#102000 From: Vince Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:21 pm Subject: Re[2]: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. cerovzt@... Hi Sarah thanks for your words :) no, I have a Mahayana background. I have been only the last two years involved with Theravada. So still I'm very ignorant of all this. I'm learning a lot of all your comments in this list, so thanks to yours for writing here. Vince, > Hi Vince, > just a quick welcome here! > If you feel inclined, pls tell us a little about your background, > your interest in the Dhamma, where you live and so on. > Look forward to more chat later. Meanwhile I'm appreciating all > your contributions. Clearly, you've been studying a lot... > Metta > Sarah #102001 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] To Khun Nina. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/5/2009 5:02:15 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------- H: > It seems to me that knowing-as-an-object is only one sort of knowing, though it is the central one. ------- I am wondering if you have made a typo there. Did you mean to say knowing-as-an-object or knowing-of-an-object? --------------------------------------------------- I should have said either " knowing-of-an-object" or "knowing-of-something-as-an-object." -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- H: > When there is mental ease (i.e., equanimity), that is a mental event, and all mental events are a kind of knowing. -------------- Yes, although I would prefer to use the word "experiencing" rather than "knowing" in this context. --------------------------------------------------- Okay. :-) ------------------------------------------------- In Abhidhamma, the experiencing performed by panna is called "knowing:" the experiencing performed by sanna is called "marking and remembering:" the experiencing performed by vedana is called "feeling" . . . and so on. ----------------------- H: > Feeling an object as pleasant is a kind of knowing. Disliking an object is a kind of knowing. The ease or pleasant feeling or disliking are all affective mental functions. While they are in effect, they are part of experience even though they are not the object of consciousness. ------------------------ I think I see what you mean: the object virtually takes on the qualities of the consciousness. And so an object experienced with pleasant vedana, for example, would be experienced as a "pleasant object." -------------------------------------------------- Yes. ------------------------------------------------- That theory might fall down, however, when all the other concurrent namas are taken into account. The object would also have to be experienced as a "contacted object" on account of phassa, as a "concentrated upon object" on account of samadhi, as a "laid hold of object" on account of vitakka, as a "repeatedly stuck object" on account of vicara . . . the list goes on. :-) And so I would rather say that the object was simply experienced as the object. Any pleasant vedana, or contact (etc) would have to be experienced separately in subsequent citta processes. Or not at all. -------------------------------------------------- I think it is a kind of experiencing co-occuring with the knowing of the object. -------------------------------------------------- Ken H =========================== With metta, Howard #102002 From: Herman Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja egberdina Hi all, 2009/11/5 Christine > Hello all, > > Notification of the Wat Nong Pah Pong Sangha decision to revoke the status > of a branch monastery > The Buddhist Channel, Nov 5, 2009 > > The following is the official statement issued by Wat Nong Pah Pong with > regards to the excommunication of Ajahn Brahmavamso from its Sangha ( > > This is a stark reminder that the road to enlightenment and institutionalised Buddhisms are only distant cousins - many times removed. Cheers Herman #102003 From: Staisha Perry Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fw: DSG Welcome info staisha_perry Hi James and Sarah,  Thank you again for thee welcome and also help me along this long path, it's nice to have good friends, Dhamma and many discussions on in this dhamma group.  Yes, i had gone to visit Wat Promkunaram, in Waddell and you are the people are very kind and helpful.  I have practiced abroad in England at the amaravati monastery in hemel hempstead,england. the nuns from this monastery will be opening the first training monastery for nuns in the theravada forest tradition of ajahn chah and ajahn sumedho. to find more aboutthis please feel free to visit: saranaloka foundation ( www.saranloka.org)  anyhow, there are more questions but one at a time works for me, it takes a little time for contemplation and practice, sometimes it takes someone elses explaination to make it click...to make all the pieces fit.  i have live in arizona for a number of years since 1996, this is were my son of 16 years lives with his father. last year my intention was to study abroad with goenka, and at a few monasteries in England. unfortunatly the trip was cut short, so back to the states i came. now i am working in Phoenix,   --- On Wed, 11/4/09, James wrote: > Sarah: A delayed thanks for this note. I'm glad to see you've settled in well now. I like your questions. James also comes from Arizona, but now lives outside the States. Short content is fine, don't worry. > If you live in Phoenix or close by, you might like to visit Wat Promkunaram. It is in Waddell, AZ. The monks are very friendly and helpful. Metta, James #102004 From: Staisha Perry Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] names/label staisha_perry hi nina, i hope you are doing well, this is that way it seems, but i could be wrong understanding & experiencing are two different things.. Understanding concept does not guarantee one can detach, but experiencing truth does guarantee one to be able to detach from concept. Therefore, there is teaching between concepts and truth. Understanding is just the 1st step for realization of the truth. please share, explain or add to this, Thank you respectfully ---------- peace in the way-staisha #102005 From: Staisha Perry Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 4:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Fw: DSG Welcome info staisha_perry Hi James and Sarah,  ...and just studying working, trying to save for the opening of the training monastery in california. perhaps one day i can visit one of the discussion groups in thailand or india with all of you.  one thing i have learned in the past eight years, it was a hard lesson, i can practice anywhere, everywere, dhamma is right in front of you, haha your noise.  when in doubt start again  wellbeing to you sarah, james, and everyone   #102006 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "freawaru80" wrote: > > > > Hi Ken, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" kenhowardau@ wrote: > > ------------------ > > > > Maybe so, but let's not confuse the other way (the insight plus jhana > > way) with formal practice. There is no formal practice of any kind in > > the Buddha's Dhamma. Everything is conditioned. There is no control over > > reality. > > What exactly do you mean by "there is no control over reality?" > ----------- Hi Freawaru, As you will no doubt agree, there is only the present moment. The Buddha taught that the present moment contained various conditioned namas and rupas. Conditioned namas and rupas arise, perform their functions and fall away *without any controlling self or permanent soul.* If we understood this teaching, would we have any desire to "do" anything about ultimate reality? - to control it in any way? What would we do, and for whom would we do it? There are only dhammas! Right understanding (panna-cetasika) has its own ways of doing what has to be done (eradicating ignorance and wrong view). The appropriate right effort occurs instantly with the arising of panna . There is no control over it and no need for control. Control and the need for control are illusions that belong in the ultimately illusory world of people, places and things to do. Therefore, whenever we find ourselves wanting to do something - to take some controlling action - in order to follow the Buddha's teaching we are misunderstanding that teaching. There is only the present moment! Ken H #102007 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. ptaus1 Dear Nina, Thanks for your reply. > N: We cannot pinpoint anything. I used to ask: how far does visible > object extend. The answer always was: just whatever appears through > eyesense. > We should not think too much, then the reality is thinking, not > seeing. Seeing sees all that is visible. pt: Okay, can we then define the terms a little further please. I mean, whenever it was said "visible object", I used to understand it that a definite object was meant (apple, table, etc). Then that turned out to be wrong and a more correct way was that "visible object" refers to a definite color in the external rupa kalapa (blue, red, etc). However, now it seems that's not correct either - when you say that all background colors are included, I'm trying to understand what does that mean exactly. Would it be the same as saying that "visible object" is all the colors that come into contact with pasada rupa in the eye at that moment? Or in more scientific terms - all the light that reflects from the surroundings onto the retina at that moment? Further, you recently said in a post to Alex (101687): > N: ...the stream of bhavangacittas is arrested when an new object impinges on a doorway. The first citta of a new process after the bhavangacittas are arrested is the sense-door adverting- consciousness, in this case the eye-door adverting consciousness. It does not see, it merely adverts, turns towards visible object and is followed by seeing." pt: When saying "a new object impinges on a doorway" - by "doorway" you mean pasada rupa in the eye? > > pt:At which point in the sense-door process (if at all) there comes > > a separation (or picking up) of a separate object (like an apple) > > out of all the background colors? > ------ > N: Picking out a separate object is already defining, thinking, not > seeing; and this occurs in a mind-door process. All the cittas in an > eyedoor process experience the same object: just colour or visible > object. pt: Thanks, this makes sense, however, now I'm wondering what happened to vipaka? I thought that vipaka was one of the the condition for eye-consciousness of a certain object to arise in the first place, but if there are no definite "objects" up until the mind-door, then I must be misunderstanding something about what's meant by the "sense-object" for vipaka condition. Further, if it's just color (or even many colors) that's the visible object, then how is that inherently pleasant or unpleasant? I remember that in abhidhamma objects are inherently pleasant or not (I think the example was that seeing gold is considered inherently pleasant and thus kusala vipaka), but how is a color like blue, red, etc, inherently un/pleasant as a/kusala vipaka? Thanks for your patience. Best wishes pt #102008 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:17 pm Subject: Following Buddha's teaching. Jhana IS the path to awakening MN36 truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > > > > What exactly do you mean by "there is no control over reality?" > > > ----------- > > > Hi Freawaru, > > As you will no doubt agree, there is only the present moment. The Buddha > taught that the present moment contained various conditioned namas and > rupas. > > Conditioned namas and rupas arise, perform their functions and fall >away *without any controlling self or permanent soul.* Same with Buddhist (as opposed to Hindu) meditation. > If we understood this teaching, would we have any desire to "do" > anything about ultimate reality? - to control it in any way? Not in meditation, there is no control there. Letting go is what happens in meditation and it is much harder to do it in daily life, for most people. In "real" life, see what happens if as a driver you let go of the steering wheel while driving into the tree. > What would we do, and for whom would we do it? There are only >dhammas! The deeper the letting go of doer and doing, the deeper into Jhanas you go. Self is not a factor, it is an obstacle to Jhana. Try to forget about Self when being ripped off at the store or in some life threatening situation in "the real world". "Better than a hundred yearslived without virtue, uncentered, is one day lived by a virtuous person absorbed in jhana.And better than a hundred years lived undiscerning, uncentered,is one day lived by a discerning person absorbed in jhana. " - Dhp VIII Sahassavagga Thousands 110-115 "So, Ananda, I have taught you the unexcelled development of the faculties in the discipline of a noble one; I have taught you how one is a person in training, someone following the way; I have taught you how one is a noble one with developed faculties. Whatever a teacher should do — seeking the welfare of his disciples, out of sympathy for them — that have I done for you. Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, Ananda. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you all." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.152.than.html With metta, Alex #102009 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Third kind of nibbana element and cessation ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks very much for the quotes and explanation. > At the death of an arahat, parinibbana, no nama aggregates ever arise again and no further rupas arise conditioned by kamma. There's no more life-force. As you say, nibbana can only be experienced "from stream-entry to parinibbana", depending on particular conditions of the arahat in the "upt to parinibbana" case. pt: I take it that the Mahayana notion that it is only the clinging aggregates (afflicted aggregates) that cease for a Buddha at death, but not non-clinging aggregates, is invalid in Theravada? Best wishes pt #102010 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau Hi Ken O, There may be some difference in the ways we are using the word 'criticise' but I am sure we agree on all the major points. ------------ <. . .> KO; She would not critised, that is not her way. To me, she knows if she critise, it is the arisen of dosa. She will ask you questions but she will not criticise. -------------- I will agree that no good ever came from dosa. But we can criticise wrong view without having dosa. And we shouldn't feel intimidated. There may be some hurt feelings when people are told their formal practices are not the Way, but the chance to hear the true Dhamma is priceless. Let's not deny it to people out of misdirected politeness. --------- KO:> As Nina said there is confusion over the word formal. There is astipulated method, pse check Visud. There is even a step by step instruction on breathing meditation, and to some it could be classified as a formal practise. --------- If even just one tiny part of the Dhamma was to be understood as an instruction - as distinct from a description of the way things are - then the entire Dhamma may as well be seen that way. Dhammas are either controllable or not controllable; they can't be both. -------------------- KO: > We cannot make such assertion that there is no formal or a stipulated method, because in many cases of Visud the student take a meditation subject from the teacher viz aside the pre-requisite for taking it. Hence this could be seen as a formal practise. --------------------- With wrong understanding almost everything in the suttas could be seen as an instruction to formally practise. It is our job to ask "How can these apparent instructions be understood in the light of anatta? If there are only the presently arisen, fleeting namas and rupas (with no persisting thing or self), then how are we to understand 'do this' and 'don't do that'?" ---------------------------- KO: > Formal practise should not equate to control, it could be a way of live that they have accumulated since past aeons, the routine they have learnt many lives ago. ---------------------------- Then let's not use the term "formal practice" to describe normal routines. Normal routines are performed without any expectations of changing the present conditioned reality. Therefore, they are not formal practices (as the term is used here at DSG). ------------------- KO: > Just like ancients ask us to reflect ourselves everyday, do we said it is formal. ------------------- Some people certainly would. Some people would say that reflection was something we could *do* (with or without the required conditions). But you and I know differently. Reflection is entirely dependent on conditions - just like every other reality in daily life. Ken H #102011 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 6:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: More questions about nimitta ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for the math. > Sense-shere cittas: > - 7 ahetuka (rootless) unwholesome vipaka cittas* > - 8 ahetuka wholesome vipaka cittas** > =15, less 10 dvi-pa~nca vi~n~naana cittas (the two sets referred to) > =5 > > - 8 sahetuka (rooted) kaamaavacara vipaka cittas, the results of the 8 kinds of wholesome kamaavacara cittas > > So that gives us 5 +8 = 13 sense-sphere vipaka cittas, excluding the 5 pairs). > > Then, add: > > 5 ruupavacara (fine-material sphere) results > > + > > 4 aruupavacara (immaterial-shere) results > = 9 > > So the total is 13 + 9 = 22 > ***************************** pt: Ah, that must be it, I forgot about the fine-material and immaterial spheres. > S: *- 7 ahetuka (rootless) unwholesome vipaka cittas > = 5 sense consciousness beginning with seeing, + sampaticchana + santiirana > > **- 8 ahetuka wholesome vipaka cittas** > = 5 sense consciousness + sampaticchana + 2 kinds of santiirana, one with upekkha, one with somanassa. pt: Just to check - contact for patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti cittas is not included in the 22 by Bhikkhu Bodhi becasue these cittas are process-freed so they do not relate to D.O. context of contact as a link? Tadarammana cittas in sense-door process are not included in the 22 because they are in fact either santirana or sahetuka kaamaavacara vipaka cittas, which were already counted, right? Best wishes pt #102012 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 7:09 pm Subject: Lets talk about Satipatthana! MN10 truth_aerator Hello all, The famous satipatthana sutta in Kayagatasati section has exercises such as 1) Anapanasati 2) 4 postures 3) Being fully alert in various activities 4) 31 parts of the body 5) 4 elements 6) Cemetery contemplations. "The Blessed One said this: "This is the direct path for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow & lamentation, for the disappearance of pain & distress, for the attainment of the right method, & for the realization of Unbinding — in other words, the four frames of reference. Which four? "There is the case where a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He remains focused on feelings... mind... mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. A. Body "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. "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. Just as a skilled turner or his apprentice, when making a long turn, discerns that he is making a long turn, or when making a short turn discerns that he is making a short turn; in the same way the monk, when breathing in long, discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short... He trains himself to breathe in calming bodily fabrication, and to breathe out calming bodily fabrication. "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. [2] "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns that he is walking. When standing, he discerns that he is standing. When sitting, he discerns that he is sitting. When lying down, he discerns that he is lying down. Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it. "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. [3] "Furthermore, when going forward & returning, he makes himself fully alert; when looking toward & looking away... when bending & extending his limbs... when carrying his outer cloak, his upper robe & his bowl... when eating, drinking, chewing, & savoring... when urinating & defecating... when walking, standing, sitting, falling asleep, waking up, talking, & remaining silent, he makes himself fully alert. "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. [4] "Furthermore...just as if a sack with openings at both ends were full of various kinds of grain — wheat, rice, mung beans, kidney beans, sesame seeds, husked rice — and a man with good eyesight, pouring it out, were to reflect, 'This is wheat. This is rice. These are mung beans. These are kidney beans. These are sesame seeds. This is husked rice,' in the same way, monks, a monk reflects on this very body from the soles of the feet on up, from the crown of the head on down, surrounded by skin and full of various kinds of unclean things: 'In this body there are head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, gorge, feces, bile, phlegm, pus, blood, sweat, fat, tears, skin-oil, saliva, mucus, fluid in the joints, urine.' "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. [5] "Furthermore...just as a skilled butcher or his apprentice, having killed a cow, would sit at a crossroads cutting it up into pieces, the monk contemplates this very body — however it stands, however it is disposed — in terms of properties: 'In this body there is the earth property, the liquid property, the fire property, & the wind property.' "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. [6] "Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground — one day, two days, three days dead — bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'... "Or again, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, picked at by crows, vultures, & hawks, by dogs, hyenas, & various other creatures... a skeleton smeared with flesh & blood, connected with tendons... a fleshless skeleton smeared with blood, connected with tendons... a skeleton without flesh or blood, connected with tendons... bones detached from their tendons, scattered in all directions — here a hand bone, there a foot bone, here a shin bone, there a thigh bone, here a hip bone, there a back bone, here a rib, there a breast bone, here a shoulder bone, there a neck bone, here a jaw bone, there a tooth, here a skull... the bones whitened, somewhat like the color of shells... piled up, more than a year old... decomposed into a powder: He applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate.' "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or externally on the body in & of itself, or both internally & externally on the body in & of itself. Or he remains focused on the phenomenon of origination with regard to the body, on the phenomenon of passing away with regard to the body, or on the phenomenon of origination & passing away with regard to the body. Or his mindfulness that 'There is a body' is maintained to the extent of knowledge & remembrance. And he remains independent, unsustained by (not clinging to) anything in the world. This is how a monk remains focused on the body in & of itself." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html Anyone wants to discuss these? With metta, Alex #102013 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 9:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: present moment, to Ken H. