina. > =============================== > I understand 'universal' to mean "occurring at all times" (in all mind > states), and my point is that if concentration is dependent on pleasure, > but pleasure is sometimes absent, then how would not concentration sometimes > be absent? In the sutta AN 4.94, the Buddha teaches "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? ... " Now, if the mind can be made to > settle down, be unified, and be concentrated, how then can concentration be > a universal - unless, as Scott seems to imply, the samadhi the Buddha > speaks of in the suttas is something other than the one-pointedness cetasika? > > With metta, > Howard > > > Seamless > > /A change in anything is a change in everything/ > > (Anonymous) > > #99424 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:42 am Subject: some findings i hope you will like them nichiconn Dear Leo, L: About Buddhist bowl, I found that ceramic bowl is the most original. It can be with some thin bumpers on sides. If mara is destruction, then to have a bowl with bumpers, is better to have. Metal bowls is more for army and jails. As I know original buddhist had ceramic or clay ones.I found in Sutta Pitaka, that ceramic is placed on smooth ground. c: That reminded me of how in the Path of Purification it talks about different bowls. It says that for the greedy type monk "the right kind of bowl for him is an ugly clay bowl disfigured by stoppings and joins, or a heavy and misshapen iron bowl as unappetising as a skull"; and for the hating one, "The right kind of bowl is made of iron, as well shaped as a water bubble, as polished as a gem, spotless, and of quite pure colour to befit an ascetic." Also, when Buddha was teaching in Tavatimsa, he had a blue stone bowl the Four Regents had given him. peace, connie #99425 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:54 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Thank you for the Pali Scott. It seems that the word is 'samadhi'..." Scott: Your question is about concentration as as universal cetasika, as I understand it: H: "...Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a universal. How then can concentration be a universal?" Here is another translation of the sutta, the PTS version. Here it is from AN Book of Tens, as it is the same as for the Book of Elevens save the tenth quality is divided into two to make eleven: "...'Pray, sir, what is the object, what is the profit of good conduct?' 'Why, Aananda, freedom from remorse is the profit of good conduct.' 'Pray, sir, what is the object, what is the profit of freedom from remorse?' 'Joy, Aananda, is the object, joy is the profit of freedom from remorse.' 'But sir, what is the object, what is the profit of joy?' 'Rapture, Aananda, is the object, rapture is the profit of joy.' 'But pray, sir, what is the object, what is the profit of rapture?' 'Calm, Aananda, is the object, calm is the profit of rapture.' 'But, sir, what is the object, what is the profit of calm?' 'Happiness, Aananda, is the object, happiness is the profit of calm.' 'Pray, sir, what is the object, what is the profit of happiness?' 'Concentration, Aananda, is the object, concentration is the profit of happiness.' 'But pray, sir, what is the object, what is the profit of concentration?' 'Knowing and seeing things as they really are, Aananda, is the object and profit of concentration.' 'What is the object, what is the profit of knowing seeing things as they really are?' 'Revulsion and fading of interest, Aananda, is the object of it' 'Pray, sir, what is the object and profit of revulsion and fading of interest?' 'Release by knowing and seeing, Aananda, is the object and profit of these..." Iti kho, aananda, kusalaani siilaani avippa.tisaaratthaani avippa.tisaaraanisa.msaani, avippa.tisaaro paamojjattho paamojjaanisa.mso, paamojja.m piitattha.m piitaanisa.msa.m, piiti passaddhatthaa passaddhaanisa.msaa, passaddhi sukhatthaa sukhaanisa.msaa, sukha.m samaadhattha.m samaadhaanisa.msa.m, samaadhi yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanattho yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso, yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m nibbidattha.m nibbidaanisa.msa.m, nibbidaa viraagatthaa viraagaanisa.msaa, viraago vimutti~naa.nadassanattho vimutti~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso. Iti kho, aananda, kusalaani siilaani anupubbena aggaaya parentii 'ti. Pa.thama.m. H: "...That word 'samadhi' is standardly translated as 'concentration', and in the suttas it is presented as important to the process of awakening. What are you asserting? That samadhi is something other than the one-pointedness cetasika? What is it then do you think? A different cetasika or a concept/compound or something else?" Scott: If you'd next consider the following (PTS PED), as a sort of ball-park take on the term: "Samaadhi ... 1. concentration; a concentrated, self-collected, intent state of mind and meditation, which, concomitant with right living, is a necessary condition to the attainment of higher wisdom and emancipation...Thus samaadhi would comprise (a) the guarding of the senses (indriyesu gutta-dvaarataa), (b) self-possession (sati -- sampaja~n~na), (c) contentment ..., (d) emancipation from the 5 hindrances ..., (e) the 4 jhaanas. In the same way we find samaadhi grouped as one of the sampadaas ... (siila, samâdhi, pa~n~naa, vimutti), and as samaadhi-khandha (with siila & pa~n~naa) ... It is defined as cittassa ekaggataa ... identified with avikkhepa ... and with samatha ... sammaa-samaadhi is one the constituents of the eightfold ariya-magga ..." Scott: And so the term has different shades of meaning depending on the context. The sutta refers to 'samaadhi' and not to 'cittassa ekaggataa' and so, since Abhidhamma clarifies that the cetasika is labelled 'cittassa ekaggataa,' and since this term is not found in the Paa.li, then 'samaadhi' must mean something other than that particular and specific shade of meaning. I, of course, am not referring to to any different cetasika. Cittassa ekaggataa does arise with each and every moment of conscioiusness. This is clear according to the Abhidhamma method. I'd suggest, based on research thus far, that 'samaadhi' in the sutta refers to a more general aspect of 'samaadhi' than the specific and precise aspect referred to as 'cittassa ekaggataa' since this term was not used in the Paa.li. I don't see how you wonder about 'concentration' as a Universal cetasika based on the sutta. Sincerely, Scott. #99426 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nilovg Hi howard and Dan, Op 22-jul-2009, om 17:11 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Now, if the mind can be made to > settle down, be unified, and be concentrated, how then can > concentration be > a universal - unless, as Scott seems to imply, the samadhi the Buddha > speaks of in the suttas is something other than the one-pointedness > cetasika? ------- N: See Dan's explanation: Different meanings in different contexts. Samaadhi with seeing focusses on visible object, assits the citta to experience it. Samaadhi in jhaana is concentration on the meditation subject and it becomes more subtle as jhaana develops. Samaadhi as a Path factor assists the citta that develops right understanding of the eightfold Path. Samaadhi accompanying lokuttara citta is of the strength of jhaana and concentrates on nibbaana. ----- Nina. #99426 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nilovg Hi howard and Dan, Op 22-jul-2009, om 17:11 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Now, if the mind can be made to > settle down, be unified, and be concentrated, how then can > concentration be > a universal - unless, as Scott seems to imply, the samadhi the Buddha > speaks of in the suttas is something other than the one-pointedness > cetasika? ------- N: See Dan's explanation: Different meanings in different contexts. Samaadhi with seeing focusses on visible object, assits the citta to experience it. Samaadhi in jhaana is concentration on the meditation subject and it becomes more subtle as jhaana develops. Samaadhi as a Path factor assists the citta that develops right understanding of the eightfold Path. Samaadhi accompanying lokuttara citta is of the strength of jhaana and concentrates on nibbaana. ----- Nina. #99427 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 12:24 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Dear Jon, J: I can see that for you the word "intellectual" carries too many negative connotations (must be the academic background ;-)). --> Actually, I had dsg in mind more than academia...lots of intellectualizing here. J: But forgetting about the label, I hope we can agree that there are certain things that need to be heard and grasped before there can be any arising of awareness and direct understanding (as taught by the Buddha) in this lifetime. --> Right. J: I think this is what the Pali "pariyatti" refers to. --> I was hoping to find some references to support that, but what I find is references that suggest that pariyatti is memorization with the primary purpose of preserving the dispensation in an era of oral transmission, that without someone having pariyatti the doctrine would soon be lost. Later, when everything was written down, pariyatti took on the additional (but related) meaning of "scripture." It also seems to carry a meaning of hearing the doctrine in the proper words and phrasing. J: To my understanding, the matters that need to be heard and grasped concern, among other things, the meaning and nature of dhammas (aka khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc) --> Yes, the meaning and nature of dhammas, in particular the tilakkhana. To my understanding, detailed intellectual understanding of lists of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, cittas, cetasikas, etc. is not part of the recipe for baking satipatthana. Dan #99428 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 7/22/2009 12:34:56 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: Hi Howard, I hope you don't mind my butting in here... The Pali canon is vast and diverse. The meanings of many terms vary, depending on context. I understand the ekaggata (one-pointedness) of the "universals" simply to mean that citta has one object at a time. ------------------------------------------------ Okay, a fact, but not much of a cetasika. ------------------------------------------------- As a jhana factor, I take ekaggata to mean successive cittas have the same object--over and over again. -------------------------------------------------- Now, THAT is interesting to me, because that is exactly the definition of concentration that I gave on DSG a long time ago [It just made sense to me], but it wasn't well received! (And I also conjectured that the cetasika of one-pointedness was the tendency, of varying degree, for a given object to continue as object. -------------------------------------------------- -Dan ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99429 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard (and Dan), Regarding: H: "...Now, THAT is interesting to me, because that is exactly the definition of concentration that I gave on DSG a long time ago [It just made sense to me], but it wasn't well received! (And I also conjectured that the cetasika of one-pointedness was the tendency, of varying degree, for a given object to continue as object." Scott: The reasons I don't receive this well are 1) because it doesn't conform with the dhamma with characteristic thing, and 2) because it mixes up naama and ruupa by implying a 'continuity' of an object when both object and consciousness fall away together, from the Abhidhamma method. From that point of view - the divergence from the texts - your definition of concentration is flawed. I see where you are coming from, and it is sort of what I thought you were wondering about. Consider the idea poorly received (by me) this time around as well. ;-) Winky guy, no flip-out. Sincerely, Scott #99430 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Howard, D: I understand the ekaggata (one-pointedness) of the "universals" simply to mean that citta has one object at a time. H: Okay, a fact, but not much of a cetasika. --> Seems like a cetasika to me. Why not? #99431 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Scott, What is your understanding of what the object of jhana is? Is it nama? Rupa? Dan #99432 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "What is your understanding of what the object of jhana is? Is it nama? Rupa?" Scott: It depends, doesn't it? What's your take on it? Sincerely, Scott. #99433 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:05 pm Subject: Re: Supramundane Jhaana truth_aerator Hi Jon and all interested, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > (99286) > > > Every Buddha achieves enlightenment with jhana as basis. So for the Bodhisatta, the attainment of jhana (which he had eschewed because of the associated pleasant feeling) was the way to go. > > > > Not just the Buddha. Anagamis must have perfected samadhi. > > AN 9.12 > > =============== > > Well we were discussing the comment in MN36 about the Bodhisatta's recalling of his childhood jhana experience and recognising that as being the "path to enlightenment". > > The point is that, for a Buddha, that is undoubtedly the case. But >it does not mean that jhana is a prerequisite for enlightenment >generally. For Anagamiship, definately, the mastery of Jhana is required. For stream, once attaining may be required (though in some cases multiple attainments may be needed). > As regards Anagamis, the anagami is perfected in samadhi, just as the sotapanna is perfected in sila and the arahant in panna. In each case, however, the perfection is attained *by virtue of* the attainment of the relevant path consciousness, rather than being a prerequisite for that attainment. > I politely disagree. I believe that perfection of sila and reaching N8P = stream entry. Not, reaching stream = attaining perfection of sila and reaching N8P. > =============== > > ALL Arhants possess at least 1st Jhana. Destruction of taints depend on Jhana. AN 9.36 > =============== > > This sutta explains the sense in which it can be said that "The ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana ... the second jhana ... the third jhana ... the fourth jhana ...". > > In each instance it is the case of a monk who (a) has attained the respective level of jhana (first to fourth) and who (b) regards "whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications and consciousness as inconstant, stressful, a disease ... etc. > > As I read the sutta, the point being made is that it's not so much >to do with the first of these factors as the second. But the Jhana IS important. Look, if you can't supress the hindrances for a short while - what makes you think you can do it for all time? We can agree to disagree. > =============== > > > Again, this has to be understood as referring to the non-arising of >the hindrances. This does not depend on jhana. > > > > Jhana temporarily suppresses hindrances and stronger jhana causes them to be suppressed for longer time. MN68 > =============== > > Yes, but temporary suppression of the hindrances does not mean more >likelihood of awareness or understanding. Actually it does. IMHO there cannot be understanding when the hindrances are present, because the presence of hindrances implies that the mind doesn't understand the noble truths. The awareness of satipatthana taught by the Buddha is something that may arise at any time and take any object: a rupa (such as visible object), vipaka consciousness (such as seeing consciousness), a kusala citta (such as everyday consideration or kindness) or an unwholesome citta (such as annoyance or irritation), or of course any mental factor accompanying any of those 3 kinds of citta. > > =============== > > > Every moment of kusala is a moment of the non-arising (abandoning) >of the hindrances. > > > > And that kusala moment cannot possibly happen until akusala (hindrances are suppressed). > =============== > > Moments of kusala occur during the day anyway, But there is such thing as intensity and duration. Long duration and strong suppresion may be required for the progress to occur quickly (or occur at all). despite the fact that the hindrances are not suppressed. There is no reason why kusala of the level of awareness should not occur, if the appropriate conditions are in place. > > Jon > With metta, Alex #99434 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Scott, Tipitaka: Neither nama nor rupa. The object of jhana is concept. Concept is not one of the dhammas and is not subject to rise and fall. My take: Different cittas can have the SAME concept as object. The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly. Or, from an atomistic perspective, in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object. Dan > Dear Dan, > > Regarding: > > D: "What is your understanding of what the object of jhana is? Is it nama? Rupa?" > > Scott: It depends, doesn't it? What's your take on it? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #99435 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Pariyatti, was: The Inconvenient truth truth_aerator Hi Dan, and all interested, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hi Alex, > Are you the Alex that was in on all those conversations with Robert, Jon, Sarah, etc. so many years ago? > I did have them, although I do not know if there was another Alex on this board. Check the email. Mine is truth_aerator@... > > And how exactly does one do that? > > (1) For "observing dhammas" [satipatthana], there is no recipe. What about the famous satipatthana sutta? What about all the suttas such as An 9.36? > (2) In "hearing the doctrine and striving to keep alert" I have just the conventional meanings in mind. > > > What is Right Effort in that case? > > In (1) "Right Effort" is Right Effort as discussed in the Tipitika. > > In (2) "Right Effort" almost never arises, except in the occasional >instances of (1). This doesn't seem what the Buddha has said in the suttas. > > > What constitutes seeing their rise & fall? > >Not thinking: "Hmmm...I was angry awhile ago and now I'm not," or >"This too shall pass." These would be instances of thinking about >dhammas. > Instead, it's seeing them arise and pass away with great rapidity. >Their swiftness of passage (anicca) and ungraspability (anatta/suńńata) appear crystal clear, and later the intellectualing mind tries to catch up with the seeing. > > Metta, > > Dan How exactly is that done? Wit metta, Alex #99436 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Nina (and Scott) - > > In a message dated 7/22/2009 10:33:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > vangorko@... writes: > > Hi Howard, > Op 22-jul-2009, om 14:55 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > > > Howard: Note that concentration depends on pleasure, which is not a > > universal. How then can concentration be a universal? > ------ > N: Being a universal means: it can be of many kinds and levels, > depending on which citta and cetasikas it accompanies. It can be > akusala, kusala or neither kusala nor akusala. > ----- > Nina. > =============================== > I understand 'universal' to mean "occurring at all times" (in all mind > states), and my point is that if concentration is dependent on pleasure, > but pleasure is sometimes absent, then how would not concentration sometimes > be absent? In the sutta AN 4.94, the Buddha teaches "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? ... " Now, if the mind can be made to > settle down, be unified, and be concentrated, how then can concentration be > a universal - unless, as Scott seems to imply, the samadhi the Buddha > speaks of in the suttas is something other than the one-pointedness cetasika? > > With metta, > Howard > > Hello Howard, Jon, Sarah, Nina and all interested, Good point. In any case I think that it is reckless to attribute the concentration (samma-samadhi) as ekagata universal cetasika. Samadhi isn't always present, but universal cetasika is. (What about restless states of mind, do they have one-pointedness as well?) Furthermore there is different levels of a same thing. There can be weak and strong quality. While there can be one-pointedness of bad qualities (such as lust) it is NOT the same as samma-samadhi. With metta, Alex #99437 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika kenhowardau Hi Scott, Howard and Dan, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Howard (and Dan), > > Regarding: > > H: "...Now, THAT is interesting to me, because that is exactly the definition of concentration that I gave on DSG a long time ago [It just made sense to me], but it wasn't well received! (And I also conjectured that the cetasika of one-pointedness was the tendency, of varying degree, for a given object to continue as object." > > Scott: The reasons I don't receive this well are 1) because it doesn't conform with the dhamma with characteristic thing, and 2) because it mixes up naama and ruupa by implying a 'continuity' of an object when both object and consciousness fall away together, from the Abhidhamma method. -------------- It's been a while since someone at DSG defined jhana absorption. If I remember correctly, it is a mind-door process in which there are more than the usual seven javana cittas. And so the same object of consciousness is retained for a longer time than usual(sometimes for aeons). This doesn't contradict anicca in any way because the object of jhana is not a dhamma, but a concept. (In some jhanas the object is the nimita of a citta, but a nimita is basically a concept.) I hope I've got that right. Ken H #99438 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:50 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth-Retreat Ascetism Off The Mark truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding Asceticism: > > A: "... Except in a retreat, one is more likely to be less physically and mentally disturbed and remember the above. Sensual objects do support latent tendencies to arise and overpower the mind ... In a retreat there are less objects that can overpower a person ... Sacrifice of lesser pleasure for higher happiness..." > > Scott: > > Ananga.na Sutta MN 9: > > "...If the spheres of these evil unwholesome wishes are seen and heard to be unabandoned in any bhikkhu, then for all he may be a forest dweller, a frequenter of remote abodes, an almsfood eater, a house-to-house seeker, a refuse-rag wearer, a wearer of rough robes still his fellows in the holy life do not honour, respect, revere, and venerate him. Why is that? Because the spheres of these evil unwholesome wishes are seen and heard to be unabandoned in that venerable one..." > > Cuu.la-Assapura Sutta MN 40: > > "...I do not say that a recluse's status comes about in a patchwork cloak wearer through the mere wearing of the patchwork cloak, nor in a naked ascetic through mere nakedness, nor in a dweller in dust and dirt through mere dust and dirt, nor in a washer in water through mere washing in water, nor in a tree-root dweller through mere dwelling at the root of a tree, nor in an open-air dweller through mere dwelling in the open air, nor in a practitioner of continuous standing through mere continuous standing, nor in a taker of food at stated intervals through mere taking of food at stated intervals, nor in a reciter of incantation through mere recitation of incantations; nor do I say that the recluse's status comes about in a matted-hair ascetic through mere wearing of the hair matted..." > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > Dear Scott (and all) Again you are making a questionable answer. I did not say that "all ascetism" is good. No, it can be misused - especially if one has wrong views. All I am saying is that right view is important to have and to be secluded (at least some times and for certain results). Seclusion (or anything, bhavana included) should be done with right view. Even the best tool can be misused. WM, Alex #99439 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/22/2009 1:55:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Thank you for the Pali Scott. It seems that the word is 'samadhi'..." =========================== I've read your reply and appreciate it. Still, it is unclear exactly what (in precise, Abhidhammic terms) that "samadhi" is intended to be. What thoughts do you have on Dan & my recent back-and-forth on this? With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99440 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 1:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 7/22/2009 6:31:27 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: Hi Howard, D: I understand the ekaggata (one-pointedness) of the "universals" simply to mean that citta has one object at a time. H: Okay, a fact, but not much of a cetasika. --> Seems like a cetasika to me. Why not? =========================== You say tomato, and I say tomahto! ;-)) With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99441 From: "connie" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:38 pm Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nichiconn Dear Friends, In his Abhidhamma Studies, the venerable Nyanponika lists as fairly synonymous 'parallel factors': mental one-pointedness, faculty of concentration, power of concentration, path factors of concentration (right and wrong), calm, and undistractedness. He has drawn up a table showing which types of consciousnesses are associated with which parallel factors & says three degrees of intensity of 'concetration' are noticeable. The weakest being in the 17 types where mental one-pointedness occurs without the other parallels and it's definition is limited to "stablility" (.thiti). For an older explanation, this from Summary of the Topics of Abhidhamma and Commentary: Chapter Seven, Categories - Summary: (26) In the five sense-consciousnesses, the jhaana factors are not obtained; in the [consciousnesses] without vigour, the powers; and in those without motivations, the path factors. (27) Similarly, in the doubt consciousness one-pointedness does not reach the state of path, faculty or power. Commentary: (26) The five sense-consciousness, being free from application of thought, merely alight upon their objects; therefore equanimity, happiness, and pain, although occurring in these consciousness, are not brought out as being jhaana factors because of the absence of the mode of contemplating, for it is what follows in the wake of application of thought that is called a jhaana-factor. Since vigour is absent in sixteen consciousnesses - the twice-five sense-consciousnesses, the three mind-elements, and the three investigating - although concentration occurs in these it does not become a power, for it is what follows in the wake of vigour that is called a power. And similarly, the path factors are not obtained in the eighteen [consciousnesses] without motivations {c: roots} because of the lack of motivations, for it is what follows in the wake of the motivations that is called a path factor. Having this point in mind he states the words beginning 'In the five sense consciousnesses'. The grammatical construction is: 'The jhaana factors are not obtained.' (27) In the doubt consciousness, because it lacks decision, one-pointedness is mere stability of mind and does not acquire the designations 'wrong concentration', 'faculty of concentration', and 'power of concentration'; thus he utters the words beginning 'similarly in the doubt consciousness'. c: In CMA that would be VII 22. peace, connie 'Bhikkhus, in the Ariyan disciple endowed with understanding there are established faith which follows it, energy which follows it, and mindfulness and concentration which follow it.' {S v 229} #99442 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:56 pm Subject: Re: Retreat Asceticism Off The Mark - Refuted, Now What? scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding Asceticism: A: "Again you are making a questionable answer. I did not say that 'all ascetism' is good. No, it can be misused - especially if one has wrong views...All I am saying is that right view is important to have and to be secluded (at least some times and for certain results). Seclusion (or anything, bhavana included) should be done with right view. Even the best tool can be misused." Scott: Alex, you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth, laddy. First of all, you've been shown ample sutta examples demonstrating that the Buddha did not make seclusion a requirement and that it is not seclusion per se but the consciousness and mental factors that matter. All this should allow you to stand down on this constant focus on seclusion. You should be able to stop using this as an argument since it has been refuted: Literal seclusion is not relevant for satipa.t.thaana. The Buddha did not teach that asceticism would, like some tool, decrease the strength of defilements like lust either, by the by and as an aside. But this is not the main concern at the moment. Above you seem to persist in suggesting that 'seclusion' or 'bhavana' can be 'misused' and that these are 'tools' and in this you demonstrate again the tendency to believe in a self that can control the elements and conditions for things and that things can be done 'with right view' in order not to 'misuse' them. I find that you might keep telling me that you are aware of anatta, or that this is a manner of speaking, but I don't think so. Its too persistent. I think you believe in a person's ability to control dhammaa. Sincerely, Scott. #99445 From: "colette" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:16 pm Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika ksheri3 Far too much elation to bother with being cute by using musical lyrics and/or by setting this up to work with future realities that are destined to come. Naw, naw, naw, Howard, have you been following my progressions in other groups. VEry particularly, I speak of my works in Yoga groups concerning the deapth and breadth of hatha yoga, yogas relation to pranayama, and yogas relation to the manifestation of THE BUDDHA, as well as this obscure concept of YIN AND YANG? yea, just between you and I, yea, I can just come up with most outrageous conections and at the same time the most outrageous REALITIES, can't I? <...> Lets ask ourselves about this hallucination called "concentration". <....> ------------------------------ Can you show a certifiable connection and a certifiable reality that advertises and glorifies the actual presence and reality of concetration on a single thought or meditation on a single thought? Come now, in Hinduism Yama is written as nothing more than a "moral restraint" while in Buddhism (Tibetan Buddhism to be exact), Yama is nothing more than the deity that holds the wheel of samsara. How do you explain these two monumental divergences in meaning and application? ----------------------------- CALLING ALL ABHIDHARMA ANALYISTS. YOUR EXPERTISE IS DESIRED HERE! <...> Come on, pleasure. What is pleasure? How can something so obscure be so definitive? How about "light", can you touch light and grasp light and therefore make light scientific where I can touch it and express the exact same feelings and sensations that you had previouly expressed and offered me the chance to experience? Why is pleausre any different? How about PAIN? Is PAIN a resultant phenomena of Yama the holder of the wheel of samsara? Why isn't PLEASURE THE RESULTANT PHENOMENA OF YAMA THE HOLDER OF THE WHEEL OF SAMSARA? I could miles upon miles upon miles when you said: As you will > see at the end of this post, concentration is dependent on pleasure, which > in turn depends on serenity, that on rapture, that on joy, that on freedom > from remorse, and that on sila. but you ended with the concept "sila" which requires the work and changes the complexity of the post and the concept. SCHREWED or is that SKILLFUL? is a schrew skillful? ;) What fun? GLAD TO HAVE YOU ABOARD! I HOPE YOU ENJOY THE REST OF THE RIDE since it's gonna get a little messy as is the case in any/all butcheries. The people need something to eat don't they? toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > If concentration is always in effect, then how is it a conditioned > dhamma, how is it contingent, since it never fails to be present? As you will > see at the end of this post, concentration is dependent on pleasure, which > in turn depends on serenity, that on rapture, that on joy, that on freedom > from remorse, and that on sila. Note that concentration depends on > pleasure, which is not a universal. How then can concentration be a universal? #99446 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 5:49 pm Subject: Never take Revenge! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: How to quell all Revenge! The Blessed Buddha once said: If in your domain the enemy has hurt you, Why should you torture your own mind, This lies not in the enemy's territory? Your kind family you left all behind, Why don't you leave your enemy also, and the hate, that brings so much torment? We truly entertain & play with this gnawing anger, which brings any good one wish to purify to sole ruin, complete fiasco and full failure!!! Can there exist any greater fool, than one in Anger? When someone has done us wrong, We fly into hot rage and fierce fury! But why then do we thus repeat and commit the same evil as we just blamed the others? If somebody while wishing to worry you, Has done you some wrong and vile thing, Why do you worry then yourself, And thereby satisfy his wish? If you are in rage, and longing for revenge, whether you return some evil to him or not, You will evermore torture yourself with the pain that always inherently is born of any hate! If, out of rage and anger, your enemy Should do you some real wrong & harm, Why do you imitate his evil behaviour By growing blind hate in your own mind? That wrath and hate, through which the foe Has done you some unpleasant thing, That inner hate, indeed, you should destroy! Then how can you worry without any cause? Since moment after moment all vanishes, so too will vanish those five groups and clusters of clinging that have done you harm! Who is it then you're angry with? Nothing is left out there! It is all gone now! If one person hates another person, Whom does he hurt most, if not himself! We are thus the cause of our own pain, Why then do we hate the others after all? Source: Visuddhimagga IX,22 Give the Enemy a Gift! An almost infallible way to overcome all ill-will towards the rival, is to present him with a gift! The Enemy has been your family many times: Another method is to consider the fact that the opponent in former rebirths have been a near relation of oneself! As the Buddha said: Not easy is it, Bhikkhus, to find any being that, at some time in this long round of rebirths, has not been your mother, or father, or brother, or sister, or son, or daughter... Source: SN 15:14-19 Revengeful thoughts are mental acid! <...> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, .... Never take any Revenge! #99447 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 3:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] what day is it again? upasaka_howard Hi, Connie- In a message dated 7/22/2009 9:07:32 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, nichicon@... writes: hmm... that last was meant for a co-worker, sorry. connie ======================= Hunh! And here I thought it was avante garde poetry. It was actually one of the most interesting posts I've read in weeks! ;-)) With metta (and fondness for Dryer's). Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99448 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:23 pm Subject: On the contrary, Reply to Scott , Sarah, Jon . truth_aerator Dear Scott (Sarah, Jon and all interested) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding Asceticism: > > A: "Again you are making a questionable answer. I did not say that 'all ascetism' is good. No, it can be misused - especially if one has wrong views...All I am saying is that right view is important to have and to be secluded (at least some times and for certain results). Seclusion (or anything, bhavana included) should be done with right view. Even the best tool can be misused." > > Scott: Alex, you are speaking out of both sides of your mouth, >laddy. First of all, you've been shown ample sutta examples >demonstrating that the Buddha did not make seclusion a requirement You took some suttas out of context. Some people who have little defilements and have strong faculties of (faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom, etc) may no longer need seclusion. Unfortunately not all of us fit the above description. I am not a mind-reader, maybe this board is filled with closet-Arahants or Anagami. >and that it is not seclusion per se but the consciousness and mental >factors that matter. I agree with the above. However not all people can do satipatthana when there is distraction around. If you can do it, great Scott! On many occasions the Buddha has said: "Bhikkhus, I do not know of a form that captivates the mind of man as that of woman. The form of a woman indeed captivates the mind of a man. " [replace the sight with other sense organs as well and the same applies to women - just reverse] AN1.1 "[5] And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by avoiding? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, avoids a wild elephant, a wild horse, a wild bull, a wild dog, a snake, a stump, a bramble patch, a chasm, a cliff, a cesspool, an open sewer. Reflecting appropriately, he avoids sitting in the sorts of unsuitable seats, wandering to the sorts of unsuitable habitats, and associating with the sorts of bad friends that would make his knowledgeable friends in the holy life suspect him of evil conduct. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to avoid these things do not arise for him when he avoids them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by avoiding. http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/002-sabbasava-\ sutta-e2.html >All this should allow you to stand down on this constant focus on >seclusion. You should be able to stop using this as an argument >since it has been refuted: Literal seclusion is not relevant for >satipa.t.thaana. It is relevant for the taints (asava) to be abandoned by avoiding. MN2. MN2 lists taints that are abandoned by seeing, restraining, using, tolerating, avoiding, destroying, & developing. We have a difference of opinion: I don't believe that easily acceptable mindfulness, where everything, everything goes, is suitable for many people. If it works for you, great! There are different levels of sati and not all people can progress to arianhood using weak, pre-jhanic, sati. Sati is present in ALL jhanas and first 3 immaterial states. The sati in and post Jhana is much stronger sati. > The Buddha did not teach that asceticism would, like some tool, >decrease the strength of defilements like lust either, by the by and >as an aside. But this is not the main concern at the moment. Some asavas are abandoned by restraining, avoiding and destroying, MN#2. If you are a flower, or an Angel, with little hindrances and well-developed faculties, then it is not for you. You are probably and Arhat by now and stand head and shoulders above venerable monks such as Mahasi Sayadaw, Ajahn Chah and others. N8P arises due to impersonal causes & conditions and cannot be willed to arise. This post was written due to certain causes & conditions. No Self is, or ever was, involved. > Above you seem to persist in suggesting that 'seclusion' or >'bhavana' can be 'misused' It can be. Buddha praised SAMMA-Samadhi and went against miccha-samadhi. Samadhi does arise due to causes and conditions. No one can will it to arise. I cannot will it to arise. It is anatta and happens when causes and conditions are right. Same with wisdom. It happens due to causes and conditions and not due to any Self. Whenever Buddhism (or any religion) became more widespread and fashionable, there is an unfortunate tendency to make it more acceptable, more accommodating to the people, more "relevant" to the modern times and the preferences that people may have. Buddh-ism is no exception. Some authors and schools teach that Awakening is nothing more than passive submission to the way things appear to be (or read in a book) rather than "as they truly are", seen ONLY after Samadhi. Upanisa Sutta. Or that unconditioned is merely easy accessible momentary mindfulness-in-daily life where everything, everything (surfing, sight seeing, travel, strip clubs) is acceptable (especially when done 'mindfully'). Or that ascetism is merely a mental seclusion that one may have as one indulges in sensuality. People cheerfully point out certain passages showing how hard work is not needed and avoid seeing the hard part. In some circles, and over time, more and more of the Buddha's teaching become merely pop-psychology (like CBT) which is easily acceptable, welcomed by the masses, and doesn't require hard work or sacrifice. Doing hard work at letting go off one's attachment is seen as "Its just the Ego, the Self doing" while indulging in sense-pleasures is seen as alright. In one of the suttas, one of the conditions of downfall of Buddha's teaching is lack of respect for Samadhi, the only thing that can lead to yathabhutananadassana (Upanisa Sutta). It has turned in some form of "opium for the people" where anything goes, anything, just do it mindfully and be mindful of nama-rupa arising. No need to destroy any kind of experience. == "[6] And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence. Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will ... Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of cruelty... Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate arisen evil, unskillful mental qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to destroy these things do not arise for him when he destroys them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/002-sabbasava-\ sutta-e2.html ======= ""And who is the individual who goes against the flow? There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.005.than.html ===== N8P is against indulging in sensuality (of the senses): "There is devotion to indulgence of pleasure in the objects of sensual desire, which is inferior, low, vulgar, ignoble, and leads to no good;" SN 56.11 where in DN29 the Buddha has said that it is good to indulge in noble & blameless non-sensual happiness, Jhana (as opposed to sensuality), which can lead to stream and higher. ======= >I think you believe in a person's ability to control dhammaa. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. To repeat myself "No one can control any dhamma - neither Samatha nor Vipassana is under control of non-existent Self". You are either deliberately twisting what I have said prior (you are the one coming up with suggestion of controlling dhammas. I haven't been saying it. You were the one saying it, Scott) or you haven't read my posts - or you are simply not understanding what I am saying. In the latter case, I will not be surprised if this post (as many others of mine) will mis-understand and slandered by saying that "Alex thinks that there is a Self that can control things". Conditions, conditions... Nothing can be done about that. Either person has understanding or not. Either there will be development of understanding (due to causes & conditions) or not. Even Buddha couldn't awaken others by His own power. He shows the way. You can bring a horse to the water, but even 100 people will not make horse drink. ... With metta, Alex #99449 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:35 pm Subject: Re: On the contrary, Reply to Scott , Sarah, Jon . scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding Asceticism: A: "You took some suttas out of context..." Scott: Sorry, Alex. I stopped here. Thanks for the discussion. Sincerely, Scott. #99450 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "I've read your reply and appreciate it. Still, it is unclear exactly what (in precise, Abhidhammic terms) that 'samadhi' is intended to be." Scott: Thanks and that's okay. I'm not sure why you would want to suggest that cittassa ekaggataa does not arise with every moment of consciousness, as shown by the Abhidhamma method. H: "What thoughts do you have on Dan & my recent back-and-forth on this?" Scott: He's less wrong than you. ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #99451 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:43 pm Subject: Re: On the contrary, Reply to Scott , Sarah, Jon . truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding Asceticism: > > A: "You took some suttas out of context..." > > Scott: Sorry, Alex. I stopped here. Thanks for the discussion. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > And you took some of my statements out of context. Please read the other part of the post and maybe, if the conditons are right, certain understanding will arise. All things (panna, samadhi, vipassana, satipatthana, etc etc included) arise due to causes & conditions and all things are conditioned. There isn't Atta that has full mastery over things. I haven't stated that one can control the arising of panna, effort, or samatha. Only the impersonal conditions can be set. WM, Alex #99452 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika truth_aerator Hi Scott, Howard and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Howard, > > Regarding: > > H: "I've read your reply and appreciate it. Still, it is unclear exactly what (in precise, Abhidhammic terms) that 'samadhi' is intended to be." > > Scott: Thanks and that's okay. I'm not sure why you would want to suggest that cittassa ekaggataa does not arise with every moment of consciousness, as shown by the Abhidhamma method. > "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born from withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of composure, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. With the fading of rapture, he remains equanimous, mindful, & alert, and senses pleasure with the body. He enters & remains in the third jhana, of which the Noble Ones declare, 'Equanimous & mindful, he has a pleasant abiding.' With the abandoning of pleasure & pain — as with the earlier disappearance of elation & distress — he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called right concentration." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html Whenever Buddhism (or any religion) became more widespread and fashionable, there is an unfortunate tendency to make it more acceptable, more accommodating to the people, more "relevant" to the modern times and the preferences & weaknesses that people may have. Buddh-ism is no exception. Some authors and schools teach that Awakening is nothing more than passive submission to the way things appear to be (or read in a book) rather than "as they truly are", seen ONLY after Samadhi. (Upanisa Sutta). Or that unconditioned is merely easy accessible momentary mindfulness-in-daily life where everything, everything (surfing, sight seeing, travel, strip clubs) is acceptable (especially when done 'mindfully'). Or that ascetism is merely a mental seclusion that one may have as one indulges in sensuality (all the sutta quotes about "seclusion, caves, trees, abandoned buildings and other secluded places" are avoided) WM, Alex #99453 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 7:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "Tipitaka: Neither nama nor rupa. The object of jhana is concept. Concept is not one of the dhammas and is not subject to rise and fall." Scott: Okay... D: "My take: Different cittas can have the SAME concept as object. The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly. Or, from an atomistic perspective, in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object." Scott: Creative. You don't agree with the Abhidhamma which considers cittassa ekaggataa to be a cetasika? And you think that naama somehow influences its object? Do you have any textual reference that can back up the claim? Sincerely, Scott. #99454 From: "Scott" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 8:00 pm Subject: Re: On the contrary, OMG scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "And you took some of my statements out of context." Scott: Alex, it is the lamest of debating ploys to claim that a sutta has been taken out of context. Now stop it. ;-) I don't think you discuss in good faith, at least not when you pull that sort of thing. Of course the suttas are in context. You already agreed with them anyway by the way, earlier, so you don't get to disqualify them now. Tch Tch. A: "Please read the other part of the post and maybe, if the conditons are right, certain understanding will arise." Scott: Please don't try to be my teacher, Alex, old bean. Do you actually mean that if conditions are right I'll see that you are correct? Seriously, man. ;-) A: "All things (panna, samadhi, vipassana, satipatthana, etc etc included) arise due to causes & conditions and all things are conditioned. There isn't Atta that has full mastery over things. I haven't stated that one can control the arising of panna, effort, or samatha. Only the impersonal conditions can be set." Scott: Here you go again. What do you mean by 'there isn't Atta that has full mastery over things'? 'Full mastery'? Explain that one, mister. You are fudging and you are equivocating. But no worry. I'm out of patience (again). I'll leave you to Sarah or someone else until I come back for like another five minutes of you. ;-) (Winky Guy, you are so cool.) Sincerely, Scott. #99455 From: "Alex" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 8:26 pm Subject: Re: On the contrary, OMG truth_aerator Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Regarding: > > A: "And you took some of my statements out of context." > >Scott: Alex, it is the lamest of debating ploys to claim that a >sutta >has been taken out of context. Now stop it. ;-) > > I don't think you discuss in good faith, at least not when you pull >that sort of thing. Please be mindful of your messages to me. The message doesn't show your intention to talk Dhamma, but to denigrate, slander and ridicule me. I'll pass this sort of 'discussion'. Alex #99456 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 4:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Dan) - In a message dated 7/22/2009 10:41:33 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "I've read your reply and appreciate it. Still, it is unclear exactly what (in precise, Abhidhammic terms) that 'samadhi' is intended to be." Scott: Thanks and that's okay. I'm not sure why you would want to suggest that cittassa ekaggataa does not arise with every moment of consciousness, as shown by the Abhidhamma method. H: "What thoughts do you have on Dan & my recent back-and-forth on this?" Scott: He's less wrong than you. ;-) ----------------------------------------- LOL! Commiserations to you, Dan! --------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99457 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Dear Scott, I'm not sure what you are getting at. Certainly the one-pointedness of the citta (cittassa ekaggataa) is a cetasika. And certainly nama conditions nama (citation: read Patthana, volumes 1-7). Are you just being cantankerous for cantankerousness' sake? With metta, Dan > D: "My take: Different cittas can have the SAME concept as object. The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly. Or, from an atomistic perspective, in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object." > > Scott: Creative. You don't agree with the Abhidhamma which considers cittassa ekaggataa to be a cetasika? And you think that naama somehow influences its object? Do you have any textual reference that can back up the claim? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #99458 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 9:38 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > > --> Yes, the meaning and nature of dhammas, in particular the tilakkhana. To my understanding, detailed intellectual understanding of lists of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, cittas, cetasikas, etc. is not part of the recipe for baking satipatthana. > > > > Dan > Dear dan what do you make of this quote: ""The "uninstructed worldling" (p40 of Mulapariyaya commentary translated by bhikku bodhi) "needs to be taught, because he possesses neither learning(agama) nor achievement. For he who possesses neither the learning running counter to the activity of conceiving because he has neglected to study, question, and discriminate the aggregates (khandhas), elements, sense bases (ayatanas) truths, law of conditionality and foundations of mindfulness etc , nor spiritual achievement because he has failed to achieve what should be achieved by practice is said to be 'uninstructed'" Robert #99459 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:21 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Hi Robert, At first glance, it looks like there are two kinds of instruction: (i) that geared toward study, and (ii) that geared toward practice. The "neither...nor..." construction reads like study *should* lead to intellectual achievement and practice *should* lead to spiritual achievement. One who has neither intellectual understanding nor spiritual understanding is "uninstructed." There is no suggestion that that spiritual achievement derives from or requires study and intellectual understanding of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. On the contrary, it seems to imply that there is a strong degree of independence between study and practice. I'll take a closer look at the passage and context (and Pali) as time allows. With mucho appreciation, Dan > what do you make of this quote: > > ""The "uninstructed worldling" (p40 of Mulapariyaya commentary translated by bhikku bodhi) "needs to be taught, because he possesses neither learning(agama) nor achievement. For he who possesses neither the learning running counter to the activity of conceiving because he has neglected to study, question, and discriminate the aggregates (khandhas), elements, sense bases (ayatanas) truths, law of conditionality and foundations of mindfulness etc , nor spiritual achievement because he has failed to achieve what should be achieved by practice is said to be 'uninstructed'" > Robert > #99460 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:28 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation rjkjp1 Dear Dan I think conceiving in the quote below is about the (mis)conceiving of things (as in the vipallasa, the papanca)and proper learning leads out of that. Robert that "For he who possesses neither the learning running counter to the activity of conceiving"" I dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hi Robert, > At first glance, it looks like there are two kinds of instruction: (i) that geared toward study, and (ii) that geared toward practice. The "neither...nor..." construction reads like study *should* lead to intellectual achievement and practice *should* lead to spiritual achievement. One who has neither intellectual understanding nor spiritual understanding is "uninstructed." There is no suggestion that that spiritual achievement derives from or requires study and intellectual understanding of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. On the contrary, it seems to imply that there is a strong degree of independence between study and practice. > > I'll take a closer look at the passage and context (and Pali) as time allows. > > With mucho appreciation, > > Dan > > > what do you make of this quote: > > > > ""The "uninstructed worldling" (p40 of Mulapariyaya commentary translated by bhikku bodhi) "needs to be taught, because he possesses neither learning(agama) nor achievement. For he who possesses neither the learning running counter to the activity of conceiving because he has neglected to study, question, and discriminate the aggregates (khandhas), elements, sense bases (ayatanas) truths, law of conditionality and foundations of mindfulness etc , nor spiritual achievement because he has failed to achieve what should be achieved by practice is said to be 'uninstructed'" > > Robert > > > #99461 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Dear Howard (and Scott), Scott: [Dan's] less wrong than you. ;-) H: LOL! Commiserations to you, Dan! --> Well, there you have it, Howard. I've always THOUGHT I was less wrong than you, but it's nice to have confirmation! -Dan #99462 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sun, 19/7/09, Alex wrote: > >A:When you sit down and close your eyes, you are temporarily relinquishing sights. When you sit in a place outside of smells and activity, you are relinquishing smells and things 'to do'. > .... >> S: And then of course you could relinquish food, so there was no >taste as well:) A:>Food is necessary for survival, but even here the Monks have rules to eat once or twice before noon. Entertainments and un-needed distractions are not needed and often are lust/hate/delusion producing distractions for non-ariyans (especially prior to Anagami stage - but then high level aryians probably wouldn't visit these places in the first place). .... S: The point of the sutta was that relinquishment is not a matter of avoiding certain foods or sights but of developing insight into the realities which arise such as pleasant feeling and attachment. The Buddha and his disciples were often given delicacies to eat and found themselves in the midst of large gatherings of various kinds, but attachment had been eradicated through the development of wisdom. .... >>S: From MN 36 Mahaasaccaka Sutta, ~Naa.namoli/ Bodhi transl: > > "....They take food once a day, once every two days...once every severn days, and so on up to once every fortnight; they dwell pursuing the practice of taking food at stated intervals." > > "But do they subsist on so little, Aggivessana? " > > "No, Master Gotama, sometimes they consume excellent hard food, eat excellent soft food, taste excellent delicacies, drink excellent drinks. Thereby they again regain their strength, fortify themselves, and become fat." > [S: the same could be said about when one opens ones eyes again and so on!] > ... A:>NO SARAH >Food sustain the body as is necessery for survival (in order tobve able to develop bhavana N8P). >Entertainments, shows, strip clubs, sight-seeings are not. .... S: Regardless, if one thinks that the Path is about avoidance of food, entertainment or anything else, it is not the Path taught by the Buddha. Why? Because there is no insight into present realities. It is the same wrong view. .... >>S: The Buddha says a little later: > > "What you have just spoken of as development of body, Aggivessana, is not development of body according to the Dhamma in the Noble One's Discipline. Since you do not know what development of body is, how could you know what development of mind is?...." > > "And how, Aggivessana, is one developed in body (bhaavitakaayo) and developed in mind (bhaavitacitto) ? Here Aggivessana, pleasant feeling arises in a well-taught noble disciple. Touched by that pleasant feeling, he does not lust after pleasure or continue to lust after pleasure. That pleasant feeling of his ceases. With the cessation of the pleasant feeling, painful feeling arises. Touched by that painful feeling, he does not sorrow, grieve, and lament, he does not weep beating his breast and become distraught. <....> ... A:> But this development in this case IS IN SECLUSION. Buddha and many monks striving for Arhatship didn't do it by spending time in kitchens, surfing, or doing un-needed things. .... S: IN SECLUSION in the highest sense of the word. What is the highest sense of 'seclusion' or viveka? Does it refer to the absence of kitchens and surfing or to the absence of defilements? Trying to emulate the imagined life-style of an arahat is not the way to eradicate attachment to sense objects. Remember Meghiya, the Buddha's attendant who saw a secluded mango grove which he considered perfect for living and meditating alone and for making an effort on the Path in spite of the Buddha's discouragement. Once there, he was overwhelmed by thoughts of sense-desire, ill-will and cruelty. When he returned, the Buddha said" "When liberation of heart is not fully mature , Meghiya, five things conduce to full maturity." These five in brief are: 1. The good friend 2. Morality. "seeing fear in sins even the size of an atom" 3. Talk concerned with the Dhamma and development of wholesome states 4. the 4 Right Efforts 5. Insight leading to the destruction of dukkha. The sutta can be found here, but a lot more helpful detail is in the commentary: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.4.01.irel.html Metta, Sarah ======== #99463 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: effort. Buddha quotes. Anatta sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sun, 19/7/09, Alex wrote: >> S: You often say that you accept and understand dhammas as anatta, so what exactly do you understand this "effort (that)MUST BE DONE in an active (and dare I say, conventional) sense" to be? How do you understand it to come about exactly? If you start using vague terms like 'meditation' in your answer, please spell out exactly what you are referring to in terms of dhammas that are anatta. ..... A:>Please explain your view on anatta. Do you view our situation ability to control to be like a rock falling down the mountain? In that case it would be pointless to talk about volition, effort, doing or even Kamma, since what intentional action (kamma), and effort can a rock do (to stop or accelerate the falling)? Note: considering, wise attention, reading, satipatthana IS DOING. .... S: Sorry, Alex....I might be slow here, but I don't see how your comments are answering my questions:-). You answer mine first, then I'll take a look at yours (preferably reposted) afterwards. Thanks in advance, Metta Sarah ====== #99464 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 3, no 8. sarahprocter... Hi Alex, >>S:....When satipatthana arises, there is no thought about the circumstances such as whether another situation would be preferable. Visible object is just visible object and there can be awareness of it anytime. As this awareness develops, there are no more doubts about the time and place of practice. > .... A:. Satipatthana development as outlined in the suttas, is best done in a seclusion, and best after Jhana, period. .... S: Let's just agree to disagree on what the suttas say on this. We could go on quoting suttas to each other for ever:-) .... >Otherwise even 7 years (if ever) may not be enough. ... S: Counting the time is bound to be with attachment....What about just understanding and being aware now for a moment? ... >I am sorry if you cannot understand that 1) There are different levels, degrees and strength of Sati & Samadhi. ... S: I've never disagreed with this. .... >Weak, ordinary sati to satipatthana is like trying to dig earth with a spoon. Super strong sati based on deep samadhi is like using a powerful excavator. What took you years (if ever) can take hours. Most likely that one spoon will break under the load, like an ordinary mind may eventually submit to the wise & sweet talking con-artists (hindrances) . .... S: If you try to develop deep samadhi first, it is bound to be micha samadhi, i.e. concentration with wrong understanding. Therefore the sati will be wrong too, as will the rest of the path. .... >2) That sustained (perhaps for many hours at a time) attention (sati or manasikara) on nama/rupa is much better than a momentary sati flip floping like a monkey from one branch to another. ... S: How long do you think that sati or manasikara can attend to a single nama or rupa for? Textual support would be interesting! .... >3) The more attention you have toward some singular thing, the less attention is available for other things. This is why full sustained attention toward one sense-door for long periods of time is much stronger and insightful than restless monkey jumping from one branch to another sort of dissipated "mindfulness" . ... S: So let's take the eye-door as an example. How long do you think there can be attention to a single visible object for? Again, I'd like to see your textual support, preferably with some of the Abhidhamma/commentary detail. Metta Sarah ======= #99465 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvinient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- On Sun, 19/7/09, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >Have a good journey to Australia and Fiji again. Must be rather heavy to you, all this traveling around. ... S: Many thanks for your good wishes. We do seem to be spending rather a lot of time jet-lagged these days:) Anyway, I managed to get into the freezing surf today with dolphins (though I didn't see them this time, even though others told me afterwards they were right by my side). Actually, it's a lovely rest here and very 'secluded':) Jon having to get back into work-mode, while I have a good chance to catch up with the list. We're looking forward to seeing you and Lodewijk in Bangkok in Feb. I was glad you encouraged Kevin. Perhaps Ken H or anyone else might consider the timing too. I know that Lukas will if he can. I had a brief note from him from Sweden thanking me for my comments on list and giving a date for his return (which I forget now). I hope Alberto's also checking out air-fares and possibilities. Metta Sarah ======= #99466 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:27 pm Subject: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 5, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, Then Nandaka said: “It is good, sisters, it is good. For it is thus, sisters, that by means of perfect intuitive wisdom this is seen by an ariyan disciple as it really is. It is, sisters, like the oil for lighting an oil- lamp which is impermanent and liable to alteration, and like the wick which is impermanent and liable to alteration, and like the flame which is impermanent and liable to alteration, and like the light which is impermanent and liable to alteration. If anyone, sisters, were to speak thus: ‘The oil for lighting this oil-lamp is impermanent and liable to alteration, and the wick…and the flame is impermanent and liable to alteration, but that which is the light– that is permanent, lasting, eternal, not liable to alteration’, speaking thus, sisters, would he be speaking rightly?” “No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? It is, revered sir, that if the oil for lighting this oil-lamp be impermanent and liable to alteration, and if the wick…and if the flame be impermanent and liable to alteration, all the more is the light impermanent and liable to alteration.” “Even so, sisters, if anyone should speak thus: ‘These six internal sense-fields are impermanent and liable to alteration, but whatever pleasure or pain or indifferent feeling I experience as a result of these six internal sense-fields, that is permanent, lasting, eternal, not liable to alteration.’ speaking thus, sisters, would he be speaking rightly?” “No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? As a result of this or that condition, revered sir, these or those feelings arise. From the stopping of this or that condition these or those feelings are stopped.” You wrote that awareness helps you to be less involved when unpleasant things happen. Sometimes there are conditions for sati and pańńĺ, but when feelings are intense we tend to take them for self, we find it very difficult to see them as only conditioned realities, only nĺma. Usually we are absorbed in what appears through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind, and we are forgetful of realities. At times we have to experience unpleasant objects through the senses. The other day someone hit me, meaning it as a joke. Feeling the impact of it was akusala vipĺka through the body-sense. Why did this have to happen to me? At such moments one may be upset and there is no awareness. Of course, I know why it happened: it was the result of akusala kamma, a deed committed in the past. Thus we see that everything we have to experience are only conditioned realities, and also our like or dislike of what happens and our feelings about it are only conditioned realities. Our attachment or our dislike are not vipĺka, they arise with akusala citta which is conditioned by our accumulated defilements. We had attachment and aversion in the past and therefore there are conditions for their arising today. There are different types of conditions which play their part in our life. ****** Nina. #99467 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] On Samadhi & the required intensity/duration sarahprocter... Hi Alex, #99331 --- On Sun, 19/7/09, Alex wrote: >All the stories about people achieving awakening when watching flame going out, or heron grabbing fish, or listening to the discourse, obviously were applicable to highly developed monks/nuns who had very developed 5 faculties (saddha, viriya, sati, samadhi, panna) by that time and needed only a very brief and precise guidance. ... S: True! ... >It is clear that we aren't as well endowed as them because many of us would have achieve arahatship 100 times. You can read Bahiya's instruction 10000x times and not even reach stream-entry. For all we know, Bahiya could have been doing something close to Buddhist Jhana for years until he met the Buddha and heard that story. .... S: You might be interested in this summary I wrote before in #24977: >We read in th Bahiya sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/udana/ud1-10.html that Bahiya became fully enlightened (an arahant) after hearing a few sentences from the Buddha on the nature of realities. His wisdom was such that it penetrated the 3 characteristics of anicca, dukkha and anatta and we may think that this is a relatively simple matter. In the commentary to this sutta (Ud-a), we read in fact about how Bahiya had first heard the Dhamma a hundred thousand kalpas in the past under the Buddha, Padumuttara and in that life had performed great meritorious deeds. He had â€gone forth’ under Buddha Kassapa and had lives in deva realms with â€morality completely fulfilled’. In fact he had spent one entire Buddha sasana in the devaloka. Even so, in the present life, when he became highly respected by people after he was shipwrecked and wandered around with only garments made from bark, he mistakenly assumed he was an arahant because he was treated as one. In fact he had not achieved any level of attainment at all and was completely misguided, deceiving those who supported him and paid him respect. It took a visit by Grat Brahma, a former deva companion and an anagami (non-returner)who took pity on him, to shock him to his senses. Great Brahma tells him: “You now, though being no arahant, roam about wearing the guise of a religious in the belief that you are an arahant. You Bahiya are certainly no arahant. Renounce this evil resorting to views.” Hence, we see how even for those who have heard the Dhamma from Buddhas, have had kalpas of rebirths as devas with wise companions, and have attained all jhanas, they can still succomb badly to wrong views about self if they haven’t reached the first stage of enlightenment. We read in the Ud-a about how the conceit of arahantship arose in him because of being used to â€wanting little, contentment and effacement’ for a long time and misjudging these states or because of having attained jhanas and therefore not experiencing defilements â€as a result of abandoning in the form of suppression’. In other words, wrong views about attainments as a result of not experiencing defilements for a long time can be very dangerous. Urged by Great Brahma, he went to see the Buddha. As we read in the sutta, it was only on a third occasion that the Buddha agreed to teach him the Dhamma. In the Ud-a, we read that he was rejected twice because the Buddha knew “the thrill of that joy is too powerful - even if he hears Dhamma he will not, as yet, be able to pierce it. So let him wait until balance and equanimity reasert themselves.” In order for Bahiya to be able to hear and fully comprehend the teachings from the Buddha, so many different conditions had to be in place, including the final meeting and listening to the Buddha himself. The Buddha fully comprehended these conditions and knew the time was ripe for Bahiya and so entered Savatthi in order that Bahiya would find him.< .... Metta Sarah ======== #99468 From: "Dan D." Date: Wed Jul 22, 2009 11:58 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Hi Robert, You're right. My reading was too quick. In context the passage does seem to imply that, like "practice", "study/question/discriminate" can run counter to conceiving to the point where the fetter of conceiving of self (sakayaditthi) is shattered (sotapattimagga and phala). But, still... D: There is no suggestion that that spiritual achievement derives from or requires [study/question/discrimination] of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. On the contrary, it seems to imply that there is a strong degree of independence between study and practice. Dan #99469 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristic of thinking sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Alex), --- On Tue, 14/7/09, kenhowardau wrote: >Quoting K Sujin, I have been saying that every word of the Buddha's teaching should be understood in terms of satipatthana. I haven't said "every word the Buddha *ever spoke*." ... S: So I'm not sure where the disagreement is.... We agree that all the teachings should/can be understood in terms of satipatthana, in terms of conditioned realities. However, as you also wrote to Ron (#99131), "If, however, a listener was not ready to hear about namas and rupas then there wasn't any point in talking about anatta. That was what happened in the sutta you are referring to. (Vacchagotta Sutta). Later, however, that listener was ready and was taught the truth." .... >Even so, now that you mention it, I can't imagine that the Buddha ever did speak for non-Dhamma-related purposes. Suppose, for example, that he asked Ananda to hand him his alms bowl; would that have been for purely mundane purposes? I doubt it. .... S: The Buddha knew that Ananda understood that in the ultimate sense there are only namas and rupas, no alms bowl. However, I'm sure he was also intending that Ananda would pass the bowl. Whether there was any deeper significance or not, we'd have to check in a commentary. It might have been an indication of his departure from a group who weren't interested in conditioned realities or something like that:). ... ------------ S: > It's like if we discuss a gift for a friend. We know from our studies that whilst having such a discussion that there are only conditioned dhammas and that whilst giving a gift there are only conditioned dhammas. That doesn't mean that the discussion about the gift is really to point to these conditioned dhammas, or does it? ------------ -- K:>Is that your best shot? :-) Sorry, I don't see how that has anything to do with it. ... S: It still seems relevant to me, but then back to the waves, crocs and whirlpools in the Catuma Sutta, MN 67: "Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus: â€Bhikkhus, four fears should be expected by one descending to water: What four? Fear of, waves, crocodiles, whirl pools and alligators. Bhikkhus, these four fears should be expected by one entering water. In the same manner four fears should be expected by a person leaving the household to become a homeless. What four?. The fear of waves, fear of crocodiles, fear of whirlpools and fear of alligators. <.....>Bhikkhus, fear of waves is a synonym for anger and aversion. <...>fear of crocodiles is synonym for, greed for food. <...>fear for whirlpools is a synonym for, the five strands of sensual pleasures. <....