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------ > Hmm, real vs unreal. Can you explain, Ken, wherein would lie the > problem with parricide? After all, all that would be happening is a modification > in a bunch of namas and rupas, right? (Or is there special significance to > the interrelatedness of the dhammas involved? That is my perspective.) ------------- I would say you were right the first time. Parricide is very bad kamma, but it is also just a moment of nama and rupa. It will have severe consequences, but (to paraphrase the Visuddhimagga) there is no traveller on the path of parricide. No person suffers. Ken H #102014 From: "Mike" Date: Thu Nov 5, 2009 11:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! mikenz66 Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > KenH: Control and the need for control are illusions that belong in the > ultimately illusory world of people, places and things to do. Therefore, > whenever we find ourselves wanting to do something - to take some > controlling action - in order to follow the Buddha's teaching we are > misunderstanding that teaching. There is only the present moment! Mike: This is the message I get from all the Buddhist teachers I have ever paid any attention to, and it matches my rather limited experience. There is certainly a danger of developing an "*I'm* a good meditator" view. Mike: However, what I can not grasp is the implication that this problem doesn't apply equally to studying the Dhamma as to any other activity. It certainly involves making choices, taking actions, and potentially producing an "*I'm* a good studier of the Dhamma" view. How do you avoid that problem? Metta Mike #102015 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 12:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau Hi Mike, -------- M: > However, what I can not grasp is the implication that this problem doesn't apply equally to studying the Dhamma as to any other activity. It certainly involves making choices, taking actions, and potentially producing an "*I'm* a good studier of the Dhamma" view. How do you avoid that problem? --------- We are discussing two questions here. One is, in what way is satipatthana developed? The other is, how can we follow that way without a controlling self? The answer to the first question is quite surprising to people like myself who were brought up to believe "Buddhism is meditation." Actually, Buddhism (the Dhamma) is all about understanding the way things are. And, like all understanding, it requires the hearing, considering, and discussion of a teaching or description. It does not require special meditative states-of-mind. The answer to the second question is the Dhamma itself. That is to say, the Dhamma is an explanation of how there can be a Way out, but no follower of that Way. So right understanding of the Way conditions more right understanding of the Way, which conditions more right understanding, . . . and so on. The Path is one of right understanding from beginning to end. Is that how you see it? Ken H #102016 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 1:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! mikenz66 Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > KenH: The answer to the second question is the Dhamma itself. That is to say, > the Dhamma is an explanation of how there can be a Way out, but no > follower of that Way. So right understanding of the Way conditions more > right understanding of the Way, which conditions more right > understanding, . . . and so on. The Path is one of right understanding > from beginning to end. Mike: Thanks for the logical explanation. So the fact that it is the Dhamma that you are choosing to study trumps the bad effects of making choices? Mike #102017 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 1:57 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 12. nilovg Dear friends, There is no lasting substance or self in the combination of fleeting physical phenomena and mental phenomena we call “person”. Neither is there a “higher self” outside. Some people believe that what we could call a self will after death be dissolved into a “higher self” into the “All”, or the cosmos. This is not the Buddha’s teaching. Even nibbåna, the unconditioned reality, is not self. All conditioned phenomena of life are impermanent, dukkha and not self. The unconditioned reality, nibbåna, does not have the characteristics of impermanence and dukkha, but it does have the characteristic of non- self. We read in the Dhammapada (verse 277-279): All conditioned realities are impermanent. Who perceives this fact with wisdom, Straightaway becomes dispassionate towards suffering. This is the Path to Purity. All conditioned realities are dukkha. Who perceives this fact with wisdom, Straightaway becomes dispassionate towards suffering. This is the Path to Purity. All dhammas are non-self. Who perceives this fact with wisdom, Straightaway becomes dispassionate towards self. This is the Path to Purity. The text states that all dhammas are non-self. Nibbåna is not a conditioned reality, but it is real, it is dhamma. Therefore, when, the text states that all dhammas are non-self, nibbåna is included. The development of the eightfold Path is in fact the development of understanding of ultimate realities: of seeing, colour, hearing, sound, of all that can be experienced through the senses and the mind. The reader may find it monotonous to read in the texts of the scriptures time and again about these realities. The aim of the teaching on ultimate realities, however, is the eradication of clinging to the concept of self. The clinging to the concept of self has to be eradicated first before there can be the elimination of other defilements. ******* Nina. #102018 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > <. . .> Thanks for the logical explanation. So the fact that it is the Dhamma that you are choosing to study trumps the bad effects of making choices? -------- Hi Mike, Choice? There is no choice. Everything is conditioned. If there was a choice I would choose to be a generous, kind, wise, wonderful person who could live forever. Or maybe a rock star! :-) There are many reasons for reading and discussing the Dhamma. Some of them are wrong reasons (desire for results, boredom with other pursuits etc). Ideally however, we will do it simply because that is where our interests lie - because it comes naturally to us. There should be no desire, no pressure, no fear, no sense of obligation. Those things would be indicative of wrong understanding. Ken H #102019 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 3:01 am Subject: Hallo Newcomers, nilovg Dear Vince, Staisha, Freawaru and other newcomers, I would like to repeat some tips Sarah gave quite a while ago: --------- 3. Go to the files section of DSG http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/ and scroll down to 'Useful Posts'. Here, scroll down to 'New to the list and new to Buddhism', also 'Abhidhamma-beginners', 'Kamma-beginners' and many more sections which may be relevant. [If it's all too much, just go to posts saved under 'zany' at the bottom:-)]. 4. If the Pali words are bugging you and you'd like to have help, consider printing out the simple Pali glossary in the files and having it next to your computer. 5. Keep asking people to clarify what they are talking about in simple language. You'll do everyone a favour. But we need an indication of what you're interested to have clarified first. --------- Nina. #102020 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 3:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: >> > Mike: However, what I can not grasp is the implication that this problem doesn't apply equally to studying the Dhamma as to any other activity. It certainly involves making choices, taking actions, and potentially producing an "*I'm* a good studier of the Dhamma" view. How do you avoid that problem? > >++++++++++ Dear Mike I don'y want to interfere between you and KenH but perhaps I can add something. The main point is that hearing/studying Dhamma is essential for right view to develop. If one does not learn the theory accurately and in sufficient depth then it is sure that one will either make no progess or progess in a wrong direction. These wrong directions can be very enticing and have the outward appearance of correctness. One may live a more serene and law-abiding life but be as deluded about the way out of samsara as ever. One may wonder whether everyone who studies, studies rightly. In fact very obviously they don't. But why is that? Mainly it is because of the very deepseated nature of self-view, it must be truly understood that there are only elements arising and passing away with no one controlling or doing anything. These elments don't want to study or not study, they are mere conditioned phenomema that arise and perform their function, and then they cease forever and a new element arises. Kind of easy to write about and of course most Buddhists easily agree with this ( a few don't) but then because of self-view people believe that they have to do something /change something in order to understand this. But the real 'change' is not anything outward it is purely the arising of understanding. And this type of understanding, as the suttas say, depends on hearing Dhamma. Now three people may hear/read this and have totally different reactions: one may properly understand, at some level. Another might say 'yes, but..I still want to do something' Another might say 'it is nonsense..' This is due to accumulations from the near and distant past. Even the one who understands correctly at the basic level may still go wrong. They may think mere acceptance of these facts is already enough whereas it is only the first step in a long path of studying and learning - both in theory and directly the difference between concept and reality- and eventually the difference between nama and rupa. Now if you are sitting down can there be understanding - even direct understanding of an element.? There can if there are conditions. You don't have to stand up to understand, or go and sit somewhere else. And if you were sitting somewhere else you don't need to come and sit here.. Or if you have desire arising, as we all do very often - can it be known as desire, as an element, right there and then? Yes, it can if there are enough conditions. But if one thought that 'Oh, here is desire I must remove it', then one is no longer following the path toward vipassana. One is either having aversion, or another more subtle desire (to get rid of the big desire) or at best one might be developing samatha. Robert #102021 From: "freawaru80" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 4:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! freawaru80 Hi Ken, > As you will no doubt agree, there is only the present moment. The Buddha > taught that the present moment contained various conditioned namas and > rupas. So far we agree :-) > Conditioned namas and rupas arise, perform their functions and fall away > *without any controlling self or permanent soul.* There is no permanent soul, but that does not mean that there is no control. > If we understood this teaching, would we have any desire to "do" > anything about ultimate reality? - to control it in any way? What would > we do, and for whom would we do it? There are only dhammas! If we would understand the teaching we would be Tataghatas. It is not what it seems to be. > Right understanding (panna-cetasika) has its own ways of doing what has > to be done (eradicating ignorance and wrong view). Yes. It is either Ignorance that controls or Wisdom. They are both controllers. The appropriate right > effort occurs instantly with the arising of panna . There is no control > over it and no need for control. Without you taking control there is Ignorance controlling. That is the default controller. > whenever we find ourselves wanting to do something - to take some > controlling action - in order to follow the Buddha's teaching we are > misunderstanding that teaching. There is only the present moment! Ah, but you take control, you want something: namely, not meditating. You keep from doing what is required for experiencing jhana, you stay away from Satipatthana. That is your control, your wish, your decision. If you would relax this control you keep you might consider trying Satipatthana. You would try to slow down the breath to a minute or more to experience the "long breath" mentioned in it. So that you can understand the Satipatthana sutta, the Buddha's Dhamma. But that is not what you want and so you control your mind and body not to experience the long breath. Freawaru #102022 From: "freawaru80" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 4:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! freawaru80 Hi Ken, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > If even just one tiny part of the Dhamma was to be understood as an > instruction - as distinct from a description of the way things are - > then the entire Dhamma may as well be seen that way. Dhammas are either > controllable or not controllable; they can't be both. > But they are both. And neither. It is an-atta. Freawaru #102023 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 5:42 am Subject: chat with Scott sarahprocter... Dear Friends, We just had a nice chat with Scott... Jon and I were laughing at the start because we were watching the news when we suddenly jumped up, remembering we'd arrange to skype Scott...Meanwhile, Scott was just surfacing for the day... A few brief notes - Scott or Jon may elaborate as they were talking together for most the time... If not, at least a few "tit-bits"... **** - Anger management, suppression, instructions in the suttas, past discussions with other friends, such as Phil on this, considering other views. - analysing the whys and why nots....just thinking, any awareness? - expectations, "how dare she...?", maana (conceit), judging what others do, the "me-centric" view of the world. - how one sees the world, the bad drivers, the rude people, all back to "me", no unpleasant sights... - The Buddha's teachings to monks dealing with the removal of anger. Can anger be "managed"? For a while, experience seems to bear out the view, but after a while, denial... - the teaching on latent tendencies....we never know what will be conditioned to arise at any moment, "out of the blue"... - Moods, provoked and unprovoked dosa.... Attachment at root, attachment to pleasant feeling. Who cares about this? - Wanting a certain outcome, a result...Any detachment from what is conditioned now? - Kusala as the remedy. Thinking of others, not oneself, advantages of kusala, especially being aware and understanding dhammas. - the bhikkhuni ordination issue.... How does it help one's development of understanding? Thanks again, Scott Metta Sarah ======== #102024 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 6:09 am Subject: Dhamma Diaries sarahprocter... Dear Ken H, Nina & all, Who's turn with the Dhamma Diary? While waiting, here's my Diary contribution. I hope others will add theirs! As you know, my younger brother was staying with us for a week. We're ill-equipped for visitors in our flat and have no spare room, but somehow we all got on fine. My brother teaches at a university in England and had been doing some work in China, so was able to pop over here. He's always cheery and very considerate, so we had many pleasant outings when he wasn't working. We discussed a few of the current DSG issues a little with him, such as the kamma-light/darkness one which he picked up very quickly and didn't find anything 'racist' in it. (When he was young and still living at home, I used to talk to him a little about the Dhamma...) We discussed the common threads about forest meditation and sitting in order to have more understanding of the present moment, selecting objects and so on. He meets people who are meditators and even those who become forest Theravada monks. His daughter had also stayed last year with Vince and Nancy and so he's also aware of their views. I actually appreciated that my brother listens carefully and doesn't rush to any judgements. The topic of consideration for others whilst speaking, writing emails and so on came up several times. He said that if he receives any emails or hears any criticism, he always pauses before replying and tries to avoid sending emails or saying anything which may sound too sharp. He's very out-going and very considerate to anyone he meets as well, I find. He asked Jon a little about what led him to become interested in Buddhism and what appealed most when he first started listening to KS. I forget most of the answer, but Jon mentioned specifically an example of how the stress on the mental states rather than the act, such as in an act of dana, made a lot of sense. He also mentioned how impressed he was by the universal application of the Teachings. (Jon may elaborate, hint!!) Interestingly, just after my brother left to return to China, I was glad to have some friendly correspondence with his wife 'K' (actually, 'partner'). She referred to some of our discussion in Italy when she had been quite disturbed about some of my mother's comments to the grand-children about their behaviour (common problem!). I had mentioned in the course of the discussion something about respect and consideration of the elderly, especially one's parents/grand-parents, but as Ken H will appreciate, there were different views on this! She'd subsequently discussed the issue with friends in England and they'd concluded that they have to apply the "dislike the behaviour accept the person" approach. In the recent correspondence, K suggested that people should have more respect for the young. I responded by suggesting that if we consider respect as kindness, consideration or courtesy, perhaps we can consider the value of respect to anyone we meet, but without expectations about others' behaviour in return. It is, after all, the expectations which lead to the difficulties. I quoted this verse everyone likes and K really liked it too. Bhaddekeratta Sutta in MN, transl by Nanamoli/Bodhi: "Let not a person revive the past or on the future build his hopes; For the past has been left behind And the future has not been reached. Instead with insight let him see Each presently arisen state" I also gave a link to Han's great message w/ quotes on anger: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/101592 It's not easy discussing the Dhamma with family members, I find. If we have disagreements here with others and little communication afterwards as a result, it's a small problem only. With family members, we particularly need to keep good relations and therefore prefer to avoid major issues. As Lukas suggested, we don't wish to condition dosa, but would also like to give helpful pointers if we can. Again the problem lies in the expectations and lack of detachment to and understanding of what is conditioned at this moment, I find. Metta Sarah p.s I wrote this a week or so ago, was interrupted, so put in 'drafts' (most unusual for me) and then forgot it until I sent the other note....:) ======= #102025 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: present moment, to Ken H. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/6/2009 12:14:18 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------------ > Hmm, real vs unreal. Can you explain, Ken, wherein would lie the > problem with parricide? After all, all that would be happening is a modification > in a bunch of namas and rupas, right? (Or is there special significance to > the interrelatedness of the dhammas involved? That is my perspective.) ------------- I would say you were right the first time. Parricide is very bad kamma, but it is also just a moment of nama and rupa. It will have severe consequences, but (to paraphrase the Visuddhimagga) there is no traveller on the path of parricide. No person suffers. ------------------------------------------------ No person suffers, so no problem? You speak of "severe consequences". What and where are they? It seems to me that if the interrelationships among the dhammas of a kammic stream (i.e., stream of kammically related namas and rupas) are ignored, the whole notion of moral consequence goes out the window. ------------------------------------------------ Ken H ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102026 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 7:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] chat with Scott nilovg Dear Sarah, how nice both of you had a chat with Scott. Op 6-nov-2009, om 14:42 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Kusala as the remedy. Thinking of others, not oneself, advantages > of kusala, especially being aware and understanding dhammas. ------ N: I am thinking here of all Kh Sujin's lovely reminders to think of others, so that we are less concerned with "self, self, self". It is especially valuable to get such reminders in a situation, while traveling with her. Nina. #102027 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 7:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhamma Diaries nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 6-nov-2009, om 15:09 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Again the problem lies in the expectations and lack of detachment > to and understanding of what is conditioned at this moment, I find. ------- N: Thank you for the reminders on respect for others. I am glad you had good discussions with your family members. As Kh Sujin always reminds us: 'Do not expect anything from anybody'. It is the lobha that leads to disappointment. It is Ken H's turn. Just simply write about your meetings with others, Ken, it need not be difficult. Nina. #102028 From: "robmoult" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 8:25 am Subject: Ajahn Brahm Removed from the Ajahn Chah Lineage robmoult I received the attached letter (indirectly) from Ajahn Chandako ===== It is with sadness that I announce that the popular monk Ajahn Brahmavamso (Brahm) has recently acted in a manner such that he and his monastery have been removed from the Ajahn Chah's lineage. Both the main monastery in Thailand and all the other western branch monasteries in the Ajahn Chah tradition have cut off official ties. As you probably know, people like Luang Por Sumedho, Ajahn Sucitto, Ajahn Pasanno, Ajahn Tiradhammo, Ajahn Candasiri, Ajahn Amaro and most of all, Luang Por Liem, are wise, compassionate and tolerant people. Only extreme behavior would warrant such a response by the rest of the abbots worldwide. Ajahn Sujato has also been involved, although his monastery is not a direct branch monastery of the Ajahn Chah tradition. Regrettably, their actions will likely have detrimental effects on the mainstream progress towards full ordination for women in the Theravada Tradition. Ajahns Brahm and Sujato secretly planned and went ahead with actions that they later admitted they knew would create disharmony in the international western Sangha. Luang Por Sumedho and the Elders Council of other senior monks and nuns were informed at the last minute, and they strongly advised Ajahn Brahm not to go ahead with this. That advice was disregarded and answered with condescending statements. A World Abbots Meeting of the branch monasteries in the Ajahn Chah tradition was planned to happen in Perth in December, hosted by Ajahn Brahm. One by one, all of the abbots of the official and associated monasteries of the Ajahn Chah lineage outside of Thailand have decided not to attend. The reason is because of the actions and attitude of Venerable Ajahn Brahmavamso. It's about how decisions are made in the Sangha and about respect for elders and peers. On October 22nd a bhikkhuni ordination was held at Bodhinyana Monastery without the prior support of the wider monastic Sangha. As a result there have been huge ramifications felt around the world. Fully comprehending the issues surrounding the ordination takes some explanation. I know the people involved pretty well. I lived at Bodhinyana Monastery for two rains retreats ten years ago, and throughout that time I had very high regard for Venerable Ajahn Brahm. Ajahn Brahmali is a good friend. I have been to India with Ajahn Vayama on pilgrimage, and I have known Ajahn Sujato for 17 years. In the past year I have gotten to know Ayya Tathaaloka, and Ayya Sucinta has stayed at our monastery in New Zealand. Having spoken with or gotten emails from all of them concerning the ordination, I think I understand their perspectives and motivations. Personally, I fully support women's aspirations to practice the Dhamma in the form of a bhikkhuni if that is their wish. In June of this year I taught a bhikkhuni monastic training retreat in California in order to help them receive proper training and to demonstrate my support for their difficult quest for equal rights for women in Buddhism. I wrote a supportive article for a bhikkhuni newsletter. I arranged and brought requisites for them from Thailand, and invited some to spend time on retreat at our monastery in New Zealand. So I'm definitely not anti-bhikkhuni. And yet I feel this particular ordination was a serious mistake. Why? First of all, the secrecy with which the ordination was planned and carried out has significantly damaged trust levels with the rest of the Sangha. The normal way we operate as an international monastic community is based on openness and discussion. However, some of the nuns and monks who participated in the ordination told me that they were requested to keep the event secret. They said it was intentionally kept quiet in order to reduce the possibility of other people voicing objections. There was no public announcement until a couple of days beforehand, and the rest of the Sangha only found out indirectly at that time. Ajahn Brahm did not inform his preceptor (the acting head of the Sangha in Thailand) or the head of the Ajahn Chah lineage, Luang Por Liem. Many people feel that they were intentionally deceived. Secondly is the timing. In just a few months, most of the senior monks and nuns from our tradition would have come together for the first time since the last WAM four years ago. Bhikkhuni ordination was one of the main topics to be discussed. In holding the ordination beforehand, Ajahn Brahm and the Sangha in Perth effectively cut off any discussion on the issue and decided it for themselves. What one monastery decides does not simply affect that monastery, but affects all the other branch monasteries around the world as well. Ajahn Brahm's decision has already had major harmful effects on the rest of us. To proceed unilaterally on such a sensitive issue as bhikkhuni ordination without consulting other senior monks or nuns came across as blatantly disrespectful and insensitive. The main issue here is not actually bhikkhuni ordination. The fact is, the vast majority of the senior western monks worldwide are sympathetic to the idea of bhikkhuni ordination, and progress in that direction was also being made in the mainstream of the Asian Theravada Buddhist countries. If Ajahn Brahm had waited to discuss the issue with his peers at the WAM, there was a realistic hope that bhikkhuni ordination would soon be accepted. Then the entire Sangha could have moved forward in unison with a spirit of harmony. I strongly suspect that this ordination at Bodhinyana will set