>fear for allegators is a synonym for women. In other words, fears and dangers even for the bhikkhus in the Buddha's order who don't enter the water. Temptations and lack of seclusion are always around the corner for lobha, dosa and moha! Metta Sarah ======== #99470 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:47 am Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation rjkjp1 Dear Dan It does seem to have the conotation of two different ways but perhaps that is the wording rather than the meaning.. Anyway you seem to agree that it suggests study is one of the ways to penetration which supports the pariyatti leading to patipatti leading to pativedha cycle . best robert In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hi Robert, > You're right. My reading was too quick. In context the passage does seem to imply that, like "practice", "study/question/discriminate" can run counter to conceiving to the point where the fetter of conceiving of self (sakayaditthi) is shattered (sotapattimagga and phala). > > But, still... > D: There is no suggestion that that spiritual achievement derives from or requires [study/question/discrimination] of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. On the contrary, it seems to imply that there is a strong degree of independence between study and practice. > > Dan > #99471 From: "Dr. Han Tun" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:51 am Subject: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Physical Phenomena (36) Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. Chapter 3. The Sense-Organs (Pasaada Ruupas): continuation. Questions and comments are welcome. ------------------------------ The "Atthasaalinii" (II, Book II, Ch III, 316) states that "the senses are not mixed." They each have their own characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause, and through each of them the appropriate object is experienced. The earsense can only receive sound, not visible object or flavour. Hearing can only experience sound through the ear-door. We are not used to considering each doorway separately since we are inclined to think of a person who coordinates all experiences. We are inclined to forget that a citta arises because of conditions, experiences one object just for a moment, and then falls away immediately. In order to help people to have right understanding of realities, the Buddha spoke time and again about each of the six doorways separately. He told people to "guard" the doorways in being mindful, because on account of what is experienced through these doorways many kinds of defilements tend to arise. We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (IV, Sa.laayatanavagga, Third Fifty, Ch 3, § 127, Bhaaradvaaja) that King Udena asked the venerable Bhaaradvaaja what the cause was that young monks could practise the righteous life in its fullness and perfection. Bhaaradvaaja spoke about the advice the Buddha gave to them, such as seeing the foulness of the body, and guarding the six doors. We read that Bhaaradvaaja said: "... It has been said, Mahaaraajah, by the Exalted One... : `Come, monks, do you abide watchful over the doors of the faculties. Seeing an object with the eye, be not misled by its outer view, nor by its lesser details. But since coveting and dejection, evil, unprofitable states, might overwhelm one who dwells with the faculty of the eye uncontrolled, do you apply yourselves to such control, set a guard over the faculty of the eye and attain control of it. Hearing a sound with the ear... with the nose smelling a scent... with the tongue tasting a savour... with the body contacting tangibles... with the mind cognizing mind-states... be you not misled by their outward appearance nor by their lesser details... attain control there- of....' " ---------------------------- Chapter 3. The Sense-Organs (Pasaada Ruupas) to be continued. with metta, Han #99472 From: han tun Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:57 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear All, I like the following passages from the book by Nina. [In order to help people to have right understanding of realities, the Buddha spoke time and again about each of the six doorways separately. He told people to *guard* the doorways in being mindful, because on account of what is experienced through these doorways many kinds of defilements tend to arise]. Han: Yes, it is very important for us to guard the doorways. But, how to do it? Nina quoted SN 35.127 Bhaaradvaaja sutta. Here also, I like the following passage from that sutta. [It has been said, Mahaaraajah, by the Exalted One: Come, monks, do you abide watchful over the doors of the faculties. Seeing an object with the eye, be not misled by its outer view (maa nimittaggaahino ahuvattha), nor by its lesser details (maanubya~njanuggaahino). But since coveting and dejection, evil, unprofitable states, might overwhelm one who dwells with the faculty of the eye uncontrolled, do you apply yourselves to such control (tassa sa.mvaraaya pa.tipajjatha), set a guard over the faculty of the eye (rakkhatha cakkhundriya.m) and attain control of it (cakkhundriye sa.mvara.m aapajjatha).] Han: The Pali words are inserted by me. Yes, it is a timely reminder for us to attain control of the faculties. Respectfully, Han #99473 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:11 am Subject: Re: On the contrary, OMG scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "All things (panna, samadhi, vipassana, satipatthana, etc etc included) arise due to causes & conditions and all things are conditioned. There isn't Atta that has full mastery over things. I haven't stated that one can control the arising of panna, effort, or samatha. Only the impersonal conditions can be set." Scott: Trying to stick to the facts, Alex, I'd be interested if you could address these statements. 1) You seem to suggest a belief in Atta with something less than 'full mastery over things.' 2) You seem to believe that 'impersonal conditions can be set.' Can you explain yourself? My thesis is that these views demonstrate a belief in self. Sincerely, Scott. #99474 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:22 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "I'm not sure what you are getting at. Certainly the one-pointedness of the citta (cittassa ekaggataa) is a cetasika. And certainly nama conditions nama (citation: read Patthana, volumes 1-7). Are you just being cantankerous for cantankerousness' sake?" Scott: No Dan. I'm just cantankerous. Can we stick to the discussion? I was considering these statements: D: "My take: Different cittas can have the SAME concept as object. The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly. Or, from an atomistic perspective, in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object." Scott: I was hoping you could show where these ideas come from - and I was thinking something a little more specific than to refer me to the entire Pa.t.thaana. ;-) Ruupa arises and falls away at a rate slower than citta, for example, which can be applied to your first point. Was there anything else you were suggesting? In the second case, you are suggesting that cittassa ekaggataa, and in particular, this mental factor with a certain strength, is condition for subsequent citta 'with the same object.' Again, can you show some textual support? Sincerely, Scott. #99475 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Dan - In a message dated 7/23/2009 1:48:30 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: Dear Howard (and Scott), Scott: [Dan's] less wrong than you. ;-) H: LOL! Commiserations to you, Dan! --> Well, there you have it, Howard. I've always THOUGHT I was less wrong than you, but it's nice to have confirmation! --------------------------------------------- ;-)) ------------------------------------------ -Dan ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99476 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation upasaka_howard Hi, Dan (and Robert) - In a message dated 7/23/2009 2:59:20 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: Hi Robert, You're right. My reading was too quick. In context the passage does seem to imply that, like "practice", "study/question/discriminate" can run counter to conceiving to the point where the fetter of conceiving of self (sakayaditthi) is shattered (sotapattimagga and phala). But, still... D: There is no suggestion that that spiritual achievement derives from or requires [study/question/discrimination] of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc. On the contrary, it seems to imply that there is a strong degree of independence between study and practice. -------------------------------------------------- Where I think that practice is strongly dependent on study is where the study centers on instruction pertaining to 1) practice itself, including sila, guarding the senses and relinquishment, ongoing mindfulness, and (physically & mentally) secluded hindrance-suppression practice (a.k.a., meditation). and 2) the core, leaves-in-the-hand teachings on such as the 4NT, the tilakkhana, the tiratana, the three poisons, dependent origination, urgency, and disengagement (i.e., opening the clenched fist). ------------------------------------------------ Dan ============================= 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) #99477 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "My take: Different cittas can have the SAME concept as object. The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly. Or, from an atomistic perspective, in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object." Scott: From the CMA: "In six ways mind is condition for mind. In five ways mind is a condition for mind-and-matter. Again, mind is condition in one way for matter, and matter in one way for mind. In two ways concepts and mind-and-matter are a condition for mind. In nine ways the dyad - mind-and-matter - is a condition for mind-and-matter. Thus the relations are sixfold..." "In six ways mind is a condition for mind: Consciousness and mental factors that immediately cease are a condition for present consciousness and mental factors by way of proximity, contiguity, absence, and disappearance. Preceding javanas are a condition for subsequent javanas by way of repetition. Conascent consciousness and mental factors are a condition for one another by way of association..." (p. 307). "In two ways concepts and mind-and-matter are conditions for mind - namely by way of object and decisive support. Therein, object is sixfold as visible form, etc. But decisive support is threefold, namely, object decisive support proximity decisive support, and natural decisive support. Of them, the object itself, when it becomes prominent serves as object decisive support. Consciousness and mental factors that immediately cease, act as proximity decisive support/ The natural decisive support is of many kinds: states of lust, etc., states of faith, etc., pleasure, pain, individuals, food, season, lodgings - (all such things) internal and external, as the case may be, are conditions for wholesome states, etc. Kamma, too, is similarily a condition for its results," (p. 315). Scott: I'm not sure what this means: D: "...The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly..." Scott: I still consider ekaggataa to be a mental factor, not a term for a process. Sincerely, Scott. #99478 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard and Dan, Regarding: S: "[Dan's] less wrong than you. ;-) H: LOL! Commiserations to you, Dan! D: Well, there you have it, Howard. I've always THOUGHT I was less wrong than you, but it's nice to have confirmation!" Scott: Okay, stop it, you two. *I* was wrong: You're both actually very wrong and I'm totally right. End of story, now fall in line. No winky guy because then you'd just think I was just kidding around... Sincerely, Scott. #99479 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Dan) - In a message dated 7/23/2009 8:08:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard and Dan, Regarding: S: "[Dan's] less wrong than you. ;-) H: LOL! Commiserations to you, Dan! D: Well, there you have it, Howard. I've always THOUGHT I was less wrong than you, but it's nice to have confirmation!" Scott: Okay, stop it, you two. *I* was wrong: You're both actually very wrong and I'm totally right. End of story, now fall in line. No winky guy because then you'd just think I was just kidding around... Sincerely, Scott. ============================== ;-)) With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99480 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (36) nilovg Dear Han, thank you for your remarks with the Pali and your elaboration. I could add something. Op 23-jul-2009, om 11:57 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Seeing an object with the eye, be not misled by its outer view (maa > nimittaggaahino ahuvattha), nor by its lesser details > (maanubya~njanuggaahino). But since coveting and dejection, evil, > unprofitable states, might overwhelm one who dwells with the > faculty of the eye uncontrolled, do you apply yourselves to such > control (tassa sa.mvaraaya pa.tipajjatha), set a guard over the > faculty of the eye (rakkhatha cakkhundriya.m) and attain control of > it (cakkhundriye sa.mvara.m aapajjatha).] > > Han: The Pali words are inserted by me. > Yes, it is a timely reminder for us to attain control of the > faculties. ------ N: We may ask how to do this. The Buddha speaks about seeing visible object. Seeing is not paying attention to the outer appearance of something or the details. But our whole life we have been doing this. We have to listen and hear again and again that seeing is only the experience of visible object. We may gradually come to understand the difference between seeing and thinking. We learn that they are different realities with different characteristics. Before we had never heard about this. When we come to understand this thoroughly, there are conditions for mindfulness, direct awareness. This awareness, sati, sets control of the faculties. At first we think that a self can control, but slowly, slowly we can learn the truth. We learn that nobody can make sati arise, that it arises when there are the right conditions for it. ***** Nina. #99481 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation nilovg Dear Dan, Op 23-jul-2009, om 8:58 heeft Dan D. het volgende geschreven: > There is no suggestion that that spiritual achievement derives from > or requires [study/question/discrimination] of khandas, dhatus, > ayatanas, etc. On the contrary, it seems to imply that there is a > strong degree of independence between study and practice. ------ N: True, but how? We do not study just the lists or the khandhas in general, but just the reality appearing at this moment. If we understand that pariyatti pertains to the reality appearing at this very moment there is no doubt about the interdependence of study and practice. Nina. #99482 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 6:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvinient truth - Renunciation nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you for your note. Ann likes to come too. I wrote to Lukas, but no answer yet. Nina. Op 23-jul-2009, om 8:28 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > I had a brief note from him from Sweden thanking me for my comments > on list and giving a date for his return (which I forget now). #99483 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:05 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nilovg Dear Alex, Op 23-jul-2009, om 1:18 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > Good point. In any case I think that it is reckless to attribute > the concentration (samma-samadhi) as ekagata universal cetasika. ------- N: It is ekaggataa cetasika, but here (as sammaa samaadhi) it arises with sobhana (beautiful) citta. It is still the ekaggataa cetasika, but as said: many kinds, many levels. Cetasika and citta condition one another, and that is one of the reasons that there is such a great variety of them. ------- > > A: Samadhi isn't always present, but universal cetasika is. (What > about restless states of mind, do they have one-pointedness as well?) ------ N: Yes samaadhi or ekaggataa cetasika (synonyms) also accompany akusala citta, even with restlessness. It makes citta focus on the object that is experienced with restlessness. Then there is no sammaa samaadhi, obviously. -------- > > A: Furthermore > there is different levels of a same thing. There can be weak and > strong quality. While there can be one-pointedness of bad qualities > (such as lust) it is NOT the same as samma-samadhi. ------ N: Right, agreed. ------ Nina. #99484 From: han tun Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:08 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear Nina, > Nina: When we come to understand this thoroughly, there are conditions for mindfulness, direct awareness. This awareness, sati, sets control of the faculties. At first we think that a self can control, but slowly, slowly we can learn the truth. We learn that nobody can make sati arise, that it arises when there are the right conditions for it. Han: I know very well your views on no control. What I had written was nothing more than the text that you have quoted. Anyway, thank you very much for your elaboration. Respectfully, Han #99485 From: "abhidhammika" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:07 am Subject: Sarah Still Misunderstood Vanapattha Suttam: Re: More on Seclusion in Jungle abhidhammika Hello Sarah How are you? Thank you for making some effort to improve your understanding of Vanapattha Suttam. I did notice that your understanding has indeed improved somewhat in terms of including more facts from other Sections of the Suttam overlooked in your original post. Why you have overlooked those facts initially, you and only you would know. But, I was glad to see whatever improvements you have made, and to know that my critical reply was not totally fruitless. However, Sarah, you are not yet out of the wood. You wrote: "I don't know if you're suggesting there was some significant difference in the forests, Suan?" Suan replied: It was not me who was suggesting anything. It was the Buddha himself who was teaching us that there were significant differences among the forests. As I summarised previously: The forests in Section 191 and 192 are not conducive to the arising of sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi, and sammaadi.t.thi. But, the forests in Section 193 and 194 are conducive to the arising of sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi and sammaadi.t.thi. Now, the question we must face and try to answer is why two types of forests are not conducive to the arising of the Right Recollection, the Right Concentration and the Right View while the other two types of forests are. This same question applies to the scenarios described in Sections 195, 196, 197, and 198 as well. Sarah, you also wrote: "The point of the sutta as I understand it is that whether living in a forest, a village, a town, a city or with a particular person, with or without plentiful necessities, it is the development of satipatthana and the destruction of the taints that counts." Suan pointed out Sarah's omission of a mandatory fact: 1. anupa.t.thitaa ceva sati upa.t.thaati, 2. asamaahitańca cittam samaadhiyati, 3. aparikkhii.naa ca aasavaa parikkhayam gacchanti, 4. ananuppattańca anuttaram yogakkhemam anupaapu.naati The Buddha mentioned the above four purposes or requirements for the monks to accomplish when they choose where to live or who to remain with. The second purpose from the above mandatory four requirements is to make the distracted mind to become the mind with the Right Concentration. Sarah, you seemed to have overlooked the mandatory requirement of developing the Right Concentration when you indicated how you understood Vanapattha Suttam. Your this omission of a mandatory fact allowed me to reply that you still lack the Right Understanding about Vanapattha Suttam. Sarah also wrote: "That's why I said there was not much use in seclusion in the forest without the development of sati-sampaja~n~naa. The same would apply to the village, town, city, person or any other circumstance." Suan replied: Not so fast, Sarah. Before you drew any conclusion from this Suttam, you ought to make relevant effort to first have the Right Understanding about it. Sarah also claimed: "At the same time, physical seclusion, villages and cities are not given as conditions for enlightenment." Suan censured: First thing first, Sarah! First, please make sure that you come to have the Right Understanding of Vanapattha Suttam. To do that, you need to first relinquish your present existing Wrong View. Please repeat reading of the Suttam one or more times – without omitting any original fact. Then, in light of the newly acquired Right View, you would be in a better position to revise your present claims of personal opinion (attanomati). If you still do not make any progress toward the Right Understanding of Vanapattha Suttam, please let me know. Best wishes, Suan Lu Zaw www.bodhiology.org #99486 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Hi Howard, There is of course a need to hear and appreciate doctrine, but much of the dispensation consists of different ways to express or point to the same basic truths. The different pointers may be more helpful to one person at one time and another person at another. It shouldn't be necessary for one person to study formulation after formulation to progress. The lust for more and more reading is a danger: "If only I had time to read this and this and this, then I'd be happy and wise!" A good, working understanding of a small set of the teachings is more conducive to progress than great intellectual understanding of a wide array of suttas, abhidhamma, vinaya, attakhata, and tika. Also, the MA passage suggests that proper study itself conduces to progress. "Proper" necessarily excludes a lust for texts. It would be more like hearing a term or other simple formulation and testing it against experience, seeing how it fits--like a koan, not a intellectual game but a puzzle nonetheless. One puzzle package that has been helpful for me is: (1) cittas arise and pass away with great rapidity, and (2) citta takes a single object. Dan ------------------------------------------------------ H: Where I think that practice is strongly dependent on study is where the study centers on instruction pertaining to 1) practice itself, including sila, guarding the senses and relinquishment, ongoing mindfulness, and (physically & mentally) secluded hindrance-suppression practice (a.k.a., meditation). and 2) the core, leaves-in-the-hand teachings on such as the 4NT, the tilakkhana, the tiratana, the three poisons, dependent origination, urgency, and disengagement (i.e., opening the clenched fist). > ------------------------------------------------ > #99487 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:40 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Dear Scott, You ask... > Scott: I'm not sure what this means: > > D: "...The ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly..." > > Scott: I still consider ekaggataa to be a mental factor, not a term for a process. My meaning: "the ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly" is everyday language for "in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object." Dan #99488 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "My meaning: 'the ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly' is everyday language for 'in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object.'" Scott: Thanks, Dan, but you seem to be paraphrasing yourself. Are you referring to javana? In other words, what are you saying exactly and from a technical point of view? I think it is true that citta and cetasika arise together, take the same object, and then fall away. Are you suggesting that it is something about ekagattaa in particular that has an influence beyond this? What condition are you referring to? (See extracts from CMA I provided you earlier.) I know you hate to be fenced in but throw a guy a bone here... Sincerely, Scott. #99489 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Dear Scott, You raise some interesting questions, and I appreciate your persistence. I think there is something to be gained from studying conditional relations if we can move beyond the gotcha politics of fences and boxes and the like. Earlier, I wrote: "My meaning: 'the ekaggata of jhana just refers to cittas taking the same object repeatedly' is everyday language for 'in one citta the single-pointedness is so strong that it conditions the arising of a subsequent citta with the same object.'" You asked: Are you referring to javana? In other words, what are you saying exactly and from a technical point of view? --> From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya (condition 17 in the Patthana framework). In jhana paccaya the conditioning state "relates by making its associated states, the conditioned states, fix themselves firmly to pleasant and unpleasant objects just as it does" (U Narada, GCR, v. 1, p. 65). An analogy: It "is like a person who goes to the top of a tree or hill and not only sees for himself the pleasant and unpleasant objects down below but also tells them to those who are on the ground" (ibid.) Scott: I think it is true that citta and cetasika arise together, take the same object, and then fall away. Are you suggesting that it is something about ekagattaa in particular that has an influence beyond this? What condition are you referring to? --> Jhanacittassa ekaggata influences the downstream, conditioned jhanacittani via jhana paccaya as they fix themselves to objects in the same way that the conditioning citta does. The influence of jhanacittassa ekaggata on conditioned states is of course stronger than that of the generalized universal ekaggata. Again with appreciation, Dan #99490 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 12:51 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation truth_aerator Hello Dan, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hi Robert, > At first glance, it looks like there are two kinds of instruction: >(i) that geared toward study, and (ii) that geared toward practice. >The "neither...nor..." construction reads like study *should* lead >to intellectual achievement and practice *should* lead to spiritual >achievement. Why do these two contradict themselves? I believe that study IS important and practice can't be without study. I am against the attitude of "burn the books". However one shouldn't only focus on studying. The more proper the study (suttamaya panna) is the more material it gives for (cittamayapanna) and conditions Bhavanamayapanna. In Upanisa sutta we have an example of transcendental path confidence (saddha)-> joy (pamojja) -> rapture (piti) -> serenity (passadhi) -> happiness (sukha) -> Samadhi -> knowledge & vision of things as they truly are (yathabhutananadassana) -> disenchantment (Nibbida) -> dispassion (viraga) -> release (vimutti) -> knowledge of ending (asavakhaya nana) When one has enough confidence in what the Buddha teaches, the other factors develop on due to causes & conditions, one by one. or from a analysis of 5 faculties: When there is strong enough faith or confidence (saddha), effort will arise. Only when there is strong enough effort (viriya), mindfulness will become continuous. Only when mindfulness (sati) is continuous, Samadhi is established. Only when tranquil one pointedness of mind is established (samadhi), you will start understanding things as they trully are (as opposed to the way they seem to be). When you start understanding things as they are (panna), faith & confidence will grow stronger. So effort & meditation are conditioned and flow out from understanding (first of Saddha level, then due to yathabhuta/panna) At first one believes in beautiful results that came from the practice, then as it is witnessed and belief becomes more unshakeble, other factors flow out. Of course pariyatti (study) is indispensible condition for patipatti (practice) and pativedha (realization). IMHO. With metta, Alex #99491 From: "Scott" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "You raise some interesting questions, and I appreciate your persistence. I think there is something to be gained from studying conditional relations if we can move beyond the gotcha politics of fences and boxes and the like." Scott: Thanks for the meta-communication. I'm into that these days. No need to sell me on The Ocean, Dan. I'm into that too. I only have the two volume PTS translation - you must have the Paa.li edition, if its in seven volumes. ;-) If you can move beyond the 'gotcha politics of fences and boxes and the like' more power to you. I just like straight answers. Which, I'm happy to see, is what follows. Cool. D: "...From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya (condition 17 in the Patthana framework)..." Scott: I like the chance to study this. I'll get back to you tomorrow after I have some time to look over the texts. Sincerely, Scott. #99492 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation truth_aerator Hi Sarah, and all interested, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Alex, > > --- On Sun, 19/7/09, Alex wrote: > > >A:When you sit down and close your eyes, you are temporarily relinquishing sights. When you sit in a place outside of smells and activity, you are relinquishing smells and things 'to do'. > > .... > >> S: And then of course you could relinquish food, so there was no >taste as well:) > > A:>Food is necessary for survival, but even here the Monks have rules to eat once or twice before noon. > > Entertainments and un-needed distractions are not needed and often are lust/hate/delusion producing distractions for non-ariyans (especially prior to Anagami stage - but then high level aryians probably wouldn't visit these places in the first place). > .... > S: The point of the sutta was that relinquishment is not a matter >of avoiding certain foods or sights but of developing insight into >the realities which arise such as pleasant feeling and attachment. IMHO the more insight into craving & its drawbacks one has, the less likely is one to engage in them. First there is intention, then there is action. A person may crave for sights, and that craving is a necessary cause to go to the movies, for example. if the person craves for flavours (ex: potato chips) and they are available, then that craving will cause the arms to stretch and eating to occur. When one has no craving or intention for something, no physical action results. >S: The Buddha and his disciples were often given delicacies to eat >and found themselves in the midst of large gatherings of various >kinds, but attachment had been eradicated through the development of >wisdom. True. But this doesn't mean that anything goes as long as you do it "mindfully and without craving". IMHO going to see the shows and other un-necessery places & events IS manifestation of CRAVING that causes the intention to go and visit those places. First there is intention, then there is physical action. > > >>S: From MN 36 Mahaasaccaka Sutta, ~Naa.namoli/ Bodhi transl: > > > > "....They take food once a day, once every two days...once every severn days, and so on up to once every fortnight; they dwell pursuing the practice of taking food at stated intervals." > > > > "But do they subsist on so little, Aggivessana? " > > > > "No, Master Gotama, sometimes they consume excellent hard food, eat excellent soft food, taste excellent delicacies, drink excellent drinks. Thereby they again regain their strength, fortify themselves, and become fat." > > [S: the same could be said about when one opens ones eyes again and so on!] > > > ... > A:>NO SARAH > > >Food sustain the body as is necessery for survival (in order tobve able to develop bhavana N8P). > > >Entertainments, shows, strip clubs, sight-seeings are not. > .... > S: Regardless, if one thinks that the Path is about avoidance of food, entertainment or anything else, it is not the Path taught by the Buddha. Why? Because there is no insight into present realities. It is the same wrong view. > .... The "avoidance" is due to realization that those are expression of craving, and that craving leads to more unsatisfaction (and obstructs the N8P). Intention is crucial! I am NOT teaching rites & rituals. I am talking about developing wisdom, which will serve as a condition for path factors to emerge. > A:> But this development in this case IS IN SECLUSION. Buddha and >many monks striving for Arhatship didn't do it by spending time in >kitchens, surfing, or doing un-needed things. > .... >S: IN SECLUSION in the highest sense of the word. What is the >highest sense of 'seclusion' or viveka? Does it refer to the absence >of kitchens and surfing or to the absence of defilements? >>> When defilements are absent, one will NOT have any desire or intention to surf, go the the movies and so on and so forth. >Trying to emulate the imagined life-style of an arahat is not the >way to eradicate attachment to sense objects. One emulates the removal of craving (as much as it can be done). See the suttas on Uposatha observance, in example. > > Remember Meghiya, the Buddha's attendant who saw a secluded mango grove which he considered perfect for living and meditating alone and for making an effort on the Path in spite of the Buddha's discouragement. Once there, he was overwhelmed by thoughts of sense-desire, ill-will and cruelty. When he returned, the Buddha said" > > "When liberation of heart is not fully mature , > Meghiya, five things conduce to full maturity." > > These five in brief are: > > 1. The good friend > 2. Morality. > "seeing fear in sins even the size of an atom" > 3. Talk concerned with the Dhamma and development of wholesome states > 4. the 4 Right Efforts > 5. Insight leading to the destruction of dukkha. > > The sutta can be found here, but a lot more helpful detail is in the commentary: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.4.01.irel.html > > Metta, > > Sarah > ======== > Smart choice, Sarah. But the above sutta should not be interpreted as "anything goes as long as you study". Note the 4 right efforts which are to make wholesome states to arise "And what, monks, is right effort? (i) There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (ii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the abandonment of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen. (iii) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen. (iv) He generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen: This, monks, is called right effort. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html ==== Again, going to see the shows, or to 5 star restaurants to experience delicious food (even though food at home may be perfectly fine & healthy), etc etc is an example of craving. In the 4RE it has to be removed. IMHO. With metta, Alex #99493 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:38 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Hi Alex, You rightly questioned my statement: "At first glance, it looks like there are two kinds of instruction: (i) that geared toward study, and (ii) that geared toward practice. The 'neither...nor...' construction reads like study *should* lead to intellectual achievement and practice *should* lead to spiritual achievement." ...and asked: Why do these two contradict themselves? --> They don't. At first glance the section Robert quoted from MA (BB's Root of Existence, pp. 33-34) does seem to say that, but, as I discussed in my later response to Robert, on closer examination and taking in mind a larger swath of the commentary and sutta, it is saying that someone who has neither studied nor practiced (nor study/practiced) to the point of sotapattimagga and phala is an "uninstructed worldling." A: The more proper the study (suttamaya panna) is the more material it gives for (cittamayapanna) and conditions Bhavanamayapanna. --> Are you getting these right? In Vibh. (§768) cintamayapańńa comes first and defined as "...ability to apprehend states [that] is acquired without hearing from others" (Book of Analysis, p. 425). This is very different from "intellectual understanding of what is heard from others." Some teachers (e.g., Goenka) talk about a progression from sutamayapańńa to cintamayapańńa to bhavanamayapańńa, but I don't see it in the texts. Are they just making it up? A: In Upanisa sutta we have an example of transcendental path confidence (saddha)-> joy (pamojja) -> rapture (piti) -> serenity (passadhi) -> happiness (sukha) -> Samadhi -> knowledge & vision of things as they truly are (yathabhutananadassana) -> disenchantment (Nibbida) -> dispassion (viraga) -> release (vimutti) -> knowledge of ending (asavakhaya nana) --> But where does cintamayapańńa fit in? Vism (XIV, 14): "Understanding acquired without hearing from others is that consisting in what is reasonaed [cintamayapańńa] because it is deduced by one's own reasoning." We all come to the table with a certain degree of cintamayapańńa. If it is reasonably non-delusional, then Buddha's words sound sweet, so we come to your next statement... A: When one has enough confidence in what the Buddha teaches, the other factors develop on due to causes & conditions, one by one. --> Right. Dan #99494 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 1:57 pm Subject: satipatthana, time, change, truth_aerator Hi Sarah (and all) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Alex, > > >>S:....When satipatthana arises, there is no thought about the circumstances such as whether another situation would be preferable. Visible object is just visible object and there can be awareness of it anytime. As this awareness develops, there are no more doubts about the time and place of practice. > > > .... > A:. Satipatthana development as outlined in the suttas, is best done in a seclusion, and best after Jhana, period. > .... > S: Let's just agree to disagree on what the suttas say on this. We could go on quoting suttas to each other for ever:-) > .... ok. > >Otherwise even 7 years (if ever) may not be enough. > ... > S: Counting the time is bound to be with attachment....What about >just understanding and being aware now for a moment? > ... I understand where this is coming from, however I am against apathetic teaching of "whatever is, is. Let it happen, don't resist defilements". Well aimed intention is good. Desire for a new purse may be akusala, but desire for Arhatship is kusala (though it has to be abandoned just as it is about to happen). Passages such as "a day may be enough" could be one of the conditions that supports striving. > > >I am sorry if you cannot understand that > 1) There are different levels, degrees and strength of Sati & Samadhi. > ... > S: I've never disagreed with this. > .... > >Weak, ordinary sati to satipatthana is like trying to dig earth with a spoon. Super strong sati based on deep samadhi is like using a powerful excavator. What took you years (if ever) can take hours. Most likely that one spoon will break under the load, like an ordinary mind may eventually submit to the wise & sweet talking con-artists (hindrances) . > .... > S: If you try to develop deep samadhi first, it is bound to be micha samadhi, i.e. concentration with wrong understanding. Therefore the sati will be wrong too, as will the rest of the path. > .... This is why I stress the importance of proper study. But not just only study . > >2) That sustained (perhaps for many hours at a time) attention (sati or manasikara) on nama/rupa is much better than a momentary sati flip floping like a monkey from one branch to another. > ... > S: How long do you think that sati or manasikara can attend to a single nama or rupa for? Textual support would be interesting! > .... > > >3) The more attention you have toward some singular thing, the less attention is available for other things. This is why full sustained attention toward one sense-door for long periods of time is much stronger and insightful than restless monkey jumping from one branch to another sort of dissipated "mindfulness" . > ... > S: So let's take the eye-door as an example. How long do you think there can be attention to a single visible object for? Again, I'd like to see your textual support, preferably with some of the Abhidhamma/commentary detail. > > Metta > > Sarah > ======= Impermanence doesn't have to mean that there are 100 trillion of rupas flashing by every and each second. The Buddha did say that the visible form can be seen remaining for years. In Mn111 there is teaching that every mind state not only arises & ceases - but