this process of mainstream acceptance back many years. If you know monastics like Luang Por Sumedho, Ajahn Sucitto, Ajahn Pasanno, Ajahn Tiradhammo, Ajahn Candasiri, Ajahn Amaro, etc, you know that they are wise, compassionate and tolerant people. Luang Por Sumedho and Ajahn Sucitto in particular have invested a huge amount of their time to make high quality monastic training available to women. So creating and perpetuating portrayals of those who opposed this ordination as anti-bhikkhuni or sexist is simply not accurate and certainly not helpful. Using polarizing language that tries to divide Buddhists into factions of pro and con, conservative and liberal, good and bad is an unreasonable oversimplification of a far more complex situation. On November 1, only a week after the bhikkhuni ordination, a meeting was called at Ajahn Chah's monastery, Wat Pah Pong, and Ajahn Brahm was invited to clarify and explain what had taken place. This was not just a meeting of a few senior Thai and western monks. In fact, 160 of the most senior Thai forest monks came from around the country with only a few days notice to take part in this discussion. It was a public meeting that was open to anyone who wished to attend. Once the details of what actually took place were verified, the Ajahn Chah Sangha gave Ajahn Brahm the choice of either considering the ordination as null and void or being cut off from the Ajahn Chah tradition. He chose the second option. By handling the bhikkhuni ordination in the way that he did, Ajahn Brahm put the Sangha of Ajahn Chah in a position where they basically had no choice but to remove his monastery from the Ajahn Chah lineage. This was very predictable. In Thailand there is a law that makes it illegal to ordain bhikkhunis without the consent of the Great Council of Elders, the Mahathera Samakom. Although Ajahn Brahm does not reside in Thailand, if he wishes to retain a connection to the Thai Sangha, he is expected to abide by Thai Sangha laws. Even if he considered the bhikkhuni law unjust, in accepting his Chao Khun status from the King of Thailand (similar to being appointed a bishop), Ajahn Brahm agreed to uphold Thai law and the regulations of the Great Council of Elders. It is my understanding that this is explicitly written in his Chao Khun certificate. Working to change that Thai law would be constructive, but knowingly breaking the law and remaining part of the Thai lineage are incompatible. When being removed from the Ajahn Chah Sangha was so obviously predictable, one again wonders why the ordination was handled the way it was. It seems that either Ajahn Brahm intentionally forced the issue in order to be able to go independent from the Ajahn Chah lineage; or that he was very much out of touch with the rest of the Sangha. Those present at the Ajahn Chah Sangha meeting were some of the best forests monks in the world today. Some are true meditation masters and were definitely not approaching the issue from the standpoint of worldly ego. Most are monks who are excellent examples of the Buddhist teachings: wise and circumspect people who have dedicated their lives to practicing the Dhamma. All of the recent correspondence concerning the ordination had been translated into Thai, so they were well informed on the issues. They were however all, or nearly all, men, so some might get the impression that this was a sexist movement to repress equal rights for women even though this was not the case. Ajahn Chah set up one of the largest and best trained nuns communities in Thailand, and his successor, Ajahn Liem, said at the Sangha meeting that he has also spent a great portion of his life teaching the path of liberation to women. Ajahn Sujato has also been a very vocal participant in this series of events. However, since he had already declared himself independent of the Ajahn Chah lineage and Bodhinyana Monastery, his actions and statements have been considered tangential to the main issue. To the best of my knowledge, Ajahns Brahm and Sujato have never tried to present their case at an Ajahn Chah Sangha meeting or discuss it at the WAM. If they had, and it really was clearly a hopeless dead end, then maybe an ordination like this might seem reasonable. For all the western abbots of the Ajahn Chah lineage (who often have very independent views on Sangha matters) to be totally united on anything is rare. For all of them to condemn Ajahn Brahm's actions is unprecedented. Many of them have been personal friends of Ajahn Brahm for over 30 years. For them to cancel their attendance at the WAM and to go through all the difficulty of changing their flights and/or sacrificing their airfares shows how serious the matter is; however, for a western branch monastery to be removed from the Ajahn Chah lineage is unheard of. Nothing even close to this has ever happened. Only extreme behavior by someone who showed no remorse would warrant such a response by the rest of the abbots worldwide. During this process Ajahns Brahm and Sujato displayed no willingness to compromise. Their emails to the Sangha seemed condescending, focused on creating divisiveness, accusing others of being sexist and trying to pigeonhole the Sangha into distinct camps that in fact do not exist. Those who did not agree with the ordination were spoken of as a fringe conservative element, when realistically it would be more accurate to say that 95% of the ordained Theravada monastics feel that the manner in which this ordination was held was a serious mistake. Unfortunately, I believe that this ordination will be more harmful to the nuns involved than helpful. For example, the nuns will likely become even more isolated. There will be very few monasteries where they will be welcome or their ordination recognised. Ordaining in the midst of discord is not the most auspicious way to begin a life as a bhikkhuni, and even ordaining more than one bhikkhuni at a time is an offense in the bhikkhuni Vinaya. Regrettably, their actions will likely have detrimental effects on the mainstream acceptance of full ordination for women in the Theravada tradition. Again, all of this was easily predictable and avoidable, and yet the nuns involved seemed to have little or no idea that there would be negative effects resulting from this ordination. As this drama unfolded, it became increasingly clear that the real issue was not really the nuns. If the welfare of the four women involved was the primary concern, Ajahn Brahm could have easily used his influence to arrange a bhikkhuni ordination elsewhere with other non-Ajahn Chah monks. That would have achieved their aim of full ordination. It could have all happened independent of the Ajahn Chah Sangha, and it would not have resulted in waves of protest. The progress within the mainstream towards full acceptance could have continued, and monks like myself would have been happy to support and recognise the ordination. So the question then arises, 'why did this ordination have to take place at Ajahn Brahm's monastery?' A few days before the ordination, I had a long conversation with Ayya Tathaaloka to find out what was happening and to discuss some of the predictable outcomes, so that the nuns could make an informed decision. Generally, the women were not aware that there would be any major problems arising from this ordination. I suggested the option of having the ordination as independent from the Ajahn Chah Sangha as possible. I thought that this might be a way to achieve their aims while defusing the situation. The next day, Ayya Tathaaloka phoned back to say that the nuns had voted unanimously to have the ordination at Dhammasara (not a branch monastery of Ajahn Chah) and not to have Ajahn Brahm play an official role in the ordination. They were confident that this would still constitute a valid bhikkhuni ordination. This decision was subject to the agreement of Ajahn Brahm and the monks at Bodhinyana. Ayya Tathaloka and Ajahn Vayama then went to Bodhinyana to discuss the matter with Ajahn Sujato and to phone Ajahn Brahm, who was in England at the time. Ayya Tathaloka said that the nuns were not able to convince the senior monks of their alternate idea, so the nuns agreed to go ahead as originally planned. If the ordination had been independent of Bodhinyana Monastery, Ajahn Brahm would not have been able to take credit for it. Although I cannot know the motivations behind their actions, many people I have spoken to think that what was important to Ajahns Brahm and Sujato was that they go down in history as the ones who revived the bhikkhuni order in the Theravada tradition. This is only speculation, but if this is true, then in some ways the nuns themselves seemed to have been used as pawns in this greater ambition. In the days before the ordination I wrote to the nuns staying at Dhammasara: "The nuns have a very valid point in that many of the senior monks have simply not wanted to deal with the issue of bhikkhuni ordination, and the lack of serious attention has been dismissive and harmful. Well, now you have the world's attention. Good on you! At this point you still have a choice. If you hold off on the ordination, almost everyone will praise your restraint, and everyone will have to seriously discuss bringing bhikkhunis into the mainstream of the Sangha. It's currently in everyone's face. If Ajahn Chah's monastery in Thailand gives the official go ahead, then we are all ready to happily support bhikkhuni ordination in Perth. If you go ahead with the ordination now, I think it will be a big mess, actually. There is already much sadness about the disharmony between Ajahns Brahm/Sujato and the European monasteries and Thailand. Ajahn Brahm is digging his heels in even deeper." One of the great strengths that holds the Ajahn Chah Sangha together worldwide is a sense of listening to each other, mutual trust and deciding issues together. This is the example set by the Buddha. If, after Ajahn Chah passed away, each monastery had simply decided to go its own way, independently following the opinions of their various abbots while disregarding the views of peers and elders, that would have led to a weak and disjointed lineage. The communal framework set up by Ajahn Chah can accommodate a wide diversity of monks, nuns, views and lifestyles, but Ajahn Brahm has taken it way past the accepted limit. One of the reasons there is sadness around this issue is because this is the first time any of the western monasteries of Ajahn Chah has decided to split away from the group. If Ajahn Brahm had waited until the WAM to inform the rest of our Sangha that he would prefer to go independent, that would have been considered regrettable but brave and honourable. Instead, the way Ajahn Brahm has handled this bhikkhuni ordination has led to much disharmony, mistrust and bad feelings, both in monastic and lay communities. The WAM has now been rescheduled to be held in Thailand on the original dates, and the abbots who were planning to travel to Perth are now planning to attend the meeting at Wat Pah Nanachat. This letter is written merely from my perspective, so please accept it as just that. I am not writing as a representative of the Sangha. The isolation of the Perth Sangha and lay community can lead to a reinforcing of particular views without having much opportunity to hear different perspectives, so at least communication among us has increased. If I have said anything in this letter that has caused anyone offense, I apologise and ask for your forgiveness. With metta, Ajahn Chandako #102029 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 10:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Ajahn Brahm Removed from the Ajahn Chah Lineage moellerdieter Hi Rob and all, I think many members like myself appreciate to be informed about the state of Bhikkhuni ordination in the Theravada tradition and the related action by Ajahn Brahm . Thank you , Rob , for passing Ajahn Chandako's perspective. I still hope that Ajahn Brahm may provide us with an explanation for his steps. with Metta Dieter #102030 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:12 am Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahm Removed from the Ajahn Chah Lineage mikenz66 Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > I think many members like myself appreciate to be informed about the state of Bhikkhuni ordination in the Theravada tradition and the related action by Ajahn Brahm . Thank you , Rob , for passing Ajahn Chandako's perspective. > > I still hope that Ajahn Brahm may provide us with an explanation for his steps. There is a statement at the BSWA site: http://www.bswa.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=769 which is also reproduced on Ven. Sujato's blog in a comment: http://www.bswa.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=769 Metta Mike #102031 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! mikenz66 Greetings Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > Dear Mike > I don't want to interfere between you and KenH but perhaps I can add something. Thank you for your kind explanations. It is very useful to have informed input on this rather tricky and crucial issue of "control" and "self-making"... Metta Mike #102032 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:29 am Subject: Re: Ajahn Brahm Removed from the Ajahn Chah Lineage mikenz66 Correction... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > Dear Dieter, > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > I think many members like myself appreciate to be informed about the state of Bhikkhuni ordination in the Theravada tradition and the related action by Ajahn Brahm . Thank you , Rob , for passing Ajahn Chandako's perspective. > > > > I still hope that Ajahn Brahm may provide us with an explanation for his steps. > > There is a statement at the BSWA site: > http://www.bswa.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=769 > which is also reproduced on Ven. Sujato's blog in a comment: > http://www.bswa.org/modules/news/article.php?storyid=769 Sorry, http://sujato.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/ajahn-chandakos-remarks-on-bhikkhuni-ordi\ nation/#comments Mike #102033 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! truth_aerator Hello Robert, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: ... > Now if you are sitting down can there be understanding - even direct understanding of an element.? There can if there are conditions. You don't have to stand up to understand, or go and sit somewhere else. And if you were sitting somewhere else you don't need to come and sit here.. > Or if you have desire arising, as we all do very often - can it be known as desire, as an element, right there and then? Yes, it can if there are enough conditions. But if one thought that 'Oh, here is desire I must remove it', then one is no longer following the path toward vipassana. One is either having aversion, or another more subtle desire (to get rid of the big desire) or at best one might be developing samatha. > Robert > One of the conditions for paths and fruit is bhavana, samma-samadhi, which includes 4 Jhanas. The Buddha didn't teach apathetic "study, remain a householder, don't sweat it and gain awakening while cooking." "Just as when a person whose turban or head was on fire would put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness to put out the fire on his turban or head, in the same way the monk should put forth extra desire, effort, diligence, endeavor, undivided mindfulness, & alertness for the abandoning of those very same evil, unskillful qualities. But if, on reflecting, he realizes that there are no evil, unskillful mental qualities unabandoned by him that would be an obstruction for him were he to die during the day, then for that very reason he should dwell in joy & rapture, training himself day & night in skillful qualities." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an06/an06.020.than.html "here 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://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.than.html With metta, Alex #102034 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 12:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Dear pt, I am glad you insist asking further. Op 6-nov-2009, om 3:16 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > Okay, can we then define the terms a little further please. I mean, > whenever it was said "visible object", I used to understand it that > a definite object was meant (apple, table, etc). Then that turned > out to be wrong and a more correct way was that "visible object" > refers to a definite color in the external rupa kalapa (blue, red, > etc). > > However, now it seems that's not correct either - -------- N:You have understood very well. Visible object may be misunderstood, people may think of a special thing like an apple. Then we use the word colour, but also that may be misunderstood. It is not a special colour like red you focus on. So here we see that discussion is necessary so that it can become clearer. -------- > pt:when you say that all background colors are included, I'm trying > to understand what does that mean exactly. Would it be the same as > saying that "visible object" is all the colors that come into > contact with pasada rupa in the eye at that moment? Or in more > scientific terms - all the light that reflects from the > surroundings onto the retina at that moment? ------- N: No focussing on a specific colour, visible object is whatever appears through eyesense. Kh Sujin used to say: close your eyes, open them, is there not something appearing? This is a practicle way of explanation of what is visible. No need to think of pasada ruupa or retina. She also said: can you count all the colours in this room? In other words, no need to worry or think about particular colours, or worry what colour exactly is appearing at that moment. Seeing sees all that is visible but it does not think about any colour. It just sees. ----------------------- > > pt: Further, you recently said in a post to Alex (101687): > > N: ...the stream of bhavangacittas is arrested when an new object > impinges on a doorway. The first citta of a new process after the > bhavangacittas are arrested is the sense-door adverting- > consciousness, in this case the eye-door adverting consciousness. It > does not see, it merely adverts, turns towards visible object and is > followed by seeing." > > pt: > When saying "a new object impinges on a doorway" - by "doorway" you > mean pasada rupa in the eye? ---------- N: Doorway is the means through which process cittas experience an object. The object impinges on the pasada ruupa which then becomes doorway. Pasada ruupas are produced by kamma throughout life, they are arising and falling away, but they are not doorway all the time. The bhavangacittas experience the same object as the rebirth- consciousness of that life, but they do so independently of a doorway, they are doorfreed, dvaravimutta. And they are process freed, viithi vimutta. When the stream of bhavangacittas is arrested a new object impinges on a doorway. A new object, different from the object experienced by the bhavangacittas. This new object is to be experienced by viithi cittas, cittas arising in a process. Colour, sound, any sense object. ----------- > > > > pt:At which point in the sense-door process (if at all) there > comes > > > a separation (or picking up) of a separate object (like an apple) > > > out of all the background colors? > > ------ > > N: Picking out a separate object is already defining, thinking, not > > seeing; and this occurs in a mind-door process. All the cittas in an > > eyedoor process experience the same object: just colour or visible > > object. > > pt: > Thanks, this makes sense, however, now I'm wondering what happened > to vipaka? I thought that vipaka was one of the the condition for > eye-consciousness of a certain object to arise in the first place, --------- N: The sense-door adverting consciousness is kiriyacitta, inoperative citta: not kusala, not akusala, not vipaaka. But seeing-consciousness itself is vipaakacitta, produced by kamma. ---------- > pt: but if there are no definite "objects" up until the mind-door, > then I must be misunderstanding something about what's meant by the > "sense-object" for vipaka condition. -------- N: In a later mind-door process, not the subsequent mind-door process, the cittas may think of green or of apple. Kusala javanacittas may think but mostly we think with akusala cittas. When the objective is not daana, siila or bhaavanaa we think with akusala citta, often with lobha. We like to think of apple, of table, we love concepts. We think long stories, about monks, monasteries, nuns, and what are the cittas like? Usually akusala cittas, lots and lots of them. --------- > > pt: Further, if it's just color (or even many colors) that's the > visible object, then how is that inherently pleasant or unpleasant? > I remember that in abhidhamma objects are inherently pleasant or > not (I think the example was that seeing gold is considered > inherently pleasant and thus kusala vipaka), but how is a color > like blue, red, etc, inherently un/pleasant as a/kusala vipaka? > Thanks for your patience. ------- N: When seeing is kusala vipaakacitta its object is pleasant, and when it is akusala vipaakacitta its object is unpleasant, but, this is something we cannot find out. Seeing is so short, like a flash of lightning. and what is the use to find out? More important is the reaction towards the object: kusala citta with understanding or akusala citta with ignorance and wrong view? Is there wise attention or unwise attention? Nice talking to you, Nina. #102035 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 12:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] names/label nilovg Dear Staisha, Op 6-nov-2009, om 1:02 heeft Staisha Perry het volgende geschreven: > this is that way it seems, but i could be wrong > > understanding & experiencing are two different things.. -------- N: It depends on what you mean by experiencing. We could also take this as direct understanding, understanding through direct experience of realities. --------- > S: Understanding concept does not guarantee one can detach, -------- N: Detachment cannot occur immediately, only when pa`n~naa is more developed. But one has to know that the objects of satipatthaana are naama and ruupa, realities, not concepts. Thus, we have to understand what realities are what concepts are and know the difference between them. --------- > > S: but experiencing truth does guarantee one to be able to detach > from concept. > Therefore, there is teaching between concepts and truth. > Understanding is just the 1st step for realization of the truth. -------- N: Understanding 'what' is the big question. Pariyatti: understanding of pariyatti is related to all realities that appear now. This will lead to patipatti, direct awareness and understanding of realities. This leads to pativedha, the direct realization of the truth of dhammas, of their characteristics of impermanence, dukkha and anatta. But the beginning must be right: firm understanding of what present realities are, firm understanding of what the Path is. Realities arise because of their own conditions and cannot be directed by a self. The Path is not developed by a self. NIna. #102036 From: Herman Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: present moment, to Ken H. egberdina Hi Ken H, 2009/11/5 kenhowardau > > Hi Herman (and Nina), > > --------- > H: > > Are you saying that his mother, and taking care of her, are not > present > > realities? > --------- > > We have told you a million times, Herman. Nama and rupa are ultimately > real; concepts are not ultimately real. > You are right, those things have been said millions of times, and sorry for testing your patience, Ken. Are you saying that your lived reality, as in say for example all the intentionality around making a cup of tea for your Mum, are you saying that intentionally isn't occurring as it happens? Cheers Herman #102037 From: Herman Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! egberdina Hi KenH and Mike, Sorry to butt in, Mike. Please feel free to privately tell me to butt out if you wish.... 2009/11/6 kenhowardau > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > > > > <. . .> > Thanks for the logical explanation. So the fact that it is the Dhamma > that you are choosing to study trumps the bad effects of making choices? > -------- > > Hi Mike, > > Choice? There is no choice. Everything is conditioned. If there was a > choice I would choose to be a generous, kind, wise, wonderful person who > could live forever. > > Or maybe a rock star! :-) > > There are many reasons for reading and discussing the Dhamma. Some of > them are wrong reasons (desire for results, boredom with other pursuits > etc). Ideally however, we will do it simply because that is where our > interests lie - because it comes naturally to us. There should be no > desire, no pressure, no fear, no sense of obligation. Those things would > be indicative of wrong understanding. > Ken, the most obvious and defining choice that you have made and continue to make is in selecting what constitutes Dhamma and what does not. Only you are the arbiter in this, it can not come from outside. Cheers Herman #102038 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau Hi Freawaru, KH: > > As you will no doubt agree, there is only the present moment. The Buddha > taught that the present moment contained various conditioned namas and > rupas. F: > So far we agree :-) KH: > > Conditioned namas and rupas arise, perform their functions and fall away > *without any controlling self or permanent soul.