stays. "Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided" "...known to him they remained..." There is no necessary hint that mind states have to always last 100 trillionth of a second (or some number like that). Why can't one state of consciousness in a deep state of meditation, be cognized for lets say, an hour? If unconscious gap of cessation of perception & feeling can last up to 7 days strait, why can't one single set of consciosness & cetasikas last in very deep aruppa samadhi ? Don't misinterpret me, change does happen, but it doesn't have to be continuous. Things are subject to change and will change, but they also ENDURE. This point may require a new thread. There is a lot to say about continuous vs discontinuous change. Of course we may conceptualize and make temporal divisions and say that this nano-second is not exactly the same as that nan-second. IMHO, With metta, Alex #99495 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:04 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation truth_aerator Hi Dan, Scott, Sarah and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > A: The more proper the study (suttamaya panna) is the more material it gives for (cittamayapanna) and conditions Bhavanamayapanna. > > --> Are you getting these right? In Vibh. (§768) cintamayapańńa comes first and defined as "...ability to apprehend states [that] is acquired without hearing from others" (Book of Analysis, p. 425). This is very different from "intellectual understanding of what is heard from others." Some teachers (e.g., Goenka) talk about a progression from sutamayapańńa to cintamayapańńa to bhavanamayapańńa, but I don't see it in the texts. Are they just making it up? > I've always heard that suttamayapanna = wisdom from hearing or reading cittamayapanna = wisdom from thinking of what one has read/heard. Bhavanamayapanna = wisdom from directly SEEING things. > A: In Upanisa sutta we have an example of transcendental path > confidence (saddha)-> joy (pamojja) -> rapture (piti) -> serenity (passadhi) -> happiness (sukha) -> Samadhi -> knowledge & vision of things as they truly are (yathabhutananadassana) -> disenchantment (Nibbida) -> dispassion (viraga) -> release (vimutti) -> knowledge of ending (asavakhaya nana) > > --> But where does cintamayapańńa fit in? > Saddha, for example. You heard the Buddha's teaching, you analyze it, understand its worthiness and the liberation it brings, as you do that joy arises, which conditions other factors that brings samadhi which conditions seeing things as they truly are. > Vism (XIV, 14): "Understanding acquired without hearing from others >is that consisting in what is reasonaed [cintamayapańńa] because it >is deduced by one's own reasoning." Yes this is right. Cittamayapanna is one's own reasoning. But reasoning is not unconditioned thing that Self does. It is fully conditioned by prior causes & conditions. One of the causes is learning gained from hearing others. It is like writers travelling around and talking to many people. They are gathering more data for their novel. All the words, ideas, relations, concepts, etc - are conditioned processes dependent on previous causes. It is delusion to think that "I" chose to right this. It is just the certain impersonal effects from certain impersonal causes. With metta, Alex #99496 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:09 pm Subject: Q. [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Alex, > Op 23-jul-2009, om 1:18 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > > Good point. In any case I think that it is reckless to attribute > > the concentration (samma-samadhi) as ekagata universal cetasika. > ------- > N: It is ekaggataa cetasika, but here (as sammaa samaadhi) it arises > with sobhana (beautiful) citta. It is still the ekaggataa cetasika, > but as said: many kinds, many levels. Cetasika and citta condition > one another, and that is one of the reasons that there is such a > great variety of them. > ------- > > > > A: Samadhi isn't always present, but universal cetasika is. (What > > about restless states of mind, do they have one-pointedness as well?) > ------ > N: Yes samaadhi or ekaggataa cetasika (synonyms) also accompany > akusala citta, even with restlessness. It makes citta focus on the > object that is experienced with restlessness. Then there is no sammaa > samaadhi, obviously. > -------- > > > > A: Furthermore > > there is different levels of a same thing. There can be weak and > > strong quality. While there can be one-pointedness of bad qualities > > (such as lust) it is NOT the same as samma-samadhi. > ------ > N: Right, agreed. > ------ > Nina. Dear Nina, Thank you very much for your reply. It is good that you understand that there are different levels of samadhi (there can be one-pointedness on unwholesome things or there can be samma-samadhi and of various strengths). With metta, Alex #99497 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:13 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Hi Alex, The first time I heard the words, I thought: "suttamayapańńa = knowledge from the suttas; cittamayapańńaa = knowledge from the cittas; and bhavanamayamayapańńa = knowledge from practice," but in the texts: "maya" is "produced by," and sutamayapańńa = suta (hearing) + maya + pańńa cintamayapańńa = cinta (thinking) + maya + pańńa bhavanamayapańńa = bhavana (development) + maya + pańńa -Dan #99498 From: "Alex" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:40 pm Subject: Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Hi Alex, > The first time I heard the words, I thought: "suttamayapańńa = knowledge from the suttas; cittamayapańńaa = knowledge from the cittas; and bhavanamayamayapańńa = knowledge from practice," but in the texts: > "maya" is "produced by," and > sutamayapańńa = suta (hearing) + maya + pańńa > cintamayapańńa = cinta (thinking) + maya + pańńa > bhavanamayapańńa = bhavana (development) + maya + pańńa > > -Dan > Hi Dan, I made a mistake it is cintamayapanna, not cittamayapanna. WM, Alex #99499 From: "Dan D." Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 8:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Hi Nina, D: strong degree of independence between study and practice. N: True, but how? We do not study just the lists or the khandhas in general, but just the reality appearing at this moment. --> Right. Intellectual understanding of lists of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, cetasikas, etc. is (not quite) useless, but discrimination of realities appearing at the present moment is bhavana. N: If we understand that pariyatti pertains to the reality appearing at this very moment there is no doubt about the interdependence of study and practice. --> Yes, if "pariyatti" is understood in that way, but that's not how it appears in the texts. -Dan #99500 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 2:58 pm Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika ksheri3 Hi Connie, GREAT OBSERVATION and CONNECTION. While it's known that I scan so quickly that I typically take that which has manifested itself "AFTERWORDS" but we have here a verifiable cognition of an act (all acts create and generate karma) which precedes my humor. ARe you making a joke better than my joke making me the "straightman"? I think not. The placement of your words and consciousness before my words and consciousness ESTABLISHES A REALITY upon which I can work with. PaLeaze, do not seperate MEDITATION from ACTION. Okay, the common Theravadan line is that acts or/and actions manifest karma, HOWEVER, IN MY RESEARCH, I HAVE FOUND THAT OF AN ELECTRICAL EQUIVALENCE AND/OR MAGNETIC EQUIVELENCE THEREFORE WE ARE DEALING WITH THE FALSE RATIONALIZATION OF KARMA AND IT'S APSECTS AS WELL AS IT'S MANIFESTATION. Yes, karma returns to the person that issued it. Yes that concept relates exclusively to the concept found in physics where force is issued it will travel around the world, or in a circular patern, and return to where it was manifested. But think of the potentials here that are held in physcal laws. Okay, this force can be issued, we should use/apply an extreme example of the force such as HATE. tHE THEORY OF KARMA is totally devoted to the purification of actions so that an ASPIRANT is without troubles and without mind-consuming BABBLES that MISS DIRECT the consciousness. Fine, lets place the 'vessel' or human body in a monestary or a cloisture, THAT STILL CANNOT AND DOES NOT RESTRAINT THE ELCTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY WHICH EXISTS BETWEEN THE MAGNETISM THAT A PERSON, INDIVIDUAL, GENERATES WHEN THEY ACT, and thus GENERATE KARMA. Sure, I admit that I have been howling on the issue that some Western Thelemites are constantly raising about this INSANITY CALLED "FREE WILL". THIS GETS INTO THAT DRUG DEPENDENT ALIESTER CROWLEY and his blind followers that have never ever bothered to research his words, his theories, and his acts. Oh, pardon me, I'm working on Yoga Nidra currently, in my own research, and I've found an excellect passage that would do you very well here: Pardon me I can only give you the address: http://www.swami.com/yoga-nidra.htm HOWEVER, the passage in that site I find beneficial to your/our problem is the post marked: "DISTORION OF YOGA NIDRA" While certainly he focuses upon the falsehoods and misdirections that are attributed to the benefits of achieving YOGA NIDRA he also clearly shows the problems that are EXISTANT today and with all yogas and most EASTERN PRACTICES. the post I offer is on the second page so it's very easily accessable. The post you offer, connie, is a post, IMO, that deals exclussively with the generation of karma: karma is viewed as a negative and therefore this person is suggesting a methodology which can assist the practitioner to avoid such problems that will occur when karma is generated. Thank you dear. It's goin' on! toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > In his Abhidhamma Studies, the venerable Nyanponika lists as fairly synonymous 'parallel factors': mental one-pointedness, faculty of concentration, power of concentration, path factors of concentration (right and wrong), calm, and undistractedness. He has drawn up a table showing which types of consciousnesses are associated with which parallel factors & says three degrees of intensity of 'concetration' are noticeable. The weakest being in the 17 types where mental one-pointedness occurs without the other parallels and it's definition is limited to "stablility" (.thiti). > #99501 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:06 pm Subject: Avoid all Stealing, Cheating & Fraud! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Neither Stealing nor Cheating, Taking only what is Given! Once in Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said this: What, householder friends, is the Dhamma explanation befitting to oneself? Here, householder friends, a Noble Disciple reflects thus: If someone were to take from me, what I have not given, that is, to commit theft, to steal, that would neither be pleasing, nor agreeable to me. If I were to take from whatever kind of another being, what he has not freely given, that is also to commit theft, to steal, that would neither be pleasing, nor agreeable to that other being either.... What is displeasing and disagreeable to me, is thus also displeasing and disagreeable to any other being too! How can I inflict upon another being, what is displeasing and disagreeable to myself? Having reflected repeatedly thus, then gradually: 1: One will carefully avoid all taking, what is not freely given... 2: One will persuade others also to abstain from all stealing and theft... 3: One will praise only accepting, what is freely and righteously given... In exactly this way is this good bodily behaviour purified in 3 respects!!! Comments: Cheating with valuables & scales, fraud, false insurance claims, swindling, tax evasion, and any illegitimate misappropriation of values is theft... DO NOT MAKE OTHERS SUFFER BY STEALING WHAT THEY CLING TO! The one who destroys life; The one who speaks false; The one who takes what is not given; The one who mates with the partner of another; The one who is addicted to drinking and drugging; Such one - even in this world - digs up his own root!!! Dhammapada 246-47 The one who never takes, what is not freely given, whether long or short, fine or foul, exquisite or repulsive, such one is a pure one. Dhammapada 409 <...> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta NikÄya. [V:354] section 55: SotÄpattisamyutta. Thread 7: To the people at the Bamboo gate... Have a nice clean and honest day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita, <...> Avoid all Stealing, Fraud & Cheating!!! #99502 From: "colette" Date: Thu Jul 23, 2009 4:43 pm Subject: Re: satipatthana, time, change, ksheri3 Hi Alex, KUDDOOS!, THANK YOU! APPLAUSE APPLAUSE leading to that standard call for ENCORE, ENCORE. <...> toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: <...> > Impermanence doesn't have to mean that there are 100 trillion of rupas flashing by every and each second. The Buddha did say that the visible form can be seen remaining for years. In Mn111 there is teaching that every mind state not only arises & ceases - but stays. > "Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided" > > "...known to him they remained..." > > There is no necessary hint that mind states have to always last 100 trillionth of a second (or some number like that). > > Why can't one state of consciousness in a deep state of meditation, be cognized for lets say, an hour? > > If unconscious gap of cessation of perception & feeling can last up to 7 days strait, why can't one single set of consciosness & cetasikas last in very deep aruppa samadhi ? > > > Don't misinterpret me, change does happen, but it doesn't have to be continuous. Things are subject to change and will change, but they also ENDURE. > > This point may require a new thread. There is a lot to say about continuous vs discontinuous change. > > > Of course we may conceptualize and make temporal divisions and say that this nano-second is not exactly the same as that nan-second. <...> #99503 From: "sprlrt" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:10 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika sprlrt Hi Dan (& Scott), > From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya (condition 17 in the Patthana framework). In jhana paccaya the conditioning state "relates by making its associated states, the conditioned states, fix themselves firmly to pleasant and unpleasant objects just as it does" (U Narada, GCR, v. 1, p. 65). The term associated, sampayutta, refers to (nŕma) dhammas arising (and falling away) together, at the same time, at the same place and sharing the same object. Previous dhammas don't associate with subsequent ones, jhana and others paccaya don't apply in this case. Here's also a quote from DhsA (the Expositor PTS p.190 on my ed.): "In the exposition of one-pointedness of mind [cittass'ekaggata, Dhs 11] it stands unshaken [thiti] in the object - this is 'stability'. The two following words are the same augmented by prepositions [santhiti, avatthiti]. Another explanation is: - It stands combining associated [sampayutta] states in the object - this is solidity. It stands having dived and entered into the object - this is 'steadfastness'. In the moral [kusala] portion four states [dhammas] dive into their object - to wit: faith, mindfulness, concentration, understanding [saddha, sati, samadhi, pa~n~na]. Hence faith has been said to be the downward plunge, mindfulness to be the non-floating, concentration to be the grounded stand and understanding to be the sounding penetration. And in the immoral [akusala] portion three states dive into the object - to wit: craving, opinionativiness and ignorance [tanha/lobha, ditthi, avijja/moha]. Hence they are called the down-plungers [or floods, ogha]. But one-pointedness of mind [ekaggata cetasika] is not strong enough to enter (in the immoral portion)." Alberto #99504 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:15 am Subject: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 5, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, Now I shall continue with the sutta. Further on we read that Nandaka said: “It is good, sisters, it is good. For it is thus, sisters, that by means of perfect intuitive wisdom this is seen by an ariyan disciple as it really is. It is, sisters, as if a clever cattle-butcher or a cattle-butcher’s apprentice, having killed a cow, should dissect the cow with a butcher’s sharp knife without spoiling the flesh within, without spoiling the outer hide, and with the butcher’s sharp knife should cut, should cut around, should cut all around whatever tendons, sinews and ligaments there are within; and having cut, cut around, cut all around and removed the outer hide and, having clothed that cow in that self-same hide again, should then speak thus: ‘This cow is conjoined with this hide as before.’ Speaking thus, sisters, would he be speaking rightly?” “No, revered sir. What is the reason for this? Although, revered sir, that clever cattle-butcher or cattle-butcher’s apprentice, having killed a cow…having clothed that cow in that self-same hide again, might then speak thus:’This cow is conjoined with this hide as before,’ yet that cow is not conjoined with that hide.” “I have made this simile for you, sisters, so as to illustrate the meaning. This is the meaning here: ‘the flesh within’ sisters, is a synonym for the six internal sense-fields.‘The outer hide’, sisters, is a synonym for the six external sense-fields.‘The tendons, sinews and ligaments within’, sisters, is a synonym for delight and attachment. ‘The butcher’s sharp knife’, sisters, is a synonym for the ariyan intuitive wisdom, the ariyan intuitive wisdom by which one cuts, cuts around, cuts all around the inner defilements, the inner fetters and the inner bonds.” After Nandaka had finished his sermon and the nuns had departed, the Buddha said to the monks: “...although these nuns were delighted with Nandaka’s teaching on Dhamma, their aspirations were not fulfilled.” We then read: Then the Lord addressed the venerable Nandaka, saying: “Well then, Nandaka, you may exhort these nuns with this same exhortation again tomorrow.” We read that after Nandaka had given the same sermon to the nuns for the second time the Buddha said: “…these nuns were delighted with Nandaka’s teaching on Dhamma and their aspirations were fulfilled. She who is the last nun [1] of these five hundred nuns is a stream-winner (sotĺpanna), not liable to the Downfall; she is assured, bound for self-awakening.” ------- 1. With the least attainment. --------- Nina. #99505 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: jhaana-condiiton, was: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nilovg Dear Dan, Op 23-jul-2009, om 22:22 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > D: "...From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana > factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state > relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya > (condition 17 in the Patthana framework)..." ------- N: I quote from my conditions: Thus, the jhaanafactors, including ekaggataa cetasika, condiiton the conascent naama dhammas by way of jhaana-condition. This condition does not pertain to a subsequent citta. ------- Nina. #99506 From: "Chew" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:44 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) chewsadhu Dear Dr Han and Nina, Han: I know very well your views on no control. Chew :Can you please elaborate more on this "no control"? Thanks and Sadhu. With respect, Chew #99507 From: han tun Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 2:57 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear Chew (Nina), Chew:Can you please elaborate more on this "no control"? Han: If you read again what Nina wrote you will understand what she meant by no control. If not, she can explain to you more about no control. > Nina: When we come to understand this thoroughly, there are conditions for mindfulness, direct awareness. This awareness, sati, sets control of the faculties. At first we think that a self can control, but slowly, slowly we can learn the truth. We learn that nobody can make sati arise, that it arises when there are the right conditions for it. Han: For me, I believe in control over my activities. For example, I meditate. I do meritorious deeds. I believe I can make the sati to arise, and so on. What I cannot control is the result of my activities. This is because I do not know what kusala and akusala deeds I had done in my previous lives. Nevertheless, It is my duty to do meritorious deeds to the best of my ability. It is my duty to guard the faculties, and so on. I do not care about the results. I do not care whether I will achieve anything or nothing in this life. That is my attitude. It may be very wrong. But I do not care. Respectfully, Han #99508 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 3:51 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya (condition 17 in the Patthana framework). In jhana paccaya the conditioning state 'relates by making its associated states, the conditioned states, fix themselves firmly to pleasant and unpleasant objects just as it does' (U Narada, GCR, v. 1, p. 65). An analogy: It 'is like a person who goes to the top of a tree or hill and not only sees for himself the pleasant and unpleasant objects down below but also tells them to those who are on the ground' (ibid.)" Scott: I see where Nina and Alberto have already mentioned to you what I had also considered. As I understand it, jhaana paccaya relates only to the moment. I think you are saying something more than is in the texts when you discuss 'downstream' factors. Other conditions are enumerated to cover the effect of a state on subsequent dhammaa. I like how jhaana paccaya shows the way in which all of the mental factors, not only one-pointedness, but applied thought, sustained thought, feeling, and rapture function together to hold, each according to its own characteristic function, citta to the object. I like thinking about how I wouldn't have finished this post were it not for these mental factors serving as conditioning states arising and falling away - jhaana-paccaya gets it done, even when robbing a bank, driving from point A to point B, etc. D: "Jhanacittassa ekaggata influences the downstream, conditioned jhanacittani via jhana paccaya as they fix themselves to objects in the same way that the conditioning citta does. The influence of jhanacittassa ekaggata on conditioned states is of course stronger than that of the generalized universal ekaggata." Scott: Can you elaborate on your idea that 'the influence of jhaanacittassa ekaggataa on conditioned states is of course stronger than that of the generalized universal ekaggataa?' I thought that jhaana-paccaya is as it in its entirety, as it were, is due to the presence and function of *all* the jhaana-factor cetasikas and that this combination was what makes the moment so - fixated in relation to the object. Dhammasa.nganii (and here I'm quoting from U Kwaw Khine's translation, p. 37): "11. What at that time is one-pointedness? That which at that time is stability of mind, steadfastness of mind, absorbed steadfastness of mind, unshakeableness, non-distraction, imperturbability, tranquility of mind, faculty of concentration, power of concentration, right concentration - this at that time is one-pointedness of mind." Do you think maybe it's the same dhamma, but developed such as it functions as faculty or power due to this development? Sincerely, Scott. #99509 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:27 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya (condition 17 in the Patthana framework). In jhana paccaya the conditioning state 'relates by making its associated states, the conditioned states, fix themselves firmly to pleasant and unpleasant objects just as it does' (U Narada, GCR, v. 1, p. 65)..." Scott: In the same section as above, U Narada notes: "These are the the jhaana factors, the ultimate realities of which are: applied thought, sustained thought, rapture, feeling, and one-pointedness of mind. (i) Applied thought has the characteristic of directing the mind straight towards the object it desires; (ii) sustained thought has the characteristic of taking the object repeatedly; (iii) rapture has the characteristic of interest in the object; (iv) feeling has the characteristic of experiencing the object. Although each of them carries out its own function, it is (v) one-pointedness of mind which has the characteristic of fixing the mind firmly on the object." Scott: Here I like how the combination of all the jhaana factors combine. As I sat on the porch waiting for the dog to do her business, visual object - conventionally a small spider on its web - became object of these factors and the natural and impersonal nature of the state seemed clear for an instant. A still, calm, interested series of moments. It reminded me that the jhaana-factors accompanying visible object differ from those accompanying, say sound, or taste, or mind-object in the sense that these only arise in relation to these specific objects. The one-pointedness of mind in relation to visible object cannot attend to sound at that moment. This would be for another moment, and another object. Sincerely, Scott. #99510 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N: "True, but how? We do not study just the lists or the khandhas in general, but just the reality appearing at this moment. If we understand that pariyatti pertains to the reality appearing at this very moment there is no doubt about the interdependence of study and practice." Scott: Here I might offer an example from everyday life, which I know you appreciate very much. I mentioned this small experience to Dan in another thread but I also thought of this thread - which is the point of offering the example, actually. Having been studying jhaana-paccaya yesterday, concepts and ideas after reading (all the while assisted by the very factors and condition I was studying), when the moment of absorption in visible object was noticed, and after the stillness fixedness of mind and the awareness of this had passed, and the thinking continued, I was able to think of how naturally the process moves between conventional 'study' (i.e. as in reading or hearing the Dhamma) and the true study, as in when sati arises and is aware of the characteristics of a moment, no matter how fleetingly. That I had read the Dhamma about the characteristic of a series of moments in which the jhaana-factors operate in relation to an object by jhaana-condition, the nature of the moment, as it was contemplated after it passed, was elaborated. These fleeting moments definitely confirm what you say above. Sincerely, Scott. #99511 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Dan) - In a message dated 7/24/2009 7:27:59 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "From a technical point of view, along with the other jhana factors, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is a conditioning state relating to subsequent conditioned states via jhana paccaya (condition 17 in the Patthana framework). In jhana paccaya the conditioning state 'relates by making its associated states, the conditioned states, fix themselves firmly to pleasant and unpleasant objects just as it does' (U Narada, GCR, v. 1, p. 65)..." Scott: In the same section as above, U Narada notes: "These are the the jhaana factors, the ultimate realities of which are: applied thought, sustained thought, rapture, feeling, and one-pointedness of mind. (i) Applied thought has the characteristic of directing the mind straight towards the object it desires; (ii) sustained thought has the characteristic of taking the object repeatedly; (iii) rapture has the characteristic of interest in the object; (iv) feeling has the characteristic of experiencing the object. Although each of them carries out its own function, it is (v) one-pointedness of mind which has the characteristic of fixing the mind firmly on the object." ----------------------------------------------- Here's what I wonder: What exactly does it mean for the mind to be fixed firmly on the object? Put in another way: What exactly is happening when the mind is NOT firmly fixed on the object? Is there a impulse to move away to a new object? ------------------------------------------------- Scott: Here I like how the combination of all the jhaana factors combine. As I sat on the porch waiting for the dog to do her business, visual object - conventionally a small spider on its web - became object of these factors and the natural and impersonal nature of the state seemed clear for an instant. A still, calm, interested series of moments. It reminded me that the jhaana-factors accompanying visible object differ from those accompanying, say sound, or taste, or mind-object in the sense that these only arise in relation to these specific objects. The one-pointedness of mind in relation to visible object cannot attend to sound at that moment. This would be for another moment, and another object. Sincerely, Scott ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99512 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Here's what I wonder: What exactly does it mean for the mind to be fixed firmly on the object? Put in another way: What exactly is happening when the mind is NOT firmly fixed on the object? Is there a impulse to move away to a new object?" Scott: At each moment the mind (citta) is firmly fixed on the object of that moment. There is never a moment of consciousness that does not have an object. One-pointedness of mind arises with each and every moment of consciousness. There is never a moment when the mind is not firmly fixed on an object. The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self. The object falls away as does mind and so no need to imagine an 'impulse to move away.' More self-view. Sincerely, Scott. #99513 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (36) nilovg Dear Han, Yes, I understand what you mean by control. Op 24-jul-2009, om 11:57 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Nevertheless, It is my duty to do meritorious deeds to the best of > my ability. It is my duty to guard the faculties, and so on. I do > not care about the results. I do not care whether I will achieve > anything or nothing in this life. ------- N: We agree on what our duties are, no problem. What about the different cittas arising because of their own conditions? I read in the Atthasaalini (Cittupaada, Analysis of Terms): By samaya is shown the concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result. The Expositor explains with regard to samaya as condition: In the same passage: It shows the extreme shortness of the time in the occurrence of kusala citta and it points out . It stresses that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: No contradiction. We remember that there are cittas accompanied by cetasikas arising because of conditions. Nina. #99514 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 6:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nilovg Dear Scott, Op 24-jul-2009, om 12:51 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > I like thinking about how I wouldn't have finished this post were > it not for these mental factors serving as conditioning states > arising and falling away - jhaana-paccaya gets it done, even when > robbing a bank, driving from point A to point B, etc. ------ N: Very true. U Narada in Guide to Conditional Relations (and you mentioned this in a post long ago), p. 65: Without jhaana-condition we could not even finish a sentence, write a post. Thank you for your example of study and practice that should go together. Difficult, though, to know the characteristic of ekaggataa cetasika. Something else, a silly question: what is winky? Wnky guy? You use it a lot, and it is not in my dictionary. Nina. #99515 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 8:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N:"...Something else, a silly question: what is winky? Wnky guy? You use it a lot, and it is not in my dictionary." Scott: This is Winky Guy: ;-) We use it when we don't want the reader to flip out or when we are angry but want to appear like we're not, or when we're being flippant - like I often am, and then I type ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #99516 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 9:15:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Here's what I wonder: What exactly does it mean for the mind to be fixed firmly on the object? Put in another way: What exactly is happening when the mind is NOT firmly fixed on the object? Is there a impulse to move away to a new object?" Scott: At each moment the mind (citta) is firmly fixed on the object of that moment. There is never a moment of consciousness that does not have an object. One-pointedness of mind arises with each and every moment of consciousness. There is never a moment when the mind is not firmly fixed on an object. -------------------------------------------- The point is with regard to "firmly". What would "loosely" be? ------------------------------------------- The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self. --------------------------------------------- Perhaps for you. Not for me. Impulses arise all the time. They are realities. ------------------------------------------- The object falls away as does mind and so no need to imagine an 'impulse to move away.' More self-view. ------------------------------------------ If you like to think so, enjoy! ---------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99517 From: "Dan D." Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Scott (and Howard), very quickly... Scottt: The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self. --> Nonsense! The arahat is not vegetable. And, Howard, you're right on the money with your question/explanation. More later. Dan #99518 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:14 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "The point is with regard to 'firmly. What would 'loosely' be?" Scott: There is no 'loosely.' The characteristic of one-pointedness of mind is 'firmly.' And this is each and every time it arises conascent with citta with each and every object. 'Loosely' would be a concept and just so much 'loose' thinking about things with out the mooring of knowing that every dhamma has its characteristic which doesn't vary. H: "Perhaps for you. Not for me. Impulses arise all the time. They are realities." Scott: Howard, am I going to have to use Winky Guy again? You asked me the question and you are getting my straight answere since I've already stated I'm not going to pussy-foot around you so you don't flip out. Which dhamma ('reality') is 'impulses?' Given that one-pointedness of mind arises with each and every moment of consciousness, even those one might loosely label as 'impulse,' these must also have the benefit of the characteristics of this particular universal cetasika. H: "If you like to think so, enjoy!" Scott: Now, Howard. You asked me the question, so I answered. Sorry if it upsets you. Sincerely, Scott. #99519 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:16 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "Nonsense! The arahat is not vegetable. And, Howard, you're right on the money with your question/explanation." Scott: Remember when I said that you and Howard are both wrong? Of course you two are going to agree. ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #99520 From: "Dan D." Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Howard, I guess I was wrong. The arahat IS a vegetable after all. Just ask Scott! -Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Dan, > > Regarding: > > D: "Nonsense! The arahat is not vegetable. And, Howard, you're right on the money with your question/explanation." > > Scott: Remember when I said that you and Howard are both wrong? Of course you two are going to agree. ;-) > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #99521 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 12:15:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "The point is with regard to 'firmly. What would 'loosely' be?" Scott: There is no 'loosely.' The characteristic of one-pointedness of mind is 'firmly.' And this is each and every time it arises conascent with citta with each and every object. 'Loosely' would be a concept and just so much 'loose' thinking about things with out the mooring of knowing that every dhamma has its characteristic which doesn't vary. H: "Perhaps for you. Not for me. Impulses arise all the time. They are realities." Scott: Howard, am I going to have to use Winky Guy again? You asked me the question and you are getting my straight answere since I've already stated I'm not going to pussy-foot around you so you don't flip out. Which dhamma ('reality') is 'impulses?' Given that one-pointedness of mind arises with each and every moment of consciousness, even those one might loosely label as 'impulse,' these must also have the benefit of the characteristics of this particular universal cetasika. H: "If you like to think so, enjoy!" Scott: Now, Howard. You asked me the question, so I answered. Sorry if it upsets you. ---------------------------------------------- My remark was with regard to your statement "The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self." That accusation of an assertion expressing an idea about self is a common ad hominem attack used by some folks in Buddhist disputation as a substitute for proper discussion. It gets used a lot on DSG, and I dislike it. What upsets me is polemic. --------------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ======================== With metta, Howard Kindness Trumps Cleverness /When I was young I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people./ (Abraham Joshua Heschel) #99522 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 5:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Dan (and Scott) - In a message dated 7/24/2009 12:39:19 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: Howard, I guess I was wrong. The arahat IS a vegetable after all. Just ask Scott! -Dan ============================== LOLOL! (To be self-serving and to preserve the humor, I'll just say nothing about negations of conjunctions! ;-) With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99523 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "My remark was with regard to your statement "The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self." That accusation of an assertion expressing an idea about self is a common ad hominem attack used by some folks in Buddhist disputation as a substitute for proper discussion. It gets used a lot on DSG, and I dislike it. What upsets me is polemic." Scott: Alright, Howard. More meta-communication. Fine. I think that disagreement is not always polemicism. I simply happen to disagree with you and I offer a reason. It simply happens to be how I see it. I think a thicker skin might help you, Howard, since a disagreement feels so quickly like an accusation or an 'ad hominem attack.' I have a good idea of how you view things and often disagree with it. I'll not pretend I do just so you'll not get upset. Show me, through reasoned discussion, how thinking about impulsivity or 'impulses' is not related to self-imbued pop-psychology. You know how I respond and should be used to it by now. I'm not out to cause you to flip out, as you've done again. You asked me an interesting question and I'm going about disagreeing with its premises. Sincerely, Scott. #99524 From: "Dan D." Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 10:35 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Dear Scott, Lobha and dosa are two "impulses" to move away from an object that betray an idea of self. But cetana, chanda, and adhimokkha are "impulses" that do not. Howard used "impulse" as a non-technical term to ask a good Dhamma question in a civil discussion. You write: "You asked me an interesting question and I'm going about disagreeing with its premises." --> The problem is that you didn't give careful consideration to what his premises are. Howard has been studying and practicing for a long time--decades, I believe. He knows about lobha and dosa and moha. Is the "impulse" he is talking about lobha/dosa/moha? I doubt it. Why not work with him to figure out what he is getting at instead of just assuming right off the bat that he's wrong? I too thought your knee-jerk response was polemical/political. I know that you've been struggling with this issue in your discussions. Be aware that it's been flaring up with intensity. -Dan #99525 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 7:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 12:53:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "My remark was with regard to your statement "The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self." That accusation of an assertion expressing an idea about self is a common ad hominem attack used by some folks in Buddhist disputation as a substitute for proper discussion. It gets used a lot on DSG, and I dislike it. What upsets me is polemic." Scott: Alright, Howard. More meta-communication. Fine. I think that disagreement is not always polemicism. I simply happen to disagree with you and I offer a reason. It simply happens to be how I see it. I think a thicker skin might help you, Howard, since a disagreement feels so quickly like an accusation or an 'ad hominem attack.' I have a good idea of how you view things and often disagree with it. I'll not pretend I do just so you'll not get upset. Show me, through reasoned discussion, how thinking about impulsivity or 'impulses' is not related to self-imbued pop-psychology. You know how I respond and should be used to it by now. I'm not out to cause you to flip out, as you've done again. You asked me an interesting question and I'm going about disagreeing with its premises. Sincerely, Scott. ============================== An impulse is a species of tanha. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99526 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "Lobha and dosa are two 'impulses' to move away from an object that betray an idea of self. But cetana, chanda, and adhimokkha are 'impulses' that do not." Scott: This is still rather unclearly worded. The characteristic of lobha cetasika is all about attachment, which seems to be more about moving towards an object than away from one. And yes, dosa seems to be about 'moving away from and object.' Other than that, I'm lost so far. You'll need to clarify this if you will. Even a moment of consciousness rooted in either lobha or dosa would arise, in relation to an object, and have the universal cetasika one-pointedness of mind arising consascently, performing its characteristic function as it does so. D: "Howard used 'impulse' as a non-technical term to ask a good Dhamma question in a civil discussion." Scott: Howard needs no interpreter that I'm aware of, Dan. If you, too, wish to engage in a bit of meta-communication, why not. Looks like a new fad. I think there's nothing wrong with straight-forward disagreement. Do you? D: "You write: 'You asked me an interesting question and I'm going about disagreeing with its premises. The problem is that you didn't give careful consideration to what his premises are. Howard has been studying and practicing for a long time--decades, I believe. He knows about lobha and dosa and moha. Is the 'impulse' he is talking about lobha/dosa/moha? I doubt it. Why not work with him to figure out what he is getting at instead of just assuming right off the bat that he's wrong?" Scott: Howard was given the opportunity to address the question, Dan. Having freaked out, he has been unable to do so. If you are offering your own opinions in the guise of speaking for Howard, why not simply leave sorting things out to Howard and I, stay out of it, and discuss things with me on your own and separate from Howard? I don't mind tag-team wrestling, but seriously... I have my way of discussing, as do you, and so why not just discuss? I certainly don't require an amateur counsellor to mediate my discussion with Howard. He asked me the question, and he knows how I respond to his views, since I've always done so. He and I differ and he knows that very well. I assume, if he comes to me, it is to discuss something. I start discussing with as clear a thesis statement I can make. D: "I too thought your knee-jerk response was polemical/political. I know that you've been struggling with this issue in your discussions. Be aware that it's been flaring up with intensity." Scott: I'm not really concerned about your Opinion in the matter, Dan. Do you wish me now to add my critique of your style, which I'm equally sure you are 'struggling with,' and suggest that it is condescending, sanctimonious, and patronizing? I'm sure that you have as little concern with my opinion in the matter as I have with yours so now we're even. Why not quit daydreaming about people and discuss Dhamma instead. Now, would you like to consider further any points of Dhamma with me? If so, feel free. I like to discuss Dhamma and you just get used to my style. If you've gotten over your need to meta-communicate with me, perhaps we can return to simple discussion of Dhamma. Sinerely, Scott. #99527 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "An impulse is a species of tanha." Scott: Okay, thanks. A little unpacking first, though. I take 'impulse' to be a conventional, non-Dhamma term. I take tanha to be a mental factor with specific characteristic and function. I don't know what it means for there to be 'a species' of any given mental factor. Any help here? I assume that you are loosely equating 'impulse' with 'tanha.' Sincerely, Scott. #99528 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Dan (and Scott) - In a message dated 7/24/2009 1:36:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, onco111@... writes: Dear Scott, Lobha and dosa are two "impulses" to move away from an object that betray an idea of self. But cetana, chanda, and adhimokkha are "impulses" that do not. ------------------------------------------------ Exactly. But there is a bit more to this "discussion issue." Scott had not written "An impulse to move away from an object is based on clinging to self," a claim that is often true, but as you point out, not always so. Had he done so I would have disagreed with him, because, as you point out, not all "desire" is corrupted by "self," but I would not have taken offense. He wrote instead "The idea of 'an impulse to move away from an object' is an idea about self," which asserts that the idea I presented (of concentration being an impulse) is an idea about self. I interpreted that, probably *incorrectly*, to mean that I was expressing atta-view. Scott, if I was wrong in understanding you to be accusing me of atta-view, and I now believe I *was* wrong, I apologize for my misreading of your intention. I do think you were overly intent on your position "winning" the day, though. Getting back to the issue, impulses are sudden instances of active "desire" which may be kusala, akusala, or morally neutral. They can be right, wrong, or functional. Much of everyday concentration is functional and technical, serving to sustain the "same" object enabling it to be cognized clearly. ---------------------------------------------------- Howard used "impulse" as a non-technical term to ask a good Dhamma question in a civil discussion. ------------------------------------------------- Thanks, Dan. However, the offense that I took was, I now believe, misplaced and based on misunderstanding of Scott's intention. --------------------------------------------------- You write: "You asked me an interesting question and I'm going about disagreeing with its premises." --> The problem is that you didn't give careful consideration to what his premises are. Howard has been studying and practicing for a long time--decades, I believe. He knows about lobha and dosa and moha. Is the "impulse" he is talking about lobha/dosa/moha? I doubt it. ------------------------------------------------- The impulse that I'm hypothesizing is the impulse for continued taking of the "same" dhamma (or idea) as object, and it is very often neutral and even without affective aspect. A rupa, for example, is said to last for *up to* 17 mind-moments, but it may continue as object for less than that. Moreover, similar rupas may then arise which may or may not be taken as object. I see concentration as being a mental operation that, with varying strength and effect, tends to maintain the same phenomenon as object for a longer rather than shorter time and tends to then turn attention to similar phenomena. There may be many conditions affecting the strength and character of such an impulse. Much of the time, concentration is not based on craving or aversion, but on selfless intention, to help someone in need, or to learn something useful like the Dhamma or just to "see" clearly, which is a good part of selfless concentration. (What is very brief in duration is difficult to perceive.) So many things may effect concentration: Interest of course (which may be a matter of self or a selfless matter of metta, for example), and distractions such as powerful rupas arising (loud sounds, bright lights), and, oppositely, the absence of distractions. Concentration clearly varies in strength, and so it seem to me that it must be something more than the fact of their being but one object at any time, for there is no variance in that. --------------------------------------------------- Why not work with him to figure out what he is getting at instead of just assuming right off the bat that he's wrong? I too thought your knee-jerk response was polemical/political. I know that you've been struggling with this issue in your discussions. Be aware that it's been flaring up with intensity. -Dan ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99529 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott (and Dan) - Scott, isn't this getting overly heated and unfriendly? You told me not to "flip out." I think that is good advice in general. With metta, Howard In a message dated 7/24/2009 3:04:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Dan, Regarding: D: "Lobha and dosa are two 'impulses' to move away from an object that betray an idea of self. But cetana, chanda, and adhimokkha are 'impulses' that do not." Scott: This is still rather unclearly worded. The characteristic of lobha cetasika is all about attachment, which seems to be more about moving towards an object than away from one. And yes, dosa seems to be about 'moving away from and object.' Other than that, I'm lost so far. You'll need to clarify this if you will. Even a moment of consciousness rooted in either lobha or dosa would arise, in relation to an object, and have the universal cetasika one-pointedness of mind arising consascently, performing its characteristic function as it does so. D: "Howard used 'impulse' as a non-technical term to ask a good Dhamma question in a civil discussion." Scott: Howard needs no interpreter that I'm aware of, Dan. If you, too, wish to engage in a bit of meta-communication, why not. Looks like a new fad. I think there's nothing wrong with straight-forward disagreement. Do you? D: "You write: 'You asked me an interesting question and I'm going about disagreeing with its premises. The problem is that you didn't give careful consideration to what his premises are. Howard has been studying and practicing for a long time--decades, I believe. He knows about lobha and dosa and moha. Is the 'impulse' he is talking about lobha/dosa/moha? I doubt it. Why not work with him to figure out what he is getting at instead of just assuming right off the bat that he's wrong?" Scott: Howard was given the opportunity to address the question, Dan. Having freaked out, he has been unable to do so. If you are offering your own opinions in the guise of speaking for Howard, why not simply leave sorting things out to Howard and I, stay out of it, and discuss things with me on your own and separate from Howard? I don't mind tag-team wrestling, but seriously... I have my way of discussing, as do you, and so why not just discuss? I certainly don't require an amateur counsellor to mediate my discussion with Howard. He asked me the question, and he knows how I respond to his views, since I've always done so. He and I differ and he knows that very well. I assume, if he comes to me, it is to discuss something. I start discussing with as clear a thesis statement I can make. D: "I too thought your knee-jerk response was polemical/political. I know that you've been struggling with this issue in your discussions. Be aware that it's been flaring up with intensity." Scott: I'm not really concerned about your Opinion in the matter, Dan. Do you wish me now to add my critique of your style, which I'm equally sure you are 'struggling with,' and suggest that it is condescending, sanctimonious, and patronizing? I'm sure that you have as little concern with my opinion in the matter as I have with yours so now we're even. Why not quit daydreaming about people and discuss Dhamma instead. Now, would you like to consider further any points of Dhamma with me? If so, feel free. I like to discuss Dhamma and you just get used to my style. If you've gotten over your need to meta-communicate with me, perhaps we can return to simple discussion of Dhamma. Sinerely, Scott. #99530 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 3:36:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "An impulse is a species of tanha." Scott: Okay, thanks. A little unpacking first, though. I take 'impulse' to be a conventional, non-Dhamma term. I take tanha to be a mental factor with specific characteristic and function. I don't know what it means for there to be 'a species' of any given mental factor. Any help here? I assume that you are loosely equating 'impulse' with 'tanha.' ------------------------------------------ A species of tanha. A post I wrote a couple minutes ago to Dan & you goes into this a bit more. ----------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ========================== With metta, Howard Kindness Trumps Cleverness /When I was young I admired clever people. Now that I am old, I admire kind people./ (Abraham Joshua Heschel) #99531 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "Scott, isn't this getting overly heated and unfriendly? You told me not to 'flip out.' I think that is good advice in general." Scott: No, it's fine, Howard. I'll wait to hear from Dan, so you can leave us to exchange opinions about how to discuss Dhamma. I'm considering the Dhamma discussion now. Sincerely, Scott. #99532 From: "Scott" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:56 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "An impulse is a species of tanha...A species of tanha. A post I wrote a couple minutes ago to Dan & you goes into this a bit more." Scott: I've dragged that bit back into our discussion so its easier to work with; (I've left out all of your attempts to interpret me so that we can go back to directly attempting to clarify the one with the other). I'll start with this bit, since the rest is very divergent, and will require much critique when compared and contrasted with known Abhidhamma: H: "The impulse that I'm hypothesizing is the impulse for continued taking of the 'same' dhamma (or idea) as object, and it is very often neutral and even without affective aspect..." Scott: So this is the 'species of tanha' to which you refer. You suggest that the characteristic of this species of tanha is 'to [want to continue] taking the same dhamma (or idea) as object.' You suggest that it arises either with upekkhaa ('neutral'?) or without being either pleasant, painful, or neither-pleasant-nor-painful ('without affective valence'?). Any clarifications thus far before I continue? Sincerely, Scott. #99533 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 4:57:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "An impulse is a species of tanha...A species of tanha. A post I wrote a couple minutes ago to Dan & you goes into this a bit more." Scott: I've dragged that bit back into our discussion so its easier to work with; (I've left out all of your attempts to interpret me so that we can go back to directly attempting to clarify the one with the other). I'll start with this bit, since the rest is very divergent, and will require much critique when compared and contrasted with known Abhidhamma: H: "The impulse that I'm hypothesizing is the impulse for continued taking of the 'same' dhamma (or idea) as object, and it is very often neutral and even without affective aspect..." Scott: So this is the 'species of tanha' to which you refer. ------------------------------------------------- Yes. I was using 'tanha' as a generic term. Perhaps 'chanda' would be better, as 'tanha' as it is used in D. O. is infected by ignorance, I am referring to a category more general than that, though that would be included. The impulse (or push) to stick with the same object may be defiled or not. When neutral and undefiled, it is purely functional, without emotion, and not atta-based. ---------------------------------------------- You suggest that the characteristic of this species of tanha is 'to [want to continue] taking the same dhamma (or idea) as object.' ---------------------------------------------- The use of 'want' is not always warranted. It is, in general, a "tending towards," and it *may* have no sense of a self involved at all. The Buddha had impulses to stand, to sit, to speak, to stick with things, and to let things go, always without any sense of self. Impulses (impulsions?) may be free of self. --------------------------------------------------- You suggest that it arises either with upekkhaa ('neutral'?) or without being either pleasant, painful, or neither-pleasant-nor-painful ('without affective valence'?). ----------------------------------------------- Mmm, not quite. It may be kusala, akusala, or neutral. And even in the neutral case, when IT is the object of consciousness, it will be experienced as pleasant, unpleasant, or neutral by vedana. --------------------------------------------- Any clarifications thus far before I continue? --------------------------------------------- Not more than I've given. In the previous post, though, I did say more. Are there things I said there that you would like to be further clarified? Also, I'd lie to ask you a question question: I had written "Concentration clearly varies in strength, and so it seem to me that it must be something more than the fact of there being but one object at any time, for there is no variance in that." Do you have any idea with regard to that? ---------------------------------------------- Sincerely, Scott. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99534 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 6:05:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Also, I'd lie to ask you a question question ... ========================= LOL! I guess that would be a meta-question! ;-) With meta-metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99535 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi again, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 6:33:44 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/24/2009 6:05:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, upasaka@... writes: Also, I'd lie to ask you a question question ... ========================= LOL! I guess that would be a meta-question! ;-) With meta-metta, Howard ================================ LOLOL! I actually MISSED my having written 'lie' instead of 'like'!! As I recall, you are a psychologist/therapist/psychiatrist? If so, you can have a Freudian field day with that! ;-)) With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) (Abraham Joshua Heschel) #99536 From: han tun Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:32 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear Nina, You are always very patient with me, and I admire and respect you for that. ---------- Nina: We agree on what our duties are, no problem. What about the different cittas arising because of their own conditions? I read in the Atthasaalini (Cittupaada, Analysis of Terms): By samaya is shown the concurrence of conditions, the mutual contribution towards the production of a common result. The Expositor explains with regard to samaya as condition: In the same passage: It shows the extreme shortness of the time in the occurrence of kusala citta and it points out . It stresses that advice has been given that we should have strenuousness and earnestness in pa.tivedha, realization of the truth, since this is very difficult: No contradiction. We remember that there are cittas accompanied by cetasikas arising because of conditions. ---------- Han: I do not have Atthasaalini, but I can easily agree with you that there are different cittas arising because of their own conditions. Here again, for me, it will be necessary to try to *control* the citta that has arisen, conditioned by whatever *condition* it may be. If it is akusala citta I would try to abandon it. If it is kusala citta I would try to develop it further. Whether I succeed in doing that is another matter. But it is my duty to try for the wholesome mental state. Since you have mentioned that there is no contradiction. I will not bother you any further, except to tell you that I always appreciate your kindness and patience. Respectfully, Han #99537 From: "Chew" Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 9:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (36) chewsadhu Dear Sister Nina and Dr Han, In conventional sense, we cannot deny to use the word "control". But we understand that there is no self to control on something. In ultimate sense, we understand that the rise and fall of nama and ruupa depend on conditions. With respect, Chew #99538 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sarah Still Misunderstood Vanapattha Suttam: Re: More on Seclusion in Jungle sarahprocter... Hi Suan, (Han, Alex & all), --- On Thu, 23/7/09, abhidhammika wrote: >You wrote: >"I don't know if you're suggesting there was some significant difference in the forests, Suan?" >Suan replied: >It was not me who was suggesting anything. It was the Buddha himself who was teaching us that there were significant differences among the forests. >As I summarised previously: >The forests in Section 191 and 192 are not conducive to the arising of sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi, and sammaadi.t.thi. >But, the forests in Section 193 and 194 are conducive to the arising of sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi and sammaadi.t.thi. >Now, the question we must face and try to answer is why two types of forests are not conducive to the arising of the Right Recollection, the Right Concentration and the Right View while the other two types of forests are. >This same question applies to the scenarios described in Sections 195, 196, 197, and 198 as well. ..... Sarah: So you'll also be suggesting that we need to determine why some villages or towns are also conducive to satipatthana while others are not. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter what kind of forests or what kinds of villages or towns we find ourselves in and I wouldn't waste any time in trying to work out what is an ideal forest, Suan! However, we can agree to disagree on the deep meaning of the sutta unless you have any text (with translation, please!) in support of this idea. As I wrote: "The point of the sutta, as I understand it, is that whether living in a forest, a village, a town, a city or with a particular person, with or without plentiful necessities, it is the development of satipatthana and the destruction of the taints that counts. That's why I said there was not much use in seclusion in the forest without the development of sati-sampaja~n~naa. The same would apply to the village, town, city, person or any other circumstance." >Suan pointed out Sarah's omission of a mandatory fact: 1. anupa.t.thitaa ceva sati upa.t.thaati, 2. asamaahitañca cittam samaadhiyati, 3. aparikkhii.naa ca aasavaa parikkhayam gacchanti, 4. ananuppattañca anuttaram yogakkhemam anupaapu.naati ..... Sarah: These are referring, I believe, to sati which becomes established, concentration attaineed, taints which become destroyed, and the previously unattained freedom from bondage as he is enlightened. .... Suan:> The Buddha mentioned the above four purposes or requirements for the monks to accomplish when they choose where to live or who to remain with. .... Sarah: I don't read him as having said this part about "when they choose where to live or who to remain with". With the development of sati-sampaja~n~na, whether it be the forest, village, city, with or without people, any place is ideal! Remember the MN sutta I quoted from recently (with the same metaphors which Han has been referring to)? Here is the one on the whirlpools, i.e. the sensual pleasures: http://www.vipassana.info/067-catuma-e1.htm "Bhikkhus, what is the fear for whirl pools? Bhikkhus, a certain son of a clansman out of faith goes forth from a household and becomes a homeless thinking I’m overcome by birth, decay, death, grief, lament, unpleasantness, displeasure and distress. He thinks there’s only a few who could declare the complete ending of this unpleasantness. He gone forth thus, putting on robes in the morning, takes bowl and robes and goes the alms round, in the village or hamlet controlled in body and speech, mindfulness not established and mental faculties not protected. In the village he sees a householder or the son of a householder partaking the five strands of sensual pleasures, possessed and provided with them. Then it occurs to him, when I was a householder, I too partook these five strands of sensual pleasures, possessed and provided. I have wealth in my clan, to enjoy these sensual pleasures. I could do merit, too. Then he gives up robes and becomes a layman. He gives up robes and becomes a layman out of fear for whirlpools, it is said. Bhikkhus, fear for whirlpool is a synonymn for, the five strands of sensual pleasures. " Suan, the problem is not the village or the householders he saw. The problem is always the underlying tendencies, the attachment not yet eradicated. This is the cause of Dukkha, not the village, householder, forest or anything else. I think that even Alex will agree with me here:-). Actually, Han & Alex, I'd be interested to hear your comments on this discussion. ..... Suan:> The second purpose from the above mandatory four requirements is to make the distracted mind to become the mind with the Right Concentration. Suan:>Sarah, you seemed to have overlooked the mandatory requirement of developing the Right Concentration when you indicated how you understood Vanapattha Suttam. ..... Sarah: There is no Right Concentration without the development of Right Understanding. While we have an idea of selecting forests rather than understanding realities at this moment, there will never be any development of Right Concentration of the Eightfold Path. Of that, I have no doubt. Thank you for your other comments. I'd like to encourage others to pursue this thread with you, such as Han, Alex, Scott or Connie, as I don't have texts with me. Metta, Sarah ========= #99539 From: han tun Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:32 am Subject: Re: Sarah Still Misunderstood Vanapattha Suttam: Re: More on Seclusion in Jungle hantun1 Dear Sarah, Suan and all, I read MN 17 Vanapattha Sutta for the first time when I saw my name in the post by Sarah. So my comments will be very superficial and may not touch the deep meaning of the sutta, and may not be of any use in the current discussions by the veteran members of the Group. In the sutta I find the following: A bhikkhu should depart from the jungle thicket, or from a certain village, or town, or city, or country, and should not continue following a person, if he comes across the following four shortcomings. 1. anupa.t.thitaa ceva sati na upa.t.thaati, (his unestablished mindfulness does not become established), 2. asamaahita~nca citta.m na samaadhiyati, (his unconcentrated mind does not become concentrated), 3. aparikkhii.naa ca aasavaa na parikkhaya.m gacchanti, (his undestroyed taints do not come to destruction), 4. ananuppatta~nca anuttara.m yogakkhema.m naanupaapu.naati. (he does not attain the unattained supreme security from bondage). A bhikkhu should continue to stay in the jungle thicket, or in a certain village, or town, or city, or country, and should continue following a person, if he could achieve the following four achievements. 1. anupa.t.thitaa ceva sati upa.t.thaati, (his unestablished mindfulness becomes established), 2. asamaahita~nca citta.m samaadhiyati, (his unconcentrated mind becomes concentrated), 3. aparikkhii.naa ca aasavaa parikkhaya.m gacchanti, (his undestroyed taints come to destruction), 4. ananuppatta~nca anuttara.m yogakkhema.m anupaapu.naati. (he attains the unattained supreme security from bondage). -------------------- Bhikkhu Nanamoli and Bhikkhu Bodhi mentioned in Notes 223, 224, The pattern on which paragraphs 3 to 6 are constructed may be stated simply as follows: No progress and requisites are scarce = depart; No progress and requisites are plentiful = depart; Progress and requisites are scarce = stay; Progress and requisites are plentiful = stay. The same pattern is applied in paragraphs 7 to 22 to village, town, city, and country. -------------------- Han: The Buddha did not mention the conditions in a particular place that are conducive to achieving the above four achievements. So it is difficult to tell which jungle thicket or a village is the place to stay or to depart. The bhikkhu will have to find out by himself the conditions prevailing in the particular place, and depart or stay depending on whether the prevailing conditions are conducive to achieving those four achievements or not. Thus, in these circumstances, when one cannot tell with confidence [at least I cannot tell] which conditions are conducive to achieving the above four achievements, I tend to agree with the comments made by Sarah: Quote: "The point of the sutta, as I understand it, is that whether living in a forest, a village, a town, a city or with a particular person, with or without plentiful necessities, it is the development of satipatthana and the destruction of the taints that counts. That's why I said there was not much use in seclusion in the forest without the development of sati-sampaja~n~naa. The same would apply to the village, town, city, person or any other circumstance." End Quote. Respectfully, Han #99540 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Also, I'd lie to ask you a question question..." H: "LOL! I guess that would be a meta-question! ;-)" H: "LOLOL! I actually MISSED my having written 'lie' instead of 'like'!! As I recall, you are a psychologist/therapist/psychiatrist? If so, you can have a Freudian field day with that! ;-))" Scott: Foisted on your own petard, Oedipus. You're on your own, but if you'd rather not discuss, I don't mind. ;-) Just do what you feel like. Now I'll look at some of your ideas bit by bit. H: "Yes. I was using 'tanha' as a generic term. Perhaps 'chanda' would be better...The impulse (or push) to stick with the same object may be defiled or not. When neutral and undefiled, it is purely functional, without emotion, and not atta-based." Scott: Alright, let's say 'chanda.' The term 'impulse' is not the best since it carries a lot of philosophical baggage, you know, speaking of the Freudian thing. I'll reiterate my position when discussing with you, Howard. I always recall that we differ essentially when it comes to the notion of control. I have read you to believe in no uncertain terms that it is possible to act with conscious 'intent', which you seem to equate and conflate with conventional descriptions of purely impersonal dhammaa arising due to purely impersonal conditions. In this way, for example, you have often argued in favour of an ability to cause to arise, by thinking about it, or by 'wishing it were so,' kusala states. This, to me, is thinking about self. If you don't consider 'impulse' or chanda in the same light please show me. That is, if you don't believe that the impersonal characteristic and function of chanda is identical to one's conscious thought-wish, it would be helpful for you to show this. You say, for example: H: "'The use of 'want' is not always warranted. It is, in general, a 'tending towards,' and it *may* have no sense of a self involved at all. The Buddha had impulses to stand, to sit, to speak, to stick with things, and to let things go, always without any sense of self. Impulses (impulsions?) may be free of self." Scott: If you could clearly show that you don't believe that you or I can 'wish-to-do' and then do it, that would be cool. Chanda is known as one of the 'Particular' cetasikas, and doesn't arise with every citta. As you say, chanda is ethically variable ('It may be kusala, akusala, or neutral'). Atthasaalinii (p.175): "Thus of these nine 'Or Whatever' states 'desire' is synonymous with wish to act. Hence its characteristic is wish-to-act, its function is searching for an object, its manifestation, having the object at its disposal, which object is also its proximate cause. In the taking of an object by the mind, desire should be regarded as the stretching forth of the hand." Scott: It would seem, then, that chanda is object-driven, as it were. It is instrumental in any 'accomplishing of a goal.' This would be much like the jhaana-factors discussed earlier, without which nothing would be accomplished due to waning concentration. Chanda is one of the four adhipatis or predominant factors. Adhipati-paccaya (predominance condition) has two aspects. The one is aarammanapaadhipati (object-predominance), the other is sahajaataadhipati (conascence-predominance). I'll stop for now, before going into any of this. H: "...In the previous post, though, I did say more. Are there things I said there that you would like to be further clarified?...I had written 'Concentration clearly varies in strength, and so it seem to me that it must be something more than the fact of there being but one object at any time, for there is no variance in that.' Do you have any idea with regard to that?" Scott: Yeah, there was a lot of complicated stuff, which will take time to unravel, so can I go slowly? As I said: 'I'll start with this bit, since the rest is very divergent, and will require much critique when compared and contrasted with known Abhidhamma.' Sincerely, Scott. #99541 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 7/25/2009 8:29:00 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Also, I'd lie to ask you a question question..." H: "LOL! I guess that would be a meta-question! ;-)" H: "LOLOL! I actually MISSED my having written 'lie' instead of 'like'!! As I recall, you are a psychologist/therapist/psychiatrist? If so, you can have a Freudian field day with that! ;-))" Scott: Foisted on your own petard, Oedipus. You're on your own, but if you'd rather not discuss, I don't mind. ;-) Just do what you feel like. Now I'll look at some of your ideas bit by bit. H: "Yes. I was using 'tanha' as a generic term. Perhaps 'chanda' would be better...The impulse (or push) to stick with the same object may be defiled or not. When neutral and undefiled, it is purely functional, without emotion, and not atta-based." Scott: Alright, let's say 'chanda.' The term 'impulse' is not the best since it carries a lot of philosophical baggage, you know, speaking of the Freudian thing. ----------------------------------------------- I follow you. That wasn't my meaning at all, though. ---------------------------------------------- I'll reiterate my position when discussing with you, Howard. I always recall that we differ essentially when it comes to the notion of control. ---------------------------------------------- Perhaps, and perhaps not. I don't believe there is a doer/actor/decider/willer. ----------------------------------------------- I have read you to believe in no uncertain terms that it is possible to act with conscious 'intent', which you seem to equate and conflate with conventional descriptions of purely impersonal dhammaa arising due to purely impersonal conditions. -------------------------------------------------- I do believe in willing and desire having consequences. I believe in kamma and kamma-patha. I believe that intention has consequences. But it is ALL impersonal, for there is no single reality that is person. ---------------------------------------------------- In this way, for example, you have often argued in favour of an ability to cause to arise, by thinking about it, or by 'wishing it were so,' kusala states. --------------------------------------------------- Not true with regard to mere "wishing it were so." But thinking certainly does have consequences. --------------------------------------------------- This, to me, is thinking about self. -------------------------------------------------- Then you just don't understand me. -------------------------------------------- If you don't consider 'impulse' or chanda in the same light please show me. That is, if you don't believe that the impersonal characteristic and function of chanda is identical to one's conscious thought-wish, it would be helpful for you to show this. You say, for example: H: "'The use of 'want' is not always warranted. It is, in general, a 'tending towards,' and it *may* have no sense of a self involved at all. The Buddha had impulses to stand, to sit, to speak, to stick with things, and to let things go, always without any sense of self. Impulses (impulsions?) may be free of self." Scott: If you could clearly show that you don't believe that you or I can 'wish-to-do' and then do it, that would be cool. ------------------------------------------------- I have no means of clearly showing that. If you can develop the iddhi of telepathy, then you can judge for yourself. The bottom line, as I see it is that without any "self," intention has consequences - so, for example, if the inclination to move my hand arises, that is a condition for the arising of "wind" rupa, i.e,. my hand may well move. (This is an example of nama-created rupa.) ------------------------------------------------- Chanda is known as one of the 'Particular' cetasikas, and doesn't arise with every citta. As you say, chanda is ethically variable ('It may be kusala, akusala, or neutral'). Atthasaalinii (p.175): "Thus of these nine 'Or Whatever' states 'desire' is synonymous with wish to act. Hence its characteristic is wish-to-act, its function is searching for an object, its manifestation, having the object at its disposal, which object is also its proximate cause. In the taking of an object by the mind, desire should be regarded as the stretching forth of the hand." Scott: It would seem, then, that chanda is object-driven, as it were. It is instrumental in any 'accomplishing of a goal.' This would be much like the jhaana-factors discussed earlier, without which nothing would be accomplished due to waning concentration. Chanda is one of the four adhipatis or predominant factors. Adhipati-paccaya (predominance condition) has two aspects. The one is aarammanapaadhipati (object-predominance), the other is sahajaataadhipati (conascence-predominance). I'll stop for now, before going into any of this. H: "...In the previous post, though, I did say more. Are there things I said there that you would like to be further clarified?...I had written 'Concentration clearly varies in strength, and so it seem to me that it must be something more than the fact of there being but one object at any time, for there is no variance in that.' Do you have any idea with regard to that?" Scott: Yeah, there was a lot of complicated stuff, which will take time to unravel, so can I go slowly? As I said: 'I'll start with this bit, since the rest is very divergent, and will require much critique when compared and contrasted with known Abhidhamma.' ------------------------------------------ I'm afraid this is getting more technical than I am equipped for, and I find my interest waning. I'd like to let this matter go, at least for a while. ------------------------------------------ Sincerely, Scott. ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #99542 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wnky, was:Concentration nilovg Dear Scott (and Howard) Thanks, now I know. Nina. Op 24-jul-2009, om 18:14 heeft Scott het volgende geschreven: > Scott: Howard, am I going to have to use Winky Guy again? You asked > me the question and you are getting my straight answere since I've > already stated I'm not going to pussy-foot around you so you don't > flip out. #99543 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:23 am Subject: AN, The Book of Tens, ii, (2) 'Thinking with intention' ('Dhammataa esaa') scottduncan2 Dear connie, All, I thought you might enjoy this sutta, I found it rather interesting (hopefully not too long): "2. Cetanaakara.niiyasutta.m 'Thinking with intention.' "Monks, for one who is virtuous, in full possession of virtue, there is no need for the purposeful thought: May freedom from remorse arise in me. This, monks, is in accordance with nature - that for one who is virtuous, in full possession of virtue, freedom from remorse arises. Siilavato, bhikkhave, siilasampannassa na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m - 'avippa.tisaaro me uppajjatuu 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m siilavato siilasampannassa avippa.tisaaro uppajjati. "Monks, for one who is free from remorse there is no need for the purposeful thought: May joy arise in me. This, monks, is in accordance with nature - that for one who is free from remorse joy arises. Avippa.tisaarissa, bhikkhave, na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'paamojja.m me uppajjatuu 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m avippa.tisaarissa paamojja.m jaayati. "Monks, for one who is joyous there is no need for the purposeful thought: May rapture arise in me. This, monks, is in accordance with nature - that for one who is joyous rapture arises. Pamuditassa, bhikkhave, na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'piiti me uppajjatuu 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m pamuditassa piiti uppajjati. "Monks, for one whose heart is enraptured there is no need for the purposeful thought: May my body be calmed. This, monks, is in accordance with nature - that for one whose heart is enraptured the body is calmed. Piitimanassa, bhikkhave, na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'kaayo me passambhatuu 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m piitimanassa kaayo passambhati. "Monks, for one whose body is calmed there is no need for the thought: I feel happiness. This, monks in in accordance with nature - that one whose body is calmed feels happiness. Passaddhakaayassa, bhikkhave, na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'sukha.m vediyaamii 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m passaddhakaayo sukha.m vediyati. "Monks, for one who is happy there is no need for the thought: My mind is concentrated. It follows that the happy man's mind is concentrated. Sukhino, bhikkhave, na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'citta.m me samaadhiyatuu 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m sukhino citta.m samaadhiyati. "Monks, for one who is concentrated there is no need for the thought: I know and see things as they really are. It follows naturally that one concentrated does so. Samaahitassa, bhikkhave, na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'yathaabhuuta.m jaanaami passaamii 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m samaahito yathaabhuuta.m jaanaati passati. "Monks, for one who knows and sees things as they really are there is no need for the thought: I feel revulsion; interest fades in me. It follows naturally that such an one feel revulsion and fading interest. Yathaabhuuta.m, bhikkhave, jaanato passato na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'nibbindaami virajjaamii 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m yathaabhuuta.m jaana.m passa.m nibbindati virajjati. "Monks, for one who feels revulsion and fading interest there is no need for the thought: I realize release by knowing and seeing. It follows naturally that he who feels revulsion and fading interest realizes release by knowing and seeing. Nibbinnassa..., bhikkhave, virattassa na cetanaaya kara.niiya.m â€" 'vimutti~naa.nadassana.m sacchikaromii 'ti. Dhammataa esaa, bhikkhave, ya.m nibbinno...viratto vimutti~naa.nadassana.m sacchikaroti. "So you see, monks, revulsion and fading of interest have release by knowing and seeing as object and profit; seeing and knowing (things) as they really are, have revulsion and fading interest as object and profit; concentration has knowing and seeing things as they really are as object and profit; happiness has concentration as object and profit; calm has happiness; rapture has calm; joy has rapture; freedom from remorse has joy; good conduct has freedom from remorse as its object, freedom from remorse as its profit. Thus, monks, one state just causes another state to swell, one state just causes fulfillment of another state, for the sake of going from the not-beyond to beyond." 'Iti kho, bhikkhave, nibbidaaviraago vimutti~naa.nadassanattho vimutti~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso; yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassana.m nibbidaaviraagattha.m nibbidaaviraagaanisa.msa.m; samaadhi yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanattho yathaabhuuta~naa.nadassanaanisa.mso; sukha.m samaadhattha.m samaadhaanisa.msa.m; passaddhi sukhatthaa sukhaanisa.msaa; piiti passaddhatthaa passaddhaanisa.msaa; paamojja.m piitattha.m piitaanisa.msa.m; avippa.tisaaro paamojjattho paamojjaanisa.mso; kusalaani siilaani avippa.tisaaratthaani avippa.tisaaraanisa.msaani . Iti kho, bhikkhave, dhammaa dhamme abhisandenti, dhammaa dhamme paripuurenti apaaraa paara.m gamanaayaa 'ti. Scott: Cool, eh? Might be something to discuss. Sincerely, Scott. #99544 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:28 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...Also, I'd lie to ask you a question question...I find my interest waning. I'd like to let this matter go, at least for a while." Scott: As you wish (and wished), Howard. No worries. Sincerely, Scott. #99545 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: wnky, was:Concentration scottduncan2 Dear Nina, Regarding: N: "Thanks, now I know." Scott: ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #99546 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation nilovg Dear Dan, Op 24-jul-2009, om 5:30 heeft Dan D. het volgende geschreven: > N: If we understand that pariyatti pertains to the reality > appearing at this very moment there is no doubt about the > interdependence of study and practice. > > --> Yes, if "pariyatti" is understood in that way, but that's not > how it appears in the texts. ------ N: These texts are better understood if we remember that there were no books. The monks had to learn texts by heart and what happens then? You penetrate the meaning more, they are not just words. We can even try that out for ourselves with short passages we learn by heart. Knowing this, we shall read the texts differently. We easily forget what is not properly understood, but what is thoroughly understood we do not forget, even after decads. Thus, the learning should go together with what appears in daily life. We read long lists of, for example, sobhana cetasikas that accompany kusala citta. But these are not textbook lists, they are about life. Studying in this way will make all the difference. Do try it. It may change your outlook on the Abhidhamma. Nina. #99547 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Howard, Regarding: H: "...I find my interest waning. I'd like to let this matter go, at least for a while." Scott: I read this in U.P., if you wanted to walk down memory lane... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/33418 Sincerely, Scott. #99548 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (36) nilovg Dear Han, Op 25-jul-2009, om 1:32 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Here again, for me, it will be necessary to try to *control* the > citta that has arisen, conditioned by whatever *condition* it may > be. If it is akusala citta I would try to abandon it. If it is > kusala citta I would try to develop it further. Whether I succeed > in doing that is another matter. But it is my duty to try for the > wholesome mental state. ------- N: We learn that cittas and all other realities are anattaa. We understand in theory, but so long as we are not sotaapannas our understanding is still deficient. We do not accept the truth of anattaa with our whole heart yet. Often the idea of 'I want to control' will come up. But it is good to know this. This way of thinking is conditioned, beyond control, anattaa. Whatever we think, or try to do, it is anattaa. We cannot escape this truth. Thus, we try to abandon akusala, and it seems that we can. In reality it is kusala citta accompanied by many sobhana cetasikas who abandon akusala. We have a feeling that it is 'I' who can do this, and this is natural for a non-ariyan. It is helpful to hear that we are deluding ourselves. Nina. #99549 From: han tun Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:38 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear Nina, N: We learn that cittas and all other realities are anattaa. We understand in theory, but so long as we are not sotaapannas our understanding is still deficient. We do not accept the truth of anattaa with our whole heart yet. Often the idea of 'I want to control' will come up. But it is good to know this. This way of thinking is conditioned, beyond control, anattaa. Whatever we think, or try to do, it is anattaa. We cannot escape this truth. Thus, we try to abandon akusala, and it seems that we can. In reality it is kusala citta accompanied by many sobhana cetasikas who abandon akusala. We have a feeling that it is 'I' who can do this, and this is natural for a non-ariyan. It is helpful to hear that we are deluding ourselves. Han: What you wrote above is what the books say. For those who can really understand in that way I have only admiration and respect. But for me, a mere puthujjana, I will be happy to delude myself and continue to believe that one indeed is one's own refuge (attaa hi attano naatho). Respectfully, Han #99550 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:56 pm Subject: Re: More on Seclusion truth_aerator Hello Sarah and all, If I may simplify a discussion: I agree that bare external objects or bare 6 consciousness themselves are not kama. I also agree that mindfulness, wisdom and all that should be developed in any circumstances one is in, although I would like to add that some circumstances to be better than others. Some external situations (marketplaces, strip clubs, etc) are too asava friendly and most people, especially beginners, usually forget about mindfulness and all that. The external objects CAN act as support for latent, not-yet-eradicated asavas to use. Example: I was looking on the internet at tips on how to study languages better, and noticed a lustful image. I had almost no gross lust the whole week (or more), then one thing led to another, one website after another and gross lust appeared... If one was meditating in seclusion with no internet and such, then hindrances would have LESS objects to focus on. Past memories are not as vivid as presently existing images, people or things - that hindrances can grab. And to finish about SATI. 4th Jhana has fully purified Sati due to Upekkha. Considering that Jhanas do require some seclusion, in order to get fully purified Sati (which may be required for some people to really progress) 4th Jhana may have to be attained to have purified SATI. Purity of sati is in 4th Jhana (see pali jhana formulas) "upekkhasatiparisuddhim catuttham jhanam upasampajja viharati" PTS DN 1.75 With metta, Alex #99551 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 3:56 pm Subject: seclusion - fix . Sati & Uppekha is purer in 4th Jhana truth_aerator Hello all, addition + correction: > And to finish about Sati. > > > 4th Jhana has fully purified Sati and Upekkha. > > Considering that Jhanas do require some seclusion, in order to get fully purified Sati (which may be required for some people to really progress) 4th Jhana may have to be attained to have purified SATI. > > Purity of sati is in 4th Jhana (see pali jhana formulas) > > "upekkhasatiparisuddhim catuttham jhanam upasampajja viharati" > PTS DN 1.75 "...with the abandoning of pleasure and stress — as with the earlier disappearance of elation and distress — he enters and remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity and mindfulness, neither-pleasure nor stress." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.02.0.than.html Note: "purity of equanimity and mindfulness" is in 4th Jhana With metta, Alex #99552 From: "Dan D." Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Alberto (and Howard and Scott), Thanks for clarifying "associated" as "sampayutta." In the U Narada passage you are right that the "associated states" are the cetasikas arising with that particular citta, not subsequent cittas. But this again raises Howard's initial question, [rephrased as] what accounts for extended repetitions of jhana cittas arising? What conditions them? The hypothesis is that ekaggata and other jhana factors, tied together by jhana condition, give such a clear fix on the object that impulses (such as lobha/dosa/moha) to grasp for a new object are suppressed, so more jhana cittas arise. Dan #99553 From: "Dan D." Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Dear Nina, You write: "Thus, the jhaanafactors, including ekaggataa cetasika, condiiton the conascent naama dhammas by way of jhaana-condition. This condition does not pertain to a subsequent citta." Right. Then what does condition jhana cittas to rise in succession to create the phenomenon we call "jhana." -Dan #99554 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:29 pm Subject: attaining N8P, perfecting sammaditthi & sila = sotapanna. Not other way around. truth_aerator Dear Nina and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > ------- > N: We learn that cittas and all other realities are anattaa. We > understand in theory, but so long as we are not sotaapannas our > understanding is still deficient. I think that it is better to say that until one's right view has not been perfected ditthisampanna - one is not yet a sotapanna. (Note: only arhats have perfect panna) Or more precisely: until one has not been attained N8P, and perfected sila, - one is not yet a sotapanna. With metta, Alex #99555 From: "Dan D." Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Scott, Many questions and comments, little time... 1. "...jhaana paccaya relates only to the moment. I think you are saying something more than is in the texts when you discuss 'downstream' factors. Other conditions are enumerated to cover the effect of a state on subsequent dhammaa." --> What conditions? 2. "I like thinking about how I wouldn't have finished this post were it not for these mental factors serving as conditioning states arising and falling away - jhaana-paccaya gets it done, even when robbing a bank, driving from point A to point B, etc." --> But if jhana condition only applies to cetasikas in a single citta, how is it that it helps you finish writing your sentence? 3. D: "Jhanacittassa ekaggata influences the downstream, conditioned jhanacittani via jhana paccaya as they fix themselves to objects in the same way that the conditioning citta does. The influence of jhanacittassa ekaggata on conditioned states is of course stronger than that of the generalized universal ekaggata." Scott: Can you elaborate on your idea that 'the influence of jhaanacittassa ekaggataa on conditioned states is of course stronger than that of the generalized universal ekaggataa?' --> In jhana the one-pointedness is strong enough to suppress cravings for new objects. In most of life, that craving pushes the cittas to different objects like crazy. 3. Scott: "Dhammasa.nganii (and here I'm quoting from U Kwaw Khine's translation, p. 37): '11. What at that time is one-pointedness? That which at that time is stability of mind, steadfastness of mind, absorbed steadfastness of mind, unshakeableness, non-distraction, imperturbability, tranquility of mind, faculty of concentration, power of concentration, right concentration - this at that time is one-pointedness of mind.' Do you think maybe it's the same dhamma, but developed such as it functions as faculty or power due to this development?" --> O.k. Due to development, the jhanacittassa ekaggata is stronger (even called 'faculty' or 'power') than the generalized universal sense of ekaggata. 4. D: "Lobha and dosa are two 'impulses' to move away from an object that betray an idea of self. But cetana, chanda, and adhimokkha are 'impulses' that do not." Scott: This is still rather unclearly worded. The characteristic of lobha cetasika is all about attachment, which seems to be more about moving towards an object than away from one. --> Moving toward one object is moving away from another. 5. D: "I too thought your knee-jerk response was polemical/political. I know that you've been struggling with this issue in your discussions. Be aware that it's been flaring up with intensity." Scott: I'm not really concerned about your Opinion in the matter, Dan. Do you wish me now to add my critique of your style...? --> O.K. Scott:...it is condescending, sanctimonious, and patronizing... --> Thank-you, Scott. I'm sure you are right. I'll work on it! Scott: I'm sure that you have as little concern with my opinion in the matter as I have with yours so now we're even. Why not quit daydreaming about people and discuss Dhamma instead. --> Actually, I AM interested in your opinion in the matter. Also, I think of discussing states of mind in what you call meta-discussion is part of discussing Dhamma--but the approach is not easy. 6. Scott: Now, would you like to consider further any points of Dhamma with me? If so, feel free. --> Not so much. I think I'm going to recede into other activities again for a few years, and then pop in again for a week or so. It has more to do with me than with you. Ever since about 2002, dsg discussions haven't been able to hold my attention for more than a week or so at a time. Work on a question or two and then move on... With metta and appreciation, Dan #99556 From: "Dan D." Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation onco111 Dear Nina, You write: "the learning should go together with what appears in daily life. We read long lists of, for example, sobhana cetasikas that accompany kusala citta. But these are not textbook lists, they are about life. --> That's right. N: Studying in this way will make all the difference. Do try it. It may change your outlook on the Abhidhamma. --> I'm not wired for that kind of learning, Nina. I have a notoriously difficult time understanding things from reading or hearing. I need to do the investigating and learning on my own. An analogy: Suppose we want to walk to Bubbles Spring. Some people would prefer to hear: "Take a left on Ave. B and travel 16 blocks until you get to 54th street. On the way you should pass a K-Mart and a Montessori school. If you come to the catholic church, you've gone to far. Take a right on 54th street and drive 15 miles to Hwy 72. Drive south on Hwy 72 for 31 miles and take Exit 31 to Bulbous Mountain.... The trail head to the spring is...On the trail, be careful of...There's a fork at...etc., etc." I'd be much happier with: "Can you see Bulbous Mountain yonder? That gully on the northeast is carved by Babbling Brook. The spring feeds the brook. There's a trail head on Hwy 72." Another story: when I was an undergraduate studying mathematics, I took a graduate-level course that I really wasn't prepared for. I had great difficulty reading the textbook because the author left many gaps in the proofs, and I couldn't fill them in on my own because I didn't have enough experience. I dug in the library until I found a book that had all the details filled in for me. I was delighted! When I showed the book to the professor, he was appalled: "Reading all those details won't do you a bit of good. You need to be able to fill in the gaps on your own to develop your own understanding." 1. Lobha/dosa/moha, 2. anicca/anatta/dukkha, 3. cittas are fast. These are fantastic models that, if understood properly, can carry you to the final goal. The lists all flow from these models. -Dan #99557 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 6:32 pm Subject: Re: More on Seclusion scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Some external situations (marketplaces, strip clubs, etc) are too asava friendly and most people, especially beginners, usually forget about mindfulness and all that. The external objects CAN act as support for latent, not-yet-eradicated asavas to use." Scott: There are a few things here, Alex. If you are talking about 'forgetting about mindfulness' then this is yet another example of the sort of thinking I find common in the practitioner schools. Sati arises unbidden and only according to conditions. Thinking it is a dhamma that simply has to be remembered for it to arise, or doesn't arise when one 'forgets' about it, is clearly thinking about a self capable of acting at will. No matter how often you suggest otherwise, statements like this appear in your writing. You believe that 'mindfulness' can be controlled. External situations are all concepts. These then are thought about after the experience of visible object, sound, taste, sensation, etc. A: "Example: I was looking on the internet at tips on how to study languages better, and noticed a lustful image. I had almost no gross lust the whole week (or more), then one thing led to another, one website after another and gross lust appeared..." Scott: Thank you for this good example. I don't think seclusion should be prized simply as a form of asceticism in order to compulsively try to suppress sexual desire. That is what hairshirts, self-flagellation, and confessing to a priest are for. Sexual desire is a natural thing. For me, as for you, it arises at times, and doesn't at other times. The dhamma at the base of kamaasava (sensuous desire) is lobha cetasika. Lobha cetasika arises a lot, Alex. No matter where you are. Being into skin, or food, or music - same thing. A: "If one was meditating in seclusion with no internet and such, then hindrances would have LESS objects to focus on. Past memories are not as vivid as presently existing images, people or things - that hindrances can grab." Scott: And then you'll get near to your computer and find another porn session underway at some point. Using seclusion to combat sexual desire is not Dhamma - its common ordinary Behaviourism. And then when the whole flight into seclusion is motivated by aversion, this is hardly kusala. I think you are cloaking ordinary psychology in a caricature of 'buddhist' asceticism with the ordinary aim of wanting to stop being the way you naturally are at a given moment. What would be wrong with finding, in mid-porn session one fine evening, that sati arises and naturally knows lust as lust? This moment would just naturally guard the senses and might just lead to a conventional act of turning off the computer - or switching to DSG for a rousing argument with me. Sincerely, Scott. #99558 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:15 pm Subject: Re: More on Seclusion truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "Some external situations (marketplaces, strip clubs, etc) are too asava friendly and most people, especially beginners, usually forget about mindfulness and all that. The external objects CAN act as support for latent, not-yet-eradicated asavas to use." > > Scott: There are a few things here, Alex. If you are talking about 'forgetting about mindfulness' then this is yet another example of the sort of thinking I find common in the practitioner schools. Sati arises unbidden and only according to conditions. >>>>>>> And one of the conditions is the actual practice, which is hard to do, and the defilements counteract with subtle excuses not to be mindful. Of course, the people who understand sufficiently the Buddha's teaching and the drawbacks of unmindfulness will do effort to make it arise. I'll open a secret: Sati will not arise unless there are causes for it to arise, and one of the causes is to actually practice it. Like any other skill (such as playing a sport or riding a bike), it is improved with practice. Skill just doesn't arise by "waiting for conditions to fall out of blue sky". Same with mindfulness and the skill in it. It doesn't just arise by itself. One has to exert appropriate right effort with right view (of counteracting unwholesome states and feeding the wholesome). With metta, Alex #99559 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:32 pm Subject: Re: More on Seclusion scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "And one of the conditions is the actual practice, which is hard to do, and the defilements counteract with subtle excuses not to be mindful." Scott: The practice is impossible to do. Alex. Why? There is no practice. This whole thing was made up by ordinary people who think that there is such a thing because they want there to be and because they don't get it. It is real 'buddhisty,' though. Ordinary 'mindfulness' is just forcing yourself to pay attention to things and then thinking you are mindful and feeling good about yourself for it. It is not sati. A: "Of course, the people who understand sufficiently the Buddha's teaching and the drawbacks of unmindfulness will do effort to make it arise." Scott: And they'll be missing the boat like you. However, they will be able to think of themselves as 'people who understand sufficiently the Buddha's teaching' and will feel very good about themselves. A: "I'll open a secret: Sati will not arise unless there are causes for it to arise, and one of the causes is to actually practice it. Like any other skill (such as playing a sport or riding a bike), it is improved with practice." Scott: No one practices, Alex. Sati develops on its own as it arises naturally. Sati increases on its own as it arises naturally. Sati begets itself naturally on its own as it arises naturally. Even the complex set of conditions and dhammaa involved in 'riding a bike' arise and fall away only according to conditions. No one rides a bike either. You can't practice bike riding like you can't practice sati. There is no self anywhere, Alex. A: "Skill just doesn't arise by 'waiting for conditions to fall out of blue sky'. Same with mindfulness and the skill in it. It doesn't just arise by itself. One has to exert appropriate right effort with right view (of counteracting unwholesome states and feeding the wholesome)." Scott: Again, with the statement: 'One has to exert appropriate right effort with right view' you reveal your belief in a self that can cause conditions to become established and dhamma to arise at will. No matter what you say to the contrary, you believe in self. Sincerely, Scott. #99560 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:52 pm Subject: Re: More on Seclusion truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "And one of the conditions is the actual practice, which is hard to do, and the defilements counteract with subtle excuses not to be mindful." > > Scott: The practice is impossible to do. Alex. Then what are you doing? Why not forget the Buddhism and live a "normal" life? Why read books, consider "dhamma", listen to Dhamma talks and so on? And what the heck did the Buddha teach for 45 years, just another "dime a dozen" philosophy? No, unlike many other teachers he taught the way out of suffering. >Why? There is no practice. This whole thing was made up by >ordinary people who think that there is such a thing because they >want there to be and because they don't get it. >> Prove it. Was Sariputta in Patisambidamagga wrong? Was the Buddha wrong in teaching the practice to end all suffering? Was Buddhaghosa wrong when he described practice in VsM? Were all traditions across the centuries wrong in saying that Buddha taught practice? > A:"Of course, the people who understand sufficiently the Buddha's >teaching and the drawbacks of unmindfulness will do effort to make >it arise." > > Scott: And they'll be missing the boat like you. Did you become awakened? > Scott: No one practices, Alex. And I've never meant that "Atta" practices. You are so focused and afraid of attaview, like a pious Christian is of the Devil. >Sati develops on its own as it arises naturally. Sati increases on its own as it arises naturally. Sati begets itself naturally on its own as it arises naturally. Even the complex set of conditions and dhammaa involved in 'riding a bike' arise and fall away only according to conditions. No one rides a bike either. You can't practice bike riding like you can't practice sati. There is no self anywhere, Alex. > > A: "Skill just doesn't arise by 'waiting for conditions to fall out of blue sky'. Same with mindfulness and the skill in it. It doesn't just arise by itself. One has to exert appropriate right effort with right view (of counteracting unwholesome states and feeding the wholesome)." > > Scott: Again, with the statement: 'One has to exert appropriate right effort with right view' you reveal your belief in a self that can cause conditions to become established and dhamma to arise at will. No matter what you say to the contrary, you believe in self. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. Absolutely not. You are so much misunderstanding what I am saying that I can only compassionately wish you all the best. When there is understanding and faith in the Buddha's path, and he did teach the path, then one will exert necesery effort that the faith, understanding, health and circumstances allow. Please no teaching of this pop buddhism where "don't do anything. let the conditions just take care of themselves. There is no need to do anything" ... etc etc... Doesn't it ever cross your mind that reading books so that one could develop understanding IS practice? Doesn't it ever occur to you that going to listen to some Dhamma talk is a form of doing? Whenever Buddhism (or any religion) became more widespread and fashionable, there is an unfortunate tendency to make it more acceptable, more accommodating to the people, more "relevant" to the modern times and the preferences that people may have. Buddh-ism is no exception. Some authors and schools teach that Awakening is nothing more than passive submission to the way things appear to be (or read in a book) rather than "as they truly are", seen ONLY after Samadhi. Upanisa Sutta. Or that unconditioned is merely easy accessible momentary mindfulness-in-daily life where everything, everything (surfing, sight seeing, travel, strip clubs) is acceptable (especially when done 'mindfully'). Or that ascetism is merely a mental seclusion that one may have as one indulges in sensuality. People cheerfully point out certain passages (usually taken out of context of the previous practice) showing how hard work is not needed and avoid seeing the hard part. In some circles, and over time, more and more of the Buddha's teaching become merely pop-psychology (like CBT) which is easily acceptable, welcomed by the masses, and doesn't require hard work or sacrifice. Doing hard work at letting go off one's attachment is seen as "Its just the Ego, the Self doing" while indulging in sense-pleasures is seen as alright. In one of the suttas, one of the conditions of downfall of Buddha's teaching is lack of respect for Samadhi, the only thing that can lead to yathabhutananadassana (Upanisa Sutta). It has turned in some form of "opium for the people" where anything goes, anything, just do it mindfully and be mindful of nama-rupa arising. No need to destroy any kind of experience. == "[6] And what are the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying? There is the case where a monk, reflecting appropriately, does not tolerate an arisen thought of sensuality. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, & wipes it out of existence. Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of ill will ... Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate an arisen thought of cruelty... Reflecting appropriately, he does not tolerate arisen evil, unskillful mental qualities. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, & wipes them out of existence. The fermentations, vexation, or fever that would arise if he were not to destroy these things do not arise for him when he destroys them. These are called the fermentations to be abandoned by destroying." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/002-sabbasava-\ \ sutta-e2.html ======= ""And who is the individual who goes against the flow? There is the case where an individual doesn't indulge in sensual passions and doesn't do evil deeds. Even though it may be with pain, even though it may be with sorrow, even though he may be crying, his face in tears, he lives the holy life that is perfect & pure. This is called the individual who goes against the flow." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.005.than.html ===== N8P is against indulging in sensuality (of the senses): "There is devotion to indulgence of pleasure in the objects of sensual desire, which is inferior, low, vulgar, ignoble, and leads to no good;" SN 56.11 where in DN29 the Buddha has said that it is good to indulge in noble & blameless non-sensual happiness, Jhana (as opposed to sensuality), which can lead to stream and higher. ======= with metta, Alex #99561 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 7:55 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Dan, You're gone, but regarding: Me: "Other conditions are enumerated to cover the effect of a state on subsequent dhammaa." D: "What conditions?" Scott: Kamma-paccaya, anantara-paccaya, samanantara-paccaya, nissaya-paccay (I think), upanissaya-paccaya. D: "But if jhana condition only applies to cetasikas in a single citta, how is it that it helps you finish writing your sentence?" Scott: Other conditions operate as well. Think of highly developed jhaana and how it remains focused on the meditation object for very long periods of time. Same thing. Jhaana is ordinary. D: "In jhana the one-pointedness is strong enough to suppress cravings for new objects. In most of life, that craving pushes the cittas to different objects like crazy." Scott: I'd like to see some textual support for this, Dan. I don't think you're correct in this. I'd suggest that all the jhaana factors combine to suppress the hindrances, not just one-pointedness of mind, which assists but has but one characteristic function. D: "Moving toward one object is moving away from another." Scott: Still unclear, but its fine. 'Moving away' is a metaphor, right? Your using conventional language, I guess. The real object is a dhamma. There is no actual 'movement' is there? Sincerely, Scott. #99562 From: "Alex" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika truth_aerator Hi Scott and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: >There is no actual 'movement' is there? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. And how did the rupa conventionally called "Scott" get to the computer in the first place to type what was typed? With metta, Alex #99563 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:34 pm Subject: Re: More on Seclusion scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Then what are you doing? Why not forget the Buddhism and live a 'normal' life? Why read books, consider 'dhamma', listen to Dhamma talks and so on? And what the heck did the Buddha teach for 45 years, just another 'dime a dozen' philosophy? No, unlike many other teachers he taught the way out of suffering." Scott: I am leading a normal life. What are you doing? ;-) Like you, and we are very much alike, I love the Dhamma. It is by conditions. The Dhamma is, as you know, no 'dime a dozen philosophy'. No, Alex, you are really missing the point. I read the Dhamma and argue with you about Dhamma etc. due to conditions. A: "Was Sariputta in Patisambidamagga wrong? Was the Buddha wrong in teaching the practice to end all suffering? Was Buddhaghosa wrong when he described practice in VsM? Were all traditions across the centuries wrong in saying that Buddha taught practice?" Scott: No, *you've* misunderstood things, Alex, as far as I'm concerned. A: "...Absolutely not. You are so much misunderstanding what I am saying that I can only compassionately wish you all the best. When there is understanding and faith in the Buddha's path, and he did teach the path, then one will exert necesery effort that the faith, understanding, health and circumstances allow." Scott: No. Effort will arise naturally. No one will exert it. A: "Please no teaching of this pop buddhism where 'don't do anything. let the conditions just take care of themselves. There is no need to do anything' ... etc etc..." Scott: This has always been hard for you to understand, Alex. There really is no need to do anything because nothing can be done. This doesn't mean that there is no kusala. This doesn't mean that there can be no true development of things the way only a Buddha can teach. A: "Doesn't it ever cross your mind that reading books so that one could develop understanding IS practice? Doesn't it ever occur to you that going to listen to some Dhamma talk is a form of doing?" Scott: No, because it is not 'practice' as in something one does deliberately so that something else will happen. Its just reading books. Sometimes I'm bored to tears with Dhamma books and read science fiction. I experienced jhaana, briefly, just waiting for the dog to take a piss. It turned out later that I imagined I had been looking at a spider. When discussing it briefly with connie, she called it 'spider-jhaana.' And then I was tempted to think it was cool, but I forgot about it. True study is of dhammaa as they arise naturally and occurs through the action of impersonal dhammaa, such as sati and pa~n~naa. A: "Whenever Buddhism..." Scott: I'll reiterate, Alex, that you are choosing asceticism. You are fighting yourself in the most ordinary, neurotic of ways like we all do. It has nothing to do with Dhamma when it is about this. I know you are into Dhamma, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying you've got demons, like everyone, and you're trying to use Dhamma to fight them and it doesn't work that way. Sincerely, Scott. Sincerely, Scott. #99564 From: "Scott" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 8:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "And how did the rupa conventionally called 'Scott' get to the computer in the first place to type what was typed?" Scott: Hey, I just sent you a reply to your last post! I don't know, Alex, but I'll bite. How did the rupa conventionally called 'Scott' get to the computer in the first place to type what was typed? Sincerely, Scott. #99565 From: "Chew" Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 9:14 pm Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) chewsadhu A puthujjana acts like a puthujjana, is better than a puthujjana acts like an ariya. Puthujjana learns to realize the truth of suffering, and develop the noble paths. A primary school boy, don't have to worry how to pass the secondary school exam. A devottee, who knows that "do good, be good", when offers dana with wishes to be reborn in a better life, it is still good to encourage. At least, it is kammasakatasammaditthi. A puthujjana, who endowed with good Dhamma knowledge, still able to guide another puthujjana how to walk to the path of Nibbaana. By telling them the problem, pointing them the truth of suffeing, showing them the methods, it is just like a light in a dark. A puthujjana learns to keep the 5 precepts well. If kilesa are still there, one will know "kilesa still arise in me". This is to keep the precept, to learn to realize the truth of suffering, and to develop the noble paths. May all beings be well and happy. With respect. #99566 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Jul 25, 2009 10:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 2, no 11. sarahprocter... Hi Dan, I've really been appreciating your flurry of posts and the points that you've been discussing in some detail. In the past we've discussed at length about pariyatti and especially the importance of hearing and considering the teachings, but I agree with you that this is not the same as learning technical terms, mounds of details or Pali. I liked what you wrote here and found it inspiring for us all: --- On Wed, 15/7/09, Dan D. wrote: >I find that I talk about Dhamma all the time, but I don't often use words like citta, cetasika, kusala, anatta, etc. (except with my wife) because our culture just doesn't understand or accept them. But many people are open to talking about how mind changes from moment to moment, how our likes and dislikes are reactions to sense data rather than some inherent characteristic of the datum itself, how all our likes and dislikes and worries and "projects" are ultimately empty, etc. .... S: It may not be satipatthana, but at least it's a start and often an eye-opener for people to even begin to reflect that the joys and problems in life are not the things and people around us. It's easy to just give up and not many effort to find a common language, I find. I also enjoyed your account of your son's learning to enjoy different foods:-) You asked about the old and new Alex. The old Alex from our early days was a female. She had/has a keen interest, but we haven't heard from her for some years. (Let us know if you're still around, 'old' Alex). 'New' Alex would have been a young school-kid at that time:-) He lives in the same town as Scott - Edmonton in the Prairies. Must be something about those cold winter nites that turns them into book-worms:-)). I'm interested in following your jhana thread. I agree with you about the power and conditioning effect of the ekaggata on its object. I think that natural decisive support, object predominance and repetition conditions must all be important too. I don't have texts handy to check, so will follow your discussions with interest. I hope you keep up your discussions with our cantankerous and not-so-cantankerous friends, lol! In any case, thanks so much for dropping in and please do so more regularly. We all need a few stir-fries:-)) Metta Sarah ========= #99568 From: "Dr. Han Tun" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:09 am Subject: Physical Phenomena (37) hantun1 Physical Phenomena (37) Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. Chapter 3. The Sense-Organs (Pasaada Ruupas): continuation. Questions and comments are welcome. ------------------------------ We then read that King Udena praised the Buddha's words. He said about his own experiences: "I myself, master Bhaaradvaaja, whenever I enter my palace with body, speech and mind unguarded, with thought unsettled, with my faculties uncontrolled,- at such times lustful states overwhelm me. But whenever, master Bhaaradvaaja, I do so with body, speech and mind guarded, with thought settled, with my faculties controlled, at such times lustful states do not overwhelm me...." We read that King Udena took his refuge in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. How can we avoid being misled by the outward appearance or by the details of phenomena? By understanding realities as they are when they appear, one at a time. The following sutta in the "Kindred Sayings"(IV, Sa.laayatanavagga, Second Fifty, Ch 3, § 82, The World) reminds us not to cling to a "whole" but to be mindful of only one object at a time as it appears through one of the six doors: "Then a certain monk came to see the Exalted One.... Seated at one side that monk said to the Exalted One: `The world! The world! is the saying, lord. How far, lord, does this saying go?' `It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the world' [Note 14]. What crumbles away? The eye... objects... eye-consciousness... eye-contact... that pleasant or unpleasant or neutral feeling that arises owing to eye-contact... tongue... body... mind... It crumbles away, monks. Therefore it is called the world'." [Note 14] In Paali there is a word association of loko, world, with lujjati, to crumble away. Questions 1. Can eyesense experience something? 2. Where is the bodysense? 3. Is eyesense all the time eye-door? 4. For which type of citta is eyesense eye-door as well as base (vatthu, physical place of origin)? --------------------- This is the End of Chapter 3 The Sense-Organs. Chapter 4 Sense Objects will start from the next post. With metta, Han #99569 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 12:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (36) nilovg Dear Han, Op 25-jul-2009, om 16:38 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > What you wrote above is what the books say. For those who can > really understand in that way I have only admiration and respect. > But for me, a mere puthujjana, I will be happy to delude myself and > continue to believe that one indeed is one's own refuge (attaa hi > attano naatho). ------- N: "Be an island to yourself, a refuge to yourself". When I first came into contact with Buddhism this impressed me very much. It is good not to be dependent on other people or a creator. Later on I found out more about the meaning of this text. How are we a refuge to ourselves? We read in the Parinibbaanasutta: "When he dwells contemplating the body in the body... feeling in the feelings... mind in the mind... dhammas in dhammas..." Thus, by the development of satipatthaana. Yourself is merely a reflexive and does not have any connection with an idea of self. Satipatthaana cuts off all darkness and leads to the highest, as the Commentary states. Darkness is ignorance or delusion, avijjaa. We are puthujjana, thus we still have ignorance and clinging. But, as you said, our duty is abandoning akusala. Ignorance arises with each akusala citta, ignorance is dangerous. It is our duty to abandon ignorance. This will take a long, long time, becaus eonly the arahat has abandoned all ignorance. Our life is a learning process, and you will agree, I am sure, that one is never too old to learn. BTW I liked your analysis of the Vanapatthasutta. ***** Nina. #99570 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:13 am Subject: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 5, no 5. nilovg Dear friends, You might think that the nuns had understood the impermanence of conditioned realities already the first time, but there are many degrees of realizing the truth. The hearing of Nandaka’s sermon for the second time was a condition for those who had not attained enlightenment to become sotĺpanna, and for others who were already ariyans to attain higher stages of enlightenment. Thus we can see that listening to the teachings or reading the scriptures are conditions for mindfulness and the development of pańńĺ, and even for attaining enlightenment. This sutta illustrates that the Buddha taught about all realities which can be experienced through the six doors. They appear all the time in daily life. Right understanding should be developed of these realities, there is no other way. Some people think that one should select particular objects of awareness, they believe that one should not be aware of all objects which appear. This is not the development of the Eightfold Path. If one is, for example, never aware of visible object which appears through the eyes one will continue to believe that people can be experienced through the eyesense. In reality only the rúpa which is visible object can be seen, but one is unable to eliminate the idea of “being" from the visible object. One should check whether pańńĺ can eliminate doubt and ignorance about the characteristics of nĺma and rúpa or not yet. It is not sufficient to be aware of what appears through one door only. When the nuns listened to Nandaka’s sermon they were considering and studying with awareness the characteristics of nĺma and rúpa which appeared in order to understand them thoroughly. One should not merely repeat for oneself what one has heard about nĺma and rúpa or merely follow what one’s teacher said. One should develop understanding oneself of whatever appears through one of the six doors. One may believe that seeing and hearing are very clear, but this may be only thinking, not direct understanding of these realities. There should be the development of right understanding which knows nĺma as nĺma and rúpa as rúpa. Usually one is so absorbed in the object which appears that one forgets to be aware of the nĺma which experiences the object. When visible object appears it is evident that there is also a reality which experiences it, a type of nĺma. If there were no nĺma which experiences visible object how could visible object appear? It is seeing which sees, no self who sees. There can be awareness of one reality at a time, a nĺma or a rúpa and then one can learn their different characteristics. ****** Nina. #99571 From: han tun Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:39 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear Nina, > Nina: "Be an island to yourself, a refuge to yourself". When I first came into contact with Buddhism this impressed me very much. It is good not to be dependent on other people or a creator. Later on I found out more about the meaning of this text. How are we a refuge to ourselves? We read in the Parinibbaanasutta: "When he dwells contemplating the body in the body... feeling in the feelings... mind in the mind... dhammas in dhammas..." Thus, by the development of satipatthaana. Yourself is merely a reflexive and does not have any connection with an idea of self. Satipatthaana cuts off all darkness and leads to the highest, as the Commentary states. Darkness is ignorance or delusion, avijjaa. We are puthujjana, thus we still have ignorance and clinging. But, as you said, our duty is abandoning akusala. Ignorance arises with each akusala citta, ignorance is dangerous. It is our duty to abandon ignorance. This will take a long, long time, becaus eonly the arahat has abandoned all ignorance. Our life is a learning process, and you will agree, I am sure, that one is never too old to learn. ----------- Han: Once again, I must thank you for your patience with me. I fully understand and appreciate what you have written above. It is not that I do not know all these. It is only that I want to be practical, and believe and do things that I can manage. Or, I may be like a monk-ghost that we talked about in Burma. A monk died and became a ghost and stayed on a big tree near the village cemetery. It so happened that the road to the next village passed near that tree. If the villagers went nearby in the dark of the night he used to frighten them. So the villagers chanted protective Parittas. But as they started their chanting, the monk-ghost joined them in their chanting because he was not afraid of those Parittas, which he knew very well, and he even finished the chanting before the villagers. Since then, we used to call someone, who is doing knowingly something he should not do, a monk-ghost. I might well be that monk-ghost! ---------- Nina: BTW I liked your analysis of the Vanapatthasutta. Han: Thank you very much, Nina. ---------- Respectfully, Han #99572 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: seclusion, viveka. Re to Sarah, as well sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Tue, 14/7/09, Alex wrote: >>Sarah:When sight-seeing, do you have any idea that it's 'the Path' >or the way to develop satipatthana? A:> Can you truly do it as Satipatthana sutta says: "having removed covetenous & displeasure for the world." vineyya loke abhijjhadomanassam? Isn't desire to go around the world to enjoy nature a part of abhijja? .... S: As I recall, you asked what was different about sight-seeing compared to formal meditation (or something like that) and in my question above, I was making the point that when we go sight-seeing, we don't have any idea that it's a special 'practice' to develop the Path to enlightenment. As Jon wrote to you, "every moment of kusala is a moment of the non-arising (abandoning) of the hindrances". Whilst sight-seeing, cooking, cleaning, working or any other activity, there is seeing of visible objects, hearing of sounds, different mental states arising. There can be awareness and understanding of a reality at any time and at such moments there is right effort and the non-arising of the hindrances. It happens very, very naturally, but never at times when Self is thinking of 'right actions' to pursue in order to be aware. .... A:>MN68 does state that the Jhana removes hindrances (abhijjhadomanassam is part of them), and without jhana the hindrances can come and remain. ... S: The hindrances are only worn away and eradicated through the development of insight. Anything else is temporary suppression and does not lead out of samsara. .... >>S: When in "formal" meditation, do you have any idea of it being a >quicker Path or way to develop satipatthana? ... A:> It is the only path and satipatthana PROPERLY done and not taken out of context of other 7 factors of N8P can bring Arhatship in 7 days. ... S: The only path is that of satipatthana. Satipatthana is not "formal" meditation and none of the hundreds of suttas you've quoted have said that it is. Yes, 8 factors, led by right understanding of namas and rupas. ... >>S: Cittas, cetasikas and rupas only. There is training, but no >trainer, there are the cittas, cetasikas and rupas we call "a monk >developing samatha and satipatthana" and there are the cittas, >cetasikas and rupas we call "a woman in Rome". All conditioned >dhammas to be known, that's all. .... A:> Sarah, I don't deny the fact that it is possible to zoom in and analyze things in terms of those 3 realities. Just like quantum Physicist sits on a chair and uses a chair knowing that it is 99% empty of solid matter, it doesn't change the fact that certain events (which can be disected into citta, cetasika, rupa) do happen. Until we see that there are only those 3 samsaric realities, it is only talk. .... S: It's not a matter of "zooming in and analyzing things" into "those 3 realities". It's a matter of being aware of what appears now - a dhamma, not a place, activity or person. .... A:> Certain places are better to see realities appearing now. No need to go to Rome or Paris. Namarupa happens now, but the business keeps us from looking deep inside. .... S: Yes, no need to go anywhere else, no need to pursue any 'formal' activity. "Looking deep inside", or I'd say, "being aware and understanding what appears now" can only be at this moment or the nama or rupa being experienced. Just lost power this end, so better post quickly! Thanks for all the interesting discussions, Alex:) Metta Sarah ====== #99573 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Description or doctrine/instruction? (was, Re: effort.) - meditation sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Tue, 14/7/09, Alex wrote: A:> According to CMA and suttas manasikara , or engagement is one of the causes. When you have 0 desire at this moment to see or to hear then you will NOT SEE OR HEAR. .... S: I don't have CMA with me, could you quote what you have in mind. Kamma is the main condition/cause for seeng or hearing to occur. Manasikara arises with every single citta. The Buddha had 0 desire/lobha, but there were still conditions to see and hear as a result of past kamma. .... >The fact that you can hear while doing meditation is because you WANT to hear. You still have craving for the external world of sights, sounds and so on. .... S: The reason for hearing to occur during meditation or any other time is kamma. Accumulated craving is the cause of further craving to sights, sounds and so on. It's important to distinguish between moments of seeing or hearing which are results of past deeds and craving to what is seen or heard. .... >> S: The only meditation or 'place to see Anatta-in-action' is at this moment, ... A:> And present moment awareness is hard to achieve, even in meditation, for those not skillful. Most of the time the minds of untrained people are wondering in the past or the future. .... S: Yes, that's right. And if there's a 'trying to achieve' by 'doing', it's a lot, lot harder, i.e. impossible. .... >>S: The only meditation or 'place to see Anatta-in-action' is at this >moment, >S:the seeing now of what appears for what it is, without any selection >at all or wish to see. ... A:> It is Manasikara. (No desire for sights = no seeing at that moment) and kammavipaka from previously done kamma can result in pleasant or unpleasant sights. Same with other sense organs. ... S: Once again, manasikara arises with every citta. Whenever kusala cittas arise, there is wise attention - again no need to 'do' anything. As you say, previous kamma results in seeing of pleasant or unpleasant visible objects. .... >>S:There is no control, so no 'giving up' of it to do. Just the wrong >views and other dhammas to be known for what they are when they >appear, any time, any place. ... A:> How isn't this a "A: Self trying to control and be aware again..." .... S: Understanding more in theory about various dhammas now as anatta, not in anyone's control, is a condition for awareness and understanding to know them. Very, very naturally, without any self involved. .... A:> How isn't your talk about developing understanding & seeing realities not be a "Self trying to understand and remove avijja? ... S: Great questions! There is a big difference between understanding seeing or visible object when they are experienced as opposed to trying to be aware of them or trying to suppress them from being experienced. If one tries to know more and remove avijja, it is Self at work again. Bottom line - only right understanding can know when there is awareness, when a reality is known and when wrong view or avijja arises. Instead of minding or trying to be rid of wrong view or avijja, they can be known for what they are - mere conditioned dhammas, just as any kusala citta, even jhana is a mere conditioned dhamma. We had a major power cut and had to roam around in the heavy rain for a while, so not sure if I'm making sense any more, but will send anyway:). Metta, Sarah ========= #99574 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:17 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika sprlrt > ... what accounts for extended repetitions of jhana cittas arising? What conditions them? Hi Dan & all, In the Patthŕna I've found and translated this, pakatůpanissaya, strong-dependence on habits paccaya. - Alberto Paccayaniddeso - upanissayo section - Kusala dhammas [arisen] (just/much) earlier are condition, as strong dependence condition, for kusala dhammas [arising] (just/much) later. (aaramma.nuupanissayo, anantaruupanissayo, pakatuupanissayo) ... Pa~navaro... - vibhanga - pakatuupanissayo section: - The parikamma of the first jhŕna is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the first jhŕna. - The parikamma of the second jhŕna / ... / of nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the second jhŕna / ... / for nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana. [Parikamma is the first citta, kŕma-plane maha-kusala associated with pa~n~na, of the 5 making up a jhŕna vithi/process through the mind-door; the jhŕna citta itself being the last of the five, either belonging to the růpa/fine-material or arůpa/immaterial plane.] - The first jhŕna is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the second jhŕna. - The second jhŕna / ... / Aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the third jhŕna. / ... / for nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana. ... pŕli: pa.thamassa jhaanassa parikamma.m pa.thamassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dutiyassa jhaanassa parikamma.m dutiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. tatiyassa jhaanassa parikamma.m tatiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. catutthassa jhaanassa parikamma.m catutthassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa parikamma.m aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa parikamma.m vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa parikamma.m aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa parikamma.m nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. pa.thama.m jhaana.m dutiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dutiya.m jhaana.m tatiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. tatiya.m jhaana.m catutthassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. catuttha.m jhaana.m aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. [continues] dibbassa cakkhussa parikamma.m dibbassa cakkhussa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa parikamma.m dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. iddhividha~naa.nassa parikamma.m iddhividha~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. cetopariya~naa.nassa parikamma.m cetopariya~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.nassa parikamma.m pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. yathaakammuupaga~naa.nassa parikamma.m yathaakammuupaga~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. anaagata.msa~naa.nassa parikamma.m anaagata.msa~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dibbacakkhu dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dibbasotadhaatu iddhividha~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. iddhividha~naa.na.m cetopariya~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. cetopariya~naa.na.m pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.na.m yathaakammuupaga~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. yathaakammuupaga~naa.na.m anaagata.msa~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. pa.thamassa maggassa parikamma.m pa.thamassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dutiyassa maggassa parikamma.m dutiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. tatiyassa maggassa parikamma.m tatiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. catutthassa maggassa parikamma.m catutthassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. pa.thamo maggo dutiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. dutiyo maggo tatiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. tatiyo maggo catutthassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. sekkhaa magga.m upanissaaya anuppanna.m samaapatti.m uppaadenti, uppanna.m samaapajjanti, sa"nkhaare aniccato dukkhato anattato vipassanti. maggo sekkhaana.m atthappa.tisambhidaaya, dhammappa.tisambhidaaya, niruttippa.tisambhidaaya, pa.tibhaanappa.tisambhidaaya, .thaanaa.thaanakosallassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. #99575 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 2, no 11. sarahprocter... Hi Dan & all, --- On Sun, 26/7/09, sarah abbott wrote: >I'm interested in following your jhana thread. I agree with you about the power and conditioning effect of the ekaggata on its object. I think that natural decisive support, object predominance and repetition conditions must all be important too. ... S: That was clumsily put. I'll re-phrase it: "I agree with you about the power and conditioning effect of the ekaggata (concentration) accompanying jhana cittas on subsequent cittas (and associated cetasikas). I think that natural decisive support condition particularly, but also object predominance, repetition and other conditions must be important in this." ***** Nina & Bkk friends, we just had a chat with Vince and Nancy who'll be joining us here in Manly on Thursday for lunch and an afternoon of Dhamma discussion. If anyone else in Australia is free to join, please do! Metta Sarah ======== #99576 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:46 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Thanks, Alberto. This is good stuff. It only raises more questions, though... Why is "jhana condition" called "jhana condition" when it doesn't seem to have any special relationship to jhana? I can see that attaining jhana and maintaining jhana are two different things. The beginner can only manage one jhana citta before breaking back into everyday cittas (GCR, p49; CMA too). A condition for continuance beyond a single jhana impulsion (beyond anuloma and gotrabhu) is pakatuupanissayo paccaya (strong-dependence on habits, or "lots of practice" for short). Interesting also is that repetition condition (asevanna paccaya) plays a role in attaining the first jhana citta but does not go beyond that. Words, words, words... -Dan > Hi Dan & all, In the Patthŕna I've found and translated this, pakatůpanissaya, strong-dependence on habits paccaya. - Alberto > > Paccayaniddeso - upanissayo section > - Kusala dhammas [arisen] (just/much) earlier are condition, > as strong dependence condition, > for kusala dhammas [arising] (just/much) later. > (aaramma.nuupanissayo, anantaruupanissayo, pakatuupanissayo) > ... > Pa~navaro... - vibhanga - pakatuupanissayo section: > - The parikamma of the first jhŕna is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the first jhŕna. > - The parikamma of the second jhŕna / ... / of nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana > is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, > for the second jhŕna / ... / for nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana. > [Parikamma is the first citta, kŕma-plane maha-kusala associated with pa~n~na, of the 5 making up a jhŕna vithi/process through the mind-door; the jhŕna citta itself being the last of the five, either belonging to the růpa/fine-material or arůpa/immaterial plane.] > > - The first jhŕna is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the second jhŕna. > - The second jhŕna / ... / Aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m is condition, > as strong-dependence on habits condition, > for the third jhŕna. / ... / for nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana. > ... > > pŕli: > pa.thamassa jhaanassa parikamma.m pa.thamassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dutiyassa jhaanassa parikamma.m dutiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > tatiyassa jhaanassa parikamma.m tatiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > catutthassa jhaanassa parikamma.m catutthassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa parikamma.m aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa parikamma.m vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa parikamma.m aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa parikamma.m nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > pa.thama.m jhaana.m dutiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dutiya.m jhaana.m tatiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > tatiya.m jhaana.m catutthassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > catuttha.m jhaana.m aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > [continues] > dibbassa cakkhussa parikamma.m dibbassa cakkhussa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa parikamma.m dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > iddhividha~naa.nassa parikamma.m iddhividha~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > cetopariya~naa.nassa parikamma.m cetopariya~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.nassa parikamma.m pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > yathaakammuupaga~naa.nassa parikamma.m yathaakammuupaga~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > anaagata.msa~naa.nassa parikamma.m anaagata.msa~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dibbacakkhu dibbaaya sotadhaatuyaa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dibbasotadhaatu iddhividha~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > iddhividha~naa.na.m cetopariya~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > cetopariya~naa.na.m pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > pubbenivaasaanussati~naa.na.m yathaakammuupaga~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > yathaakammuupaga~naa.na.m anaagata.msa~naa.nassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > pa.thamassa maggassa parikamma.m pa.thamassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dutiyassa maggassa parikamma.m dutiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > tatiyassa maggassa parikamma.m tatiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > catutthassa maggassa parikamma.m catutthassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > pa.thamo maggo dutiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > dutiyo maggo tatiyassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > tatiyo maggo catutthassa maggassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > sekkhaa magga.m upanissaaya anuppanna.m samaapatti.m uppaadenti, uppanna.m samaapajjanti, sa"nkhaare aniccato dukkhato anattato vipassanti. > maggo sekkhaana.m atthappa.tisambhidaaya, dhammappa.tisambhidaaya, niruttippa.tisambhidaaya, pa.tibhaanappa.tisambhidaaya, .thaanaa.thaanakosallassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > #99577 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 2, no 11. onco111 Hi Sarah, S: I agree with you about the power and conditioning effect of the ekaggata (concentration) accompanying jhana cittas on subsequent cittas (and associated cetasikas). I think that natural decisive support condition particularly, but also object predominance, repetition and other conditions must be important in this. --> Yes, other conditions and other cetasikas too. Howard's question was specifically about ekaggata. I found it interesting that repetition condition is only good for helping launch the first jhana citta before petering out (GCR, p. 49), but it is pakatuupanissayo paccaya rather than repetition condition that kicks in for maintenance. -Dan #99578 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 6:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 2, no 11. onco111 Hi again Sarah, S: I've really been appreciating your flurry of posts and the points that you've been discussing in some detail. --> It's been a pleasure! S: In the past we've discussed at length about pariyatti and especially the importance of hearing and considering the teachings, but I agree with you that this is not the same as learning technical terms, mounds of details or Pali. --> Yes. S:...'New' Alex would have been a young school-kid at that time:-) He lives in the same town as Scott - Edmonton in the Prairies. --> Edmonton is not far from my old stomping grounds. Maybe I'll stop by sometime for a surprise visit to new dsg friends. Must be something about those cold winter nites that turns them into book-worms:-)). S: I hope you keep up your discussions with our cantankerous and not-so-cantankerous friends, lol! --> The discussions are coming to a close as the loose ends are tied, but I have enjoyed my stay and learned a lot. Metta, Dan #99579 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 8:28 am Subject: Re: More on Seclusion truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > A: "Was Sariputta in Patisambidamagga wrong? Was the Buddha wrong in teaching the practice to end all suffering? Was Buddhaghosa wrong when he described practice in VsM? Were all traditions across the centuries wrong in saying that Buddha taught practice?" > > Scott: No, *you've* misunderstood things, Alex, as far as I'm concerned. > Ok, please explain anapanasati instructions all the references "he trains" ""There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore.1 Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." [1] Breathing in long, he discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, he discerns, 'I am breathing out long.' [2] Or breathing in short, he discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, he discerns, 'I am breathing out short.' [3] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in sensitive to the entire body.'2 He trains himself, 'I will breathe out sensitive to the entire body.' [4] He trains himself, 'I will breathe in calming bodily fabrication.'3 He trains himself, 'I will breathe out calming bodily fabrication.' etc,,, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html > Scott: No. Effort will arise naturally. No one will exert it. I wasn't saying otherwise. The fact is that effort does arise. > Scott: This has always been hard for you to understand, Alex. >There really is no need to do anything because nothing can be done. Is kusala an intentionalaction? Sure it is. Only arahats with their functional consciousness do not do any more kamma. > Scott: No, because it is not 'practice' as in something one does >deliberately so that something else will happen. Kamma = intentional action. What you are saying is just another way of disregarding kamma. A rock has 0% control and is 0% responsibility. If a rock that is falling of a cliff falls on someone's head, and the person dies - the rock is not "evil" nor is it a "murderer", nor can it be said to make any "kamma". All the talk about non-existence of things + absence of kamma, seems like a heretical teaching where murder is just "sticking one matter between other aggregates of matter" and the the accountability is the same as that of a rock which falls on someone's head and the person dies. >Its just reading books. Is that how you view Buddhist path? with metta, Alex #99580 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 8:32 am Subject: GCR - 12. Repetition Condition nichiconn 12. REPETITION CONDITION (AASEVANNA PACCAYA) DEFINITION: The condition where a conditioning state relates by causing similar states, the conditioned states, to arise repeatedly after it ceases is known as repetition condition. Or, the condition where a conditioning state relates by habitually causing states similar to itself, the conditioned states, to arise after it ceases is known as repetition condition. ANALOGY: When clothes are kept in a sandalwood casket or box, the fragrant odour of the sandalwood is given to the clothes. This is an example of a thing which has the tendency of giving its attribute to another and strengthening the latter's attribute. Also, when the study of a subject is taken up, it is difficult at the begining but as time goes on and progress is made, it becomes easier by repetition. What was learnt earlier helps to make the study become gradually easier later on. Similarly, in this condition, the preceding impulsion relates by causing the subsequent impulsion of the same class to arise and strengthen it. STATES WHICH ARE NOT OF REPETITION CONDITION: Repetition condition has the nature of making efforts deliberately, so this applies only to faultless, faulty and functional impulsions. Therefore, the other states are not of repetition condition. These are: five-door advertence which has no other function than that of attention; mind-door advertence, though it can arise two or three times in succession, is very weak and cannot make efforts to increase or reduce the power of its successive states; mundane resultants, which are the result of past kamma, arise in the present existence without effort; Path impulsions can destroy the corruptions at the first time of arising; Fruition consciousnesses, although they perform the function of impulsion and can make efforts for their own arising. Moreover, Path impulsion is faultless and Fruition impulsion that folows is resultant and, therefore, the former cannot be related to the latter by repetition condition because they are not of the same class. From the above it will be seen that only the forty-seven (55 - 8) mundane impulsions are conditioning states of repetition condition. ONLY IMPULSIONS OF THE SAME CLASS ARE RELATED BY REPETITION CONDITION: In the five-door mental process, determining consciousness is related to the first impulsion by proximity force. So also, in the mind-door process, mind-door advertence is related to the first impulsion by proximity force. But since determining consciousness and mind-door advertence do not function as impulsions, they are not related to the first impulsion by repetition condition. Thus the first impulsion cannot be a conditioned state of repetition condition. On the other hand, the seventh impulsion, which is the last impulsion, is related to registering consciousness or life-continuum (depending on the mental process) by proximity force but not by repetition force. The reasons are that they are not of the same class of consciousness and the force of repetition is exhausted at this last impulsion. Thus the seventh impulsion cannot be a conditioning state of repetition condition. But the impulsions between the first and the last are both conditioning and conditioned states of repetition condition. SEVEN AND FIVE IMPULSIONS: Sensuous impulsions generally arise seven times and jhaana impulsion five times in their respective mental processes. In the case where there are seven impulsions, the repetition conditioning force of the first impulsion is received by the second impulsion which thus becomes stronger than the first. Similarly, that of the second impulsion is received by the third and that of the latter by the fourth. Through this gradual increase in strength, the force reaches its maximum at the middle impulsion which is the fourth. Then, although the force of the fourth impulsion is given to the fifth and this in turn to the sixth and this in turn to the seventh, the strength of the force gradually decreases and is exhausted at the seventh impulsion so that there is no strength to produce another impulsion. Thus the repetition of impulsions comes to an end with the seventh impulsion. That is why this latter impulsion is not a repetition conditioning state. In the case of jhaana there are five impulsions for a beginner. The first four are sensuous impulsions (preparation, approximation, adaptation and change-of-lineage) and the fifth is a jhaana impulsion which is the last. After that life-continuum arises. As regards the attainment of jhaana process, although as many jhaana impulsions take place as desired, the strength of the repetition conditioning force is exhausted the the last impulsion, life-continuum arising after it. REPETITION CONDITION WHEN THE OBJECT TAKEN IS NOT THE SAME: It was pointed out that the states are related by repetition condition only when they are of the same class. That is why in CR, p168, item 426(i) it is given that 'Adaptation (is related) to change-of-lineage; adaptation (is related) to purification (by repetition condition).' Here all the three impulsions are of the same sensuous class and plane but adaptation takes a state of mundane formation as object whereas the other two take Nibbaana as object. So, although the states take different objects they are related by repetition condition. REPETITION CONDITION WHEN THE PLANE IS NOT THE SAME: In the same reference given above it is also stated that 'change-of-lineage (is related) to Path; purification is related to Path by repetition condition.' Here all the three impulsions are of the same faultless class, take the same object, Nibbaana, but change-of-lineage and purification are of the sensuous plane whereas Path is of the supramundane plane. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NATURAL STRONG-DEPENDENCE AND REPETITION: The arising of faultless and faulty states at any time or in any existence is due to natural strong-dependence condition but the increase in the powers of these states is due to repetition condition. In this world, all the great and wonderful discoveries, jhaana, supernormal power, Attainment, Path, Fruition and the practice of the Perfections to become a Buddha such as charity and the rest are not possible without repetition condition. #99581 From: "connie" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:03 am Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika nichiconn Dear Dan, It's my understanding that only the last javana or jhaana citta doesn't have the conditioning force of repetition influencing the next citta. I also keep thinking that the strength increases all the way thru the series but GCR says it is strongest in the middle of the series. Guess I'll have to remember that... by conditions. Why do you say jhaana condition doesn't seem to have any special relationship to jhaana? peace, connie #99582 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:05 am Subject: On doing and strange double standard. truth_aerator Hi Scott, Sarah, Jon, Nina and all interested, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > >A: "And how did the rupa conventionally called 'Scott' get to the >computer in the first place to type what was typed?" > > Scott: Hey, I just sent you a reply to your last post! I don't >know, Alex, but I'll bite. How did the rupa conventionally called >'Scott' get to the computer in the first place to type what was >typed? > > Sincerely, > > Scott. Please answer that fair question, Scott. Also: Studying Dhamma, considering Dhamma, reading Dhamma - IS A PRACTICE it IS a doing. In fact only Arahants do not "do" . Even Anagamis have conceit, nothing to say about worldlings with their self views (and tendency to it) as well. If you reject meditation because "it is doing something" then you might as well reject studying, reading & considering Dhamma - because it is doing as well. Besides, doing is of many kinds, and certain kinds of "doing" are beneficial. Since only Arahants do not have avijja and do not kammically do anything, we might as well do something, do wholesome things. >Sarah: As I recall, you asked what was different about sight-seeing >compared to formal meditation (or something like that) and in my >question above, I was making the point that when we go sight-seeing, >we don't have any idea that it's a special 'practice' to develop the >Path to enlightenment. Similiar with meditation (bhavana). One doesn't think "* I am * ". Furthermore intention, aim - is required. Period. Without intention, one wouldn't move a finger. Intention for awakening IS wholesome intention and even craving & conceit for Arhatship can motivate one to develop the path (see bhikkhuni sutta with Ananda) >Sarah: The hindrances are only worn away and eradicated through the >development of insight. But insight depends on temporary suppression of the hindrances first. And that is the work of Samatha. Samatha pacifies craving which conditions clinging to wrong views in the first place. >S: It's not a matter of "zooming in and analyzing things" into >"those 3 realities". It's a matter of being aware of what appears >now - a dhamma, not a place, activity or person. And before hindrances are suppressed through and only through samatha - there can be no real awareness period. At best it is superficial awareness, at worst, it is just defilements masquerading as "awareness". >S: Yes, no need to go anywhere else, no need to pursue any 'formal' >activity. "Looking deep inside", or I'd say, "being aware and >understanding what appears now" can only be at this moment or the >nama or rupa being experienced. Being aware and understanding what appears now - IS A PRACTICE and as such is refuted by your own admission that practice is self view. Furthermore, what about frequent imperatives by the Buddha to: "There is the case where a monk, having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building, sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect, and setting mindfulness to the fore.1 Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.118.than.html "And what more is to be done? There is the case where a monk seeks out a secluded dwelling: a forest, the shade of a tree, a mountain, a glen, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle grove, the open air, a heap of straw. After his meal, returning from his alms round, he sits down, crosses his legs, holds his body erect, and brings mindfulness to the fore. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.039.than.html You've did say in #99573 >S: Not when right understanding and awareness arise naturally, >without any trying or concern about being aware. Same could be said for above quotes and for formal meditation. It arises due to causes & conditions. But it DOES happen whatever subatomic & metaphysical explanation for it is. >A:> And present moment awareness is hard to achieve, even in >meditation, for those not skillful. Most of the time the minds of >untrained people are wondering in the past or the future. .... >S: Yes, that's right. And if there's a 'trying to achieve' by >'doing', it's a lot, lot harder, i.e. impossible. Look, the same thing can be said about anything, including considering. Why don't you consider considering to be doing? The same reasons I can say for meditation. In any case, the tendency to self-views underly ALL worldlings. So any activity would be done with that anusaya. One might as well do wholesome and abstain from unwholesome - EVEN IF IT ASSUMES WRONG VIEW OF SELF (remember the tendency is there anyways, might as well gather kusala things to set up conditions for eradication of self views). With metta, Alex #99583 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:24 am Subject: Re: More on Seclusion scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Ok, please explain anapanasati instructions all the references 'he trains.' Scott: The Paa.li for 'he trains' is 'sikkhati.' From MN 118: "Breathing in long he understands: 'I breathe in long'; or breathing out long he understands: 'I breathe out long.' Breathing in short he understands: 'I breathe in short'; breathing out short he understands: 'I breathe out short.' He trains thus..." Diigha.m vaa assasanto 'diigha.m assasaamii 'ti pajaanaati, diigha.m vaa passasanto 'diigha.m passasaamii 'ti pajaanaati; rassa.m vaa assasanto 'rassa.m assasaamii 'ti pajaanaati, rassa.m vaa passasanto 'rassa.m passasaamii 'ti pajaanaati; 'sabbakaayapa.tisa.mvedii assasissaamii 'ti sikkhati... Scott: Sikkhati is (PTS PED): "Sikkhati...1. to learn, to train oneself..." Scott: Since 'oneself' is a concept - i.e., there is no dhamma 'oneself,' then sikkhati must refer to something else - to some reality. Consider the sutta again, the question is: "And how, bhikkhus, is mindfulness of breathing developed and cultivated, so that is of great fruit and great benefit?" Katha.m bhaavitaa ca, bhikkhave, aanaapaanassati katha.m bahuliikataa mahapphalaa hoti mahaanisa.msaa? Scott: Considering 'developed and cultivated', which is from 'bhaveti,' (PTS PED): "Bhaaveti [Caus. of bhuu, bhavati] to beget, produce, increase, cultivate, develop... "Bhavati [bhuu to become...] to grow ... to become, to be, exist, behave ... In general the meaning 'to become, to get' prevails, but many shades of it are possible according to context & combination ... to happen, to occur, to befall..." Scott: I'd suggest that 'training' is part of 'developed and cultivated' and refers to the impersonal process of growth of a given dhamma. It is impersonal, due to conditions, and proceeds naturally. You are befuddled by conventional language, forgetting that what are being referred to are dhammaa. There is no Self. There is no One-Who-Trains. Is kusala an intentional action? Sure it is..." Scott: Cetanaa cetasika is a universal mental factor and arises with each and every moment of consciousness. It's characteristic is willing and it is in relation to the moment. A: "Kamma = intentional action. What you are saying is just another way of disregarding kamma. A rock has 0% control and is 0% responsibility. If a rock that is falling of a cliff falls on someone's head, and the person dies - the rock is not 'evil' nor is it a 'murderer', nor can it be said to make any 'kamma'. All the talk about non-existence of things + absence of kamma, seems like a heretical teaching where murder is just 'sticking one matter between other aggregates of matter' and the the accountability is the same as that of a rock which falls on someone's head and the person dies." Scott: An interesting little essay, Alex. I fail to see where anyone is suggesting an 'absence of kamma.' This is a constant scarecrow sitting in your garden, man. This is a major misunderstanding beneath which you labour. Maybe you really, really hate and fear the notion of 'no control.' You'd have to rethink all your 'practice' and do something else instead of retreats. ;-) At least you don't have to protect years and years of misunderstanding... Sincerely, Scott. #99584 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:26 am Subject: Re: On doing and strange double standard. scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "Please answer that fair question, Scott." Scott: No. I don't think it is a reasonable question at all. Make a statement instead, if you would. (I liked imagining the stand-up comic, myself). Sincerely, Scott. #99585 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:16 am Subject: Re: On doing and strange double standard. truth_aerator Hi Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "Please answer that fair question, Scott." > > Scott: No. I don't think it is a reasonable question at all. Make a statement instead, if you would. (I liked imagining the stand-up comic, myself). > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > You answer first. I don't think the Scotty beamed you up toward the computer. The namarupa called Scott did move toward the computers and Scotts eyeballs are moving as you read this, from left to right and right to left. Alex #99586 From: "Alex" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:26 am Subject: training & kamma truth_aerator Hi Scott, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Scott" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "Ok, please explain anapanasati instructions all the references 'he trains.' > > Scott: The Paa.li for 'he trains' is 'sikkhati.' From MN 118: > Yes, and while the first two steps are pajanati, the sikkhati distinguishes from the mere observation. pajanati (present active 3rd sg verb) = knows clearly. sikkhati = verb. learns; trains oneself; practises. present active 3rd person singular. HE trains/practices Note: It is NOT reflective (sikkhate) > "Breathing in long he understands: 'I breathe in long'; or breathing out long he understands: 'I breathe out long.' Breathing in short he understands: 'I breathe in short'; breathing out short he understands: 'I breathe out short.' He trains thus..." > > Diigha.m vaa assasanto 'diigha.m assasaamii 'ti pajaanaati, diigha.m vaa passasanto 'diigha.m passasaamii 'ti pajaanaati; rassa.m vaa assasanto 'rassa.m assasaamii 'ti pajaanaati, rassa.m vaa passasanto 'rassa.m passasaamii 'ti pajaanaati; 'sabbakaayapa.tisa.mvedii assasissaamii 'ti sikkhati... > > Scott: Sikkhati is (PTS PED): > > "Sikkhati...1. to learn, to train oneself..." > > Scott: Since 'oneself' is a concept - i.e., there is no dhamma 'oneself,' then sikkhati must refer to something else - to some reality. Consider the sutta again, the question is: > Reality of practice as distinguished from just knowing clearly (pajanati) > "And how, bhikkhus, is mindfulness of breathing developed and cultivated, so that is of great fruit and great benefit?" > > Katha.m bhaavitaa ca, bhikkhave, aanaapaanassati katha.m bahuliikataa mahapphalaa hoti mahaanisa.msaa? > > Scott: Considering 'developed and cultivated', which is from 'bhaveti,' (PTS PED): > > "Bhaaveti [Caus. of bhuu, bhavati] to beget, produce, increase, cultivate, develop... > > "Bhavati [bhuu to become...] to grow ... to become, to be, exist, behave ... In general the meaning 'to become, to get' prevails, but many shades of it are possible according to context & combination ... to happen, to occur, to befall..." > > Scott: I'd suggest that 'training' is part of 'developed and >cultivated' and refers to the impersonal process of growth of a >given dhamma. Of course any action is ultimately devoid of Atta. I haven't denied this. First there is SIKKHATI (active present verb) and then results are produced. >It is impersonal, due to conditions, and proceeds naturally. You >are befuddled by conventional language, forgetting that what are >being referred to are dhammaa. There is no Self. There is no >One-Who-Trains. Actually you seem to be confused by the language. Read my recent posts, including this one. Of course anapanasati is developed by anatta process. But it IS developed and the Buddha DID recommend its development. > > Is kusala an intentional action? Sure it is..." > > Scott: Cetanaa cetasika is a universal mental factor and arises >with each and every moment of consciousness. It's characteristic is >willing and it is in relation to the moment. Kusala/Akusala isn't a universal cetasika. I was talking about kamma. If the kamma that is done now is 100% determined by previous causes, then "one is a killer solely due to past causes" and so on. Morality is negated at all, because there is no responcibility or present akusala volition. A snow avalanche that causes the death of skiers is not held responcible and neither is its action kusala or akusala. > A: "Kamma = intentional action. What you are saying is just another way of disregarding kamma. A rock has 0% control and is 0% responsibility. If a rock that is falling of a cliff falls on someone's head, and the person dies - the rock is not 'evil' nor is it a 'murderer', nor can it be said to make any 'kamma'. All the talk about non-existence of things + absence of kamma, seems like a heretical teaching where murder is just 'sticking one matter between other aggregates of matter' and the the accountability is the same as that of a rock which falls on someone's head and the person dies." > > Scott: An interesting little essay, Alex. I fail to see where >anyone is suggesting an 'absence of kamma.' If anyone say that present kamma is 100% determined by previous actions (in other words, citta has no choice between kusala/akusala) then there isn't any Kamma being done. Only when there is some degree of free choice, between kusala and akusala can their trully be intentional action. Otherwise it is like choiceless rock fall down the cliff... Note: the limited free choice is what nama choses, not a Self. P.S. What is with all self boasting and putting me down? You sure are confident in your heterodox teachings, Scott. With metta, Alex #99587 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:15 am Subject: Re: On doing and strange double standard. scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "You answer first. I don't think the Scotty beamed you up toward the computer. The namarupa called Scott did move toward the computers and Scotts eyeballs are moving as you read this, from left to right and right to left." Scott: ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #99588 From: "Scott" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:21 am Subject: Re: training & kamma scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "...Kusala/Akusala isn't a universal cetasika..." Scott: This is correct, Alex. Sincerely, Scott. #99589 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:30 pm Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Hi Connie, Thanks for making me read the GCR section (2:12) again. As you point out, when the repetition conditioning force is exhausted, the jhana impulsions end. My mistake. On first reading I was confused because I read: "In the case of jhana there are five impulsions for a beginner...the fifth is a jhana impulsion which is the last....the strength of the repetition conditioning force is exhausted with the last impulsion." This makes it look like repetition condition ends with the fifth impulsion, so there had to be a different paccaya for continuance of jhana. But I didn't properly digest the "...although as many jhana impulsions take place as desired, the strength of the repetition conditioning force is exhausted with the last impulsion...", which implies that the repetition condition carries through from parikamma to upacara to anuloma to gotrabhu to as many jhana cittas as there are going to be. As for the strength of repetition condition reaching its maximum in the middle impulsions, hmmm.... I don't understand the "seven impulsions", but for the jhana impulsions, my understanding is that there can be many parikamma and upacara cittas but then ----boom----boom: anuloma and gotrabhu hit singly and but for an instant, then jhana. So many parikammas and upacaras, but only one anuloma and gotrabhu. Wouldn't it make sense for repetition condition to be stronger for parikamma and upacara, and weaker for anuloma and gotrabhu? C: Why do you say jhaana condition doesn't seem to have any special relationship to jhaana? --> I'm just going by the description in GCR (pp. 65-66), viz. "It is due to jhana condition that a faultless or faulty action in though, word or deed can be completely performed from the beginning right through to the end." E.g., taking a step, finishing a sentence, etc. can be accomplished due to jhana condition holding the attention to the task at hand. With appreciation, -Dan #99590 From: "Dan D." Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:35 pm Subject: Re: Concentration as a Universal Cetasika onco111 Alberto, Did I get it backwards? On second reading, it looks like it is pakatuupanissayo paccaya that pushes the parikamma-upacara-anuloma-gotrabhu-jhana sequence, while repetition condition pushes jhana-jhana-jhana-jhana... -Dan --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dan D." wrote: > > Thanks, Alberto. This is good stuff. It only raises more questions, though... Why is "jhana condition" called "jhana condition" when it doesn't seem to have any special relationship to jhana? > > I can see that attaining jhana and maintaining jhana are two different things. The beginner can only manage one jhana citta before breaking back into everyday cittas (GCR, p49; CMA too). A condition for continuance beyond a single jhana impulsion (beyond anuloma and gotrabhu) is pakatuupanissayo paccaya (strong-dependence on habits, or "lots of practice" for short). Interesting also is that repetition condition (asevanna paccaya) plays a role in attaining the first jhana citta but does not go beyond that. > > Words, words, words... > > -Dan > > > Hi Dan & all, In the Patthŕna I've found and translated this, pakatůpanissaya, strong-dependence on habits paccaya. - Alberto > > > > Paccayaniddeso - upanissayo section > > - Kusala dhammas [arisen] (just/much) earlier are condition, > > as strong dependence condition, > > for kusala dhammas [arising] (just/much) later. > > (aaramma.nuupanissayo, anantaruupanissayo, pakatuupanissayo) > > ... > > Pa~navaro... - vibhanga - pakatuupanissayo section: > > - The parikamma of the first jhŕna is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the first jhŕna. > > - The parikamma of the second jhŕna / ... / of nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana > > is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, > > for the second jhŕna / ... / for nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana. > > [Parikamma is the first citta, kŕma-plane maha-kusala associated with pa~n~na, of the 5 making up a jhŕna vithi/process through the mind-door; the jhŕna citta itself being the last of the five, either belonging to the růpa/fine-material or arůpa/immaterial plane.] > > > > - The first jhŕna is condition, as strong-dependence on habits condition, for the second jhŕna. > > - The second jhŕna / ... / Aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m is condition, > > as strong-dependence on habits condition, > > for the third jhŕna. / ... / for nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatana. > > ... > > > > pŕli: > > pa.thamassa jhaanassa parikamma.m pa.thamassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > dutiyassa jhaanassa parikamma.m dutiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > tatiyassa jhaanassa parikamma.m tatiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > catutthassa jhaanassa parikamma.m catutthassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa parikamma.m aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa parikamma.m vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa parikamma.m aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa parikamma.m nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > > > pa.thama.m jhaana.m dutiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > dutiya.m jhaana.m tatiyassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > tatiya.m jhaana.m catutthassa jhaanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > catuttha.m jhaana.m aakaasaana~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > aakaasaana~ncaayatana.m vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatana.m aaki~nca~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > aaki~nca~n~naayatana.m nevasa~n~naanaasa~n~naayatanassa upanissayapaccayena paccayo. > > > > [continues] > #99591 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 10:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: characteristic of thinking kenhowardau Hi Sarah, --------- <. . .> S: The Buddha knew that Ananda understood that in the ultimate sense there are only namas and rupas, no alms bowl. However, I'm sure he was also intending that Ananda would pass the bowl. ---------- I could be convinced either way. So I'll take your word for it. ------------ S: > > > It's like if we discuss a gift for a friend. We know from our studies that whilst having such a discussion that there are only conditioned dhammas and that whilst giving a gift there are only conditioned dhammas. That doesn't mean that the discussion about the gift is really to point to these conditioned dhammas, or does it? ------------ I'm still trying to see the point you are making there. But don't worry, it'll dawn on me eventually. If a Buddha (not being prone to common chatter) was to talk about a gift, it would have to be for the purposes of satipatthana wouldn't it, or would it? :-) Ken H #99592 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (36) nilovg Dear Han, Op 26-jul-2009, om 10:39 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > It is only that I want to be practical, and believe and do things > that I can manage. > > Or, I may be like a monk-ghost that we talked about in Burma. -------- N: What a story. Ghosts always are hungry and thirsty. It is fortunate that we are still in the human plane where we can hear the Dhamma and discuss Dhamma, although both for you and for me it will not be for long! We are putthujana but we can still help one another. You helped Sarah with the Vanapatthasutta. I am thinking of Chew's post on putthujana who can help and who is still learning: Nina. #99593 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] attaining N8P, perfecting sammaditthi & sila = sotapanna. Not other way around. nilovg Dear Alex, Op 26-jul-2009, om 2:29 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > I think that it is better to say that > until one's right view has not been perfected ditthisampanna - one > is not yet a sotapanna. (Note: only arhats have perfect panna) > > Or more precisely: > until one has not been attained N8P, and perfected sila, - one is > not yet a sotapanna. ------- N: It depends on the way how you view it. We can also say: at the moment of the magga-citta of the sotaapanna the bases for heavy akusala kamma are eradicated, not before. Wrong view is completely eradicated, not before. Nina. #99594 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Jul 26, 2009 11:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: characteristic of thinking sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Mon, 27/7/09, kenhowardau wrote: >If a Buddha (not being prone to common chatter) was to talk about a gift, it would have to be for the purposes of satipatthana wouldn't it, or would it? :-) ... S: The Buddha praised all kinds of kusala. So if he was praising Anathapindika's great generosity, I think it was just to praise such great kusala. If he then went on to show that such generosity is worth very little indeed compared to metta, it was to show the greater kusala of metta. Later he would of course indicate that this is nothing compared to the development of insight. So I'm sure we can say that the aim was to point to satipatthana as the only way out of samsara, but this doesn't mean that other kinds of kusala which should be praised and developed were not praised and encouraged. This is satipatthana too - understanding such moments of kusala for what they are too. I have a feeling this is a word-quibble only..... You could always pop down for the Vince session on Thursday or the Feb sessions in Bkk to pursue live:). Metta Sarah p.s.... and just saw some whales at a distance in front of our seaside room! ======= #99595 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 2, no 11. sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, The other note reminded me that I never replied to this one: --- On Tue, 14/7/09, kenhowardau wrote: >I think you have explained in the past that, without satipatthana, there can be no development of kusala. There can be kusala, but no development of it. .... S: As Rob K indicated, without bhavana (mental development with rt understanding), there can be kusala but no development. However, bhavana can be samatha or satipatthana. So even those who've never heard the Buddha's teachings or reject them completely can still develop good qualities such as metta or other kinds of samatha. .... >That means there can be no conventional wisdom, doesn't it? ... S: There can be and is. For example, there can be "conventional wisdom" that it's good to be kind to animals or people around one. ... >And I think experience bears that out. For every conventional argument *against* something (for example, against speaking one's mind or "trying to be the world's manager") there can be an equally good conventional argument in *favour*. ... S: Now you're talking about "conventional arguments" without any wisdom or right understanding. {Btw, I was chatting to Vince about our discussions in Italy one of my nieces and her friend stayed with him and Nancy recently and so he has an interest in the Procter Politics:-) Anyway, he made the good point that speaking out in the name of truth is very often an excuse for venting one's dosa.] ... >We can argue that only our own bad qualities can ultimately harm us. And, even in conventional terms, that argument can sound convincing. But it won't hold up for long. Without some proof of the ultimate *reality* of good and bad qualities, why should anyone listen? Why shouldn't they be equally convinced by the opposite argument and fight tooth and nail against their external enemies? .... S: [You'll have to join the session with Vince!] For one thing, even if there's no understanding of dhammas as anatta, I think (like Dan, perhaps), that people can begin to see how their dosa harms them and makes life miserable, the opposite of metta and kindness. A little wise reflection, even if it's all taken at the next moment for "Me" and "My personality that's so important". ..... >Without satipatthana there can be no clear way out. And so, if our friends aren't interested in satipatthana, there is not a lot we can do for them, is there? ... S: True - only one way out and the only way that will really have a lasting effect. However, it's still kindness to show generosity (even if it just feeds attachment) or to encourage kusala of any kind (even if it all gets taken for self). We know that no one likes to experience dosa or be unhappy in anyway, so we try to make life a little easier and pleasanter for those around us whilst we can. Metta Sarah ======= #99596 From: han tun Date: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:33 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (36) hantun1 Dear Nina, N: What a story. Ghosts always are hungry and thirsty. It is fortunate that we are still in the human plane where we can hear the Dhamma and discuss Dhamma, although both for you and for me it will not be for long! We are putthujana but we can still help one another. You helped Sarah with the Vanapatthasutta. I am thinking of Chew's post on putthujana who can help and who is still learning: ---------- Han: I think we have different ghost stories depending on our culture. Do not pay too much attention to the authenticity of my ghost story. What is more important is to quote a story that would portray a person like me who knows things but chooses to believe and act differently, and who is prepared to face whatever consequences that may result from his action. It is a good reminder that both for you and for me it will not be for long. Many times now, I go to sleep wondering whether that would be my last sleep! Yes, for whatever little time that we have, we can learn and help each other to learn. For that matter, you are a very good helping hand, I must say. And for helping others, you are accumulating good kusala kamma that will be the conditions for the arising of more kusala cittas. I also like what Chew had written. Respectfully, Han #99597 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Hi Dan, --- On Fri, 24/7/09, Dan D. wrote: D:>--> Right. Intellectual understanding of lists of khandas, dhatus, ayatanas, cetasikas, etc. is (not quite) useless, but discrimination of realities appearing at the present moment is bhavana. N>>: If we understand that pariyatti pertains to the reality appearing at this very moment there is no doubt about the interdependence of study and practice. D:> --> Yes, if "pariyatti" is understood in that way, but that's not how it appears in the texts. ... S: I think that if we don't get lost by the word, there are many, many suttas (such as those in AN, but not to hand now) which point to the importance of wise reflection of a word or term heard and how this is more precious that hearing a lot with no understanding. Whatever the Buddha taught was for pariyatti leading to patipatti and pativedha, surely? Anyway, you've made good points that I'm sure we all agree with, that pariyatti is not a matter of memorising lists and numbers! A great idea to visit Dan and Alex in Edmonton, especially now you've all bonded so well and "out-condescended" each other satisfactorily:-) Perhaps Ann could pop over from Vancouver to mediate at the "sanctimonious session":-)) Just remember a pic for the album when you get into the serious "put-downs":-))) Always great when you drop by, Dan.... Metta Sarah ======== #99598 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:38 am Subject: [dsg] The World in the Buddhist Sense. Ch 5, no 6. nilovg Dear friends, In the above quoted sutta we read about the dissecting of a cow. When it has been dissected there is no longer the idea of a whole cow. When we join realities together into a “whole” there is the idea of a thing, a person, a self. When pańńĺ directly realizes visible object as rúpa, not self, hardness as rúpa, not self, hearing as nĺma, not self, and the other realities appearing one at a time as not self, the concept of a whole will disappear. After I had typed the text about dissecting the cow, my husband and I were having dinner. While we were eating I was still busy “dissecting the cow”. I liked the food and I remembered the words of the sutta that we are bound by delight and attachment. We are bound by these “tendons”, but wisdom can cut them away. The scriptures can be a condition to consider different nĺmas and rúpas which appear in daily life. We are bound by attachment and delight with regard to what is experienced through the six doors. We like savours and tasting, we want to go on tasting. We like visible object and seeing, we want to go on seeing. We like sound and hearing, we want to go on hearing. We like thoughts and thinking, we want to go on thinking. Thus there are conditions to go on in the cycle of birth and death. It is because of clinging that we must be reborn. There will be the arising of nĺma and rúpa in other existences, again and again. Why did the nuns have to hear the same sermon again? Hearing it only once was not enough. We also would need to hear it again and again, many more times. We still cling to the internal sense-fields and the external sense-fields. That is why it is necessary to be aware of seeing, visible object, hearing, sound, of all realities which appear through the six doors, over and over again, without preference for a particular reality, without excluding any reality. Thus we have to be busy, “dissecting the cow ” . ****** Nina. #99599 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jul 27, 2009 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Inconvenient truth - Renunciation sarahprocter... Hi Dan (& Alex), --- On Fri, 24/7/09, Dan D. wrote: >>A: The more proper the study (suttamaya panna) is the more material it gives for (cittamayapanna) and conditions Bhavanamayapanna. ... S: Yes, this is correct... ... D:> --> Are you getting these right? In Vibh. (§768) cintamayapańńa comes first and defined as "...ability to apprehend states [that] is acquired without hearing from others" (Book of Analysis, p. 425). .... S: There are different kinds and levels of suta- and cintamayapa~n~naa as I understand and these terms were, I believe, commonly used at the time. As far as satipatthana or vipassana are concerned, only a Buddha doesn't need to hear from others. So we need to consider if it's referring to the Bodhisatta/Buddha. .... >This is very different from "intellectual understanding of what is heard from others." Some teachers (e.g., Goenka) talk about a progression from sutamayapańńa to cintamayapańńa to bhavanamayapańń a, but I don't see it in the texts. Are they just making it up? .... S: This is correct. Try U.P. under 'sutamayapanna' or a text such as Psm. Perhaps Connie can help. I've asked KS the same question about the order given in texts such as AN. .... >Vism (XIV, 14): "Understanding acquired without hearing from others is that consisting in what is reasonaed [cintamayapańń a] because it is deduced by one's own reasoning." ... S: For the Buddha. Metta Sarah ======