* F: > There is no permanent soul, but that does not mean that there is no control. ---------------- OK there may be control of a different sort. The conditioning effect of one dhamma on another dhamma may quite reasonably be given the name "control." But we are not talking about that, we are talking here about anatta and the ramifications of anatta. When we know that all dhammas are anatta, we know that there is no "control" over them. They are conditioned 100% by other dhammas. There is no self - no you or me - to influence them in any way whatsoever. ---------------------------- KH: > > If we understood this teaching, would we have any desire to "do" > anything about ultimate reality? - to control it in any way? What would > we do, and for whom would we do it? There are only dhammas! F: > If we would understand the teaching we would be Tataghatas. It is not what it seems to be. ------------------------------ I am not sure what you mean by that. Do you think there may be a surprise in store? I don't. The path has weak right understanding at the beginning, stronger right understanding in the middle, and full right understanding at the end. But it is the same right understanding all the way. There are no surprises. The Buddha did not keep anything back. It is not a "closed fist" teaching. ----------------------------------------- KH: > > Right understanding (panna-cetasika) has its own ways of doing what has > to be done (eradicating ignorance and wrong view). F: > Yes. It is either Ignorance that controls or Wisdom. They are both controllers. -------------------------------------------- OK. In that sense there is control. :-) --------------------- KH: > > The appropriate right > effort occurs instantly with the arising of panna . There is no control > over it and no need for control. F: > Without you taking control there is Ignorance controlling. That is the default controller. -------------------------- But you have just said there were two possible controllers; either ignorance or wisdom. Now you are saying "you" can take control. What do you mean by that? ----------------------------------------- KH: > > whenever we find ourselves wanting to do something - to take some > controlling action - in order to follow the Buddha's teaching we are > misunderstanding that teaching. There is only the present moment! F: > Ah, but you take control, you want something: namely, not meditating. You keep from doing what is required for experiencing jhana, you stay away from Satipatthana. That is your control, your wish, your decision. ------------------------------------------- You could also say I walk, I talk, I turn to the left or turn to the right (etc) and these are my decisions - under my control. But that is just how the world seems. In ultimate reality there is no control - every reality is conditioned 100% by other conditioned realities. There may be the *illusion* of a controlling self, and at times it is a very convincing illusion. But that is all it is, an illusion. ------------------------------ F: > If you would relax this control you keep you might consider trying Satipatthana. ------------------------------ No need to relax or to try in any way. I have heard the Dhamma and I have had it explained to me by patient, helpful friends at DSG. So there are conditions for a degree of satipatthana to arise right now. No need to try, no need to do anything! Everything is just a conditioned dhamma. ----------------------------------- F: > You would try to slow down the breath to a minute or more to experience the "long breath" mentioned in it. So that you can understand the Satipatthana sutta, the Buddha's Dhamma. But that is not what you want and so you control your mind and body not to experience the long breath. ------------------------------------ This is where study comes to the fore. As Robert said earlier, a beginner's level of right understanding is not enough. I have to understand the Buddha's teaching in minute detail. So I should find out exactly what the Satipatthana Sutta is referring to when it mentions a "long breath" and a "short breath". My current understanding of the sutta is that a Buddha, a Buddha's chief disciple, or a similar incomparable being, can practise satipatthana *in conjunction with jhana.* (These people take breath as their meditation object.) And so the sutta is describing such a moment of satipatthana. Later, the sutta describes moments of satipathana that occur in the daily lives of all monks, not just Buddhas etc. It is very important to study these suttas properly. Do not jump to the conclusion that satipatthana is a way of breathing, or a way of walking etc. That is not the meaning of the sutta at all. In fact, it is *contrary* to the meaning. Ken H #102039 From: Herman Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! egberdina Hello RobK, 2009/11/6 rjkjp1 > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > >> > > Mike: However, what I can not grasp is the implication that this problem > doesn't apply equally to studying the Dhamma as to any other activity. It > certainly involves making choices, taking actions, and potentially producing > an "*I'm* a good studier of the Dhamma" view. How do you avoid that problem? > > > >++++++++++ > Dear Mike > I don'y want to interfere between you and KenH but perhaps I can add > something. > > The main point is that hearing/studying Dhamma is essential for right view > to develop. If one does not learn the theory accurately and in sufficient > depth then it is sure that one will either make no progess or progess in a > wrong direction. As you know, there are many theories to choose from. Which theory should be chosen? Cheers Herman #102040 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 3:06 pm Subject: What teaching should one follow? truth_aerator Hello Herman, KenH, RobertK, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > > > As you know, there are many theories to choose from. Which theory should be > chosen? > What should be chosen is that which actually leads to cessation of Dukkha, rebirth and so on - Not the theory that makes one feel learned, wise and have lots of understanding that allows one to publish books, participate in Buddhist councils and earn a PhD. IMHO if someone's understanding doesn't allow them to reach at least 1st Jhana (and thus avoid, at least temporary, the suffering brought by 5 hindrances and kamaloka) - then it is not wisdom, not Buddhist one anyway. With metta, Alex #102041 From: Herman Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 3:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta, my "butting in" characteristic egberdina Hi colette, 2009/11/6 colette > good Morning Herman, > > > Herman, how does an "absince" exist without a presence? How can you say > that something is lacking if you had not experienced it previously? > > You ask very good and worthwhile questions here, colette. What is present when we think we see a lack or absence, is intention. When we sense something we want to be different, when we want something else instead, as you say, that we have wanted previously, that is when we think absence. At any given time, the pyramids of Gize are absent to me. As I walk down the street, no pyramids of Gize. As I go to the toilet, no pyramids of Gize. Even now, likewise. But I do not construe them as absent, even though they are, because they do not form part of my expectation. It is only when I intend the pyramids in some way, when I expect them, that they are absent. For the Buddha, the world was empty of what was not there (MN121) . There are no absences in the world when there is no intention towards the world. Do I know anyone who does not intend a world. Not on your Nelly :-) Cheers Herman #102042 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 2:12 pm Subject: Catching the Snake! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Catching the Snake when fishing for Pleasure! The Ancient Elders explained reflexion thus: One sees all constructions as impermanent based on the following facts: They are inconstant, momentary, non-continuous, temporary, limited by rise and fall, disintegrating, unstable, perishable, transient, subject to change, coreless, due to vanish, constructed, subject to decay, to ageing, to death! One sees all phenomena as ultimate suffering based on the following facts: They are continuously oppressing, hard to bear, the source of pain, a disease, a tumour, a dart, a calamity, an affliction, a stress, a disaster, a terror that offers no protection, no shelter, no refuge, a danger, the root of calamity, murderous, subject to mental fermentation, Mara's bait, subject to birth, subject to ageing, illness and despair, producing sorrow, cause of grieving! One knows all constructions as disgusting, foul & ugly, because they surely are deplorable, stinking, detestable, repulsive, & grotesque pain in disguise! One regards all constructions as egoless no-self based on the these facts: Because they are alien, empty, vain, void, ownerless, with no full controller, with none to wield power over them, prone to washed about by conditions... It is then one acquires Knowledge & Vision of the Way by associating all constructions with these 3 universal characteristics. But why this grossly negative way? It is in order to achieve the tools to releasing deliverance!!! Here is a simile: a man thought to catch a fish, so he took a fishing net and cast it in the water. He put his hand into the mouth of the net under the water and seized a snake by the neck. He was glad, thinking: I have caught a fish! In the belief that he had caught a big fish, he lifted it up to see it... When he saw three marks, he perceived that it was a snake & he was truly terrified. He saw danger, felt revulsion & desired to be delivered from it. Contriving a means to deliverance, he flung it away, yelling: Go, foul snake! Then quickly hasting up on dry land, he stood looking back, while thinking: Happily, by effort, I have been delivered from the jaws of a huge snake!! Vism 652 <..> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #102043 From: "colette" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "Come inside the show's about to start" ELP ksheri3 Hi Herman, I have no idea what you're talking about or what you are questioning.\ Where did I mention an absence? Where did I mention a "lacking of"? I, like the Buddha, speak of that which is and not that which is not. Where did I propose that something OTHER than a "wind" exists? I speak of the buddhist terminology of Winds and Drops in the aspect of Tantra aka Vajrayana NOT THERAVADAN although the foundations are exactly the same. You suggest that something exists and that another person has cognized this existance and now you are here or there to play the role of Satan and to question the actuality of that which was never proposed to exist. <...> I may suggest that your focus is not proper to the MEDITATION which I am working on. There are countless troubles and waves in the apprehension of the individual subjects that I have given HOWEVER I simply made a statement concerning the Winds through the Shashumna as it activates each chakra individually. <...> Where is the requirement that the question "What is there" be honored as being a valid question? Is it a question at all since it is an endless question that has absolutely no significance to the Tantra practices which I am participating in. Spaceva. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi colette, > > 2009/11/5 colette > > > Good Morning Group, > > > > WINDS pass through that which is SHUNYA because we are Shunya and because > > we are shunya THEN the mind must be trained to see that which is phantasm > > and that which is SVABHAVA (Theosophical and Hindu definition) or the > > Buddhist terminology of ULTIMATE TRUTH/REALITY. <...> #102044 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 4:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: present moment, to Ken H. kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------- <. . .> KH: > there is no traveller on the path of parricide. No person suffers. H: > No person suffers, so no problem? ------------------------------------------------- Exactly! But only when there is right understanding - as taught by the Buddha. At other times there is a problem. ------------------------------- H: > You speak of "severe consequences". What and where are they? -------------------------------- The experiencing of highly-undesirable sense objects is the consequence of past, strong, akusala kamma. -------------------- H: > It seems to me that if the interrelationships among the dhammas of a kammic stream (i.e., stream of kammically related namas and rupas) are ignored, the whole notion of moral consequence goes out the window. --------------------- It doesn't seem quite that way to me. As I see it, the important thing is to know the various ways in which dhammas are conditioned by other dhammas. Kamma/vipaka is just one of those ways. When we understand them all we will have a firm understanding of the conditioned dhamma that is actually appearing now at one of the six door-ways. It will be seen as anicca, dukkha and anatta - not worth a tinker's cuss. :-) Ken H #102045 From: Vince Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 4:49 pm Subject: Re[4]: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. cerovzt@... Nina wrote: > N: See what I quoted. The wise know conditions, they quench all > graspings and do not have to be reborn. > However this is a long way. We have to begin now: there is perception > of sense objects such as colour, sound, etc. Should these not be > known first of all for what they are: just conditioned dhammas? That > is the only way that can eventually lead to detachment. I think you are right. In this mess of not-perceiving perceptors and a final quality of nibbana, the only open door to conciliation can be detachment. best, #102046 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 5:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------ KH: > > Choice? There is no choice. Everything is conditioned. <. . .> H: > Ken, the most obvious and defining choice that you have made and continue to > make is in selecting what constitutes Dhamma and what does not. Only you are > the arbiter in this, it can not come from outside. ------- Sorry Herman, you have lost me. Are you making one of those simplistic points that are commonly made by non-Buddhists when they first hear about anatta: "If you don't exist then you won't mind if I hit you on the head. . . . you won't mind if I take your wallet (etc)" ? Or, as Alex likes to say, "If you think people, cars and trees don't really exist then try driving your car into a tree." :-) To cut a long story short, why don't you just come out and say, is there ultimately a self? If you agree there is no self then what (as you understand the Dhamma) is there? Ken H #102047 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 6:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: #102046 > Hello KenH, I hope nobody is arguing about the factor of conditioning. The thing is that "everything is conditioned" is NOT the same as saying that everything just happens. Buddha often has talked about 4 Right Efforts and 5 bases of Power. There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent: * for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... * for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... * for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen... And for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development,& culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen. § 63. Monks, whoever neglects these four bases of power neglects the noble path going to the right ending of stress. Whoever undertakes these four bases of power undertakes the noble path going to the right ending of stress. Which four? There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. Whoever neglects these four bases of power neglects the noble path going to the right ending of stress. Whoever undertakes these four bases of power undertakes the noble path going to the right ending of stress. — SN 51.2 With metta, Alex #102048 From: Ken O Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What teaching should one follow? ashkenn2k Dear Alex and Herman whichever theory or path one choose, understanding comes first. The DSG is about Abhidhamma and following the ancient commentary way. We seriously follow such a way. Not everyone here is agreeable or like it this way. Each one of us has his or her path due to accumulations and inclinations. It is up to individual to decide. Our positions may be different, we hope by sharing we could benefit from each other. We dont know whether such discussions might be useful in future or a seed for future enlightment. We hope we all benefit from it. With metta Ken O #102049 From: Ken O Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! ashkenn2k Dear Herman Concepts can be objects of the mind and paccaya for arisen of akusla dhammas. However, concepts cannot decay, not impermanent, it cannot show the not-self in a dhamma. This would not display the characterisic of not self. Even if someone hits us on the head, it is the kaya vinnaya that accompany with dukkha vedana. What exist, pain exist. What does not exist, self does not exist. Then did the assailant commit a akusala action, yes. It is the kamma that accumulates such action, it is not the self that accumulates. When one kills someone, even though self does not exist, kamma exist. Kamma make sure the result is being reap. Kamma is the one who conditions the rupa and citta that constitue a being and not a self, to reap the result of the actions. Ken O #102050 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Thu, 5/11/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S:(esp. for those who like to suggest the Buddha urged all to live in the forest, at the foot of a tree.) ============ ========= ======== H:> I haven't encountered any such "suggesters" yet. Whom do you have in mind? ... S: Good call! The wording may have been a tad strong, but there have certainly been many "suggesters" here over the years who've proclaimed that forest-dwelling is recommended by the Buddha for the development of samatha and vipassana. For example, to mention a relatively recent one, if you put 'Alex forest Buddha' into the search-engine on DSG, you come up with over 100 entries:-). How do you read his comments, such as the following one and those in the messages below: '...Running into the forest seems to be such a let down for most that some people like to make the teaching suit them rather than the other way around, sucking it up and doing the hard work.' See also recent messages by Alex (and Suan): 100833, 99851 (Suan), 99731, 99643, 99582, 99349 These were just from the first page. To me they read as suggestions that the Buddha urged/encouraged forest dwelling for any kind of bhavana. Perhaps I misunderstood them! I hope so!! Metta Sarah ======== #102051 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Herman (101810) > OK, thanks for that. However, all my readings of what (for the sake of ease > I will call) the KS clan have written over the years suggested that citta is > given exactly the same characteristics that are given to a being or a person > ie a distinct, separate reality that acts on an object that is other than > it. If I have misunderstood all these years, I am more than happy to breathe > a sigh of relief and apoligise for my misunderstanding :-) > =============== You seem to be defining/describing a person as "a distinct, separate reality that acts on an object that is other than it". I'm afraid I don't understand this at all. Would you mind elaborating on how cittas are being given the same characteristics as a person? Thanks. To my understanding of the teachings, there can be a concept of a person but there is no distinct, separate reality that is "a person". > =============== > > I would say the characteristic of consciousness is the experiencing of an > > object. > > > > > Thank you for that. Is that different in any way for you than just the > object? > =============== I have no difficulty with the idea of the consciousness that experiences being different from the object that is experienced. What is the problem with that? > =============== > Are there unexperienced objects? > =============== By definition, I suppose there can be no unexperienced objects (because if unexperienced it would not be an object). But in the case of an object that is a rupa, I see no reason why the rupa could not have arisen before becoming the object. So let me ask you: Is it your understanding that rupas arise only as object of consciousness? > =============== > > > Subject/object dualism is the belief that objects happen to subjects, or > > > that subjects do things to objects. But just like it says in the Vis, > > 'mere > > > suffering exists, no sufferer is found; the deed is, but no doer of the > > deed > > > is there.' There is not a subject to which the object is happening. Blue > > > doesn't happen to consciousness, there is just blue. No consciousness is > > > found. > > =============== > > > > Thanks for this explanation. For reasons mentioned above, I do not see > > this the Vism passage as denying the notion of consciousness as a dhamma > > that has the function of experiencing an object. > > > > I saw in the passage the denial of anything "external" to experience. > =============== I'm afraid I did not see it that way. > =============== > There are also a number of references to the way out of being stuck in that > scenario. They have to do with "consciousnes" finding no foothold anywhere, > and the subsequent release that follows naturally from that. > =============== Interesting. Happy to discuss any suttas or other texts you'd like to bring up. Jon #102052 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Howard (101823) > I'm simply > asking for the basis for the significance (as you see it) of the > distinction of knowing and known in the development of insight. > -------------------------------------------------------- > The significance is nothing more or less than it being a reality, and > being unconfused about what is real is the nature of insight, whereas being > confused is the opposite. But I have not been writing about insight. I've > made no claims about insight. > =============== To my understanding, there's a difference between: - knowing the dhamma that is visible object or sound as it truly is, i.e., as a rupa having the 3 characteristics, and - knowing that what is being seen or heard at the present moment is the object of consciousness, different from the consciousness of which it is the object. The former a level of insight knowledge, while the latter is conventional non-confusion about the present moment. That's why I do not see the significance of the distinction between knowing and known as regards the development of insight. > =============== > I assure you that sights and seeing are inseparable, one from the > other. There is neither without the other, ever. And the Buddha actually HAS > said so - in the Kalaka Sutta: There is no unseen sight. > > Emptiness of Consciousness > /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't > construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't > construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. > "When hearing... > "When sensing... > "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] > cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an > [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ > (From the Kalaka Sutta) > =============== I'm not with you here. Which part of the quoted passage exactly do you read as saying that there is no unseen sight? Of course, by definition a sight is something that is being seen (much like "object" implies the presence of consciousness). But "sight" is not the term used in the original Pali ("rupa"). So perhaps it's not a particularly good translation for that term. Jon #102053 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > <. . .> > I hope nobody is arguing about the factor of conditioning. The thing is that "everything is conditioned" is NOT the same as saying that everything just happens. > > > > Buddha often has talked about 4 Right Efforts and 5 bases of Power. > Hi Alex and Herman. Firstly I should apologise to Herman. After complaining I had already told him something "one million times" I then asked him a question he had already answered one million times. (Or more than once, anyway.) Herman, if I am not mistaken you have said that actions do ultimately exist but physical and mental phenomena do not . We'll just have to agree to disagree on that. Alex, I am not sure where you stand. You object to my saying there is no control but you still agree everything is conditioned. How can that be? To me 'no control' and 'conditioned' are two ways of saying the same thing. Ken H #102054 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 9:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! sarahprocter... Hi Kens H & O, --- On Thu, 5/11/09, kenhowardau wrote: Ken H: >Ken. I think she will say there are no formal practices of sila, smatha or vipassana. She will criticise formal meditation if someone tries to tell her it is the Buddha's teaching. Otherwise, I agree, she wouldn't bother to comment on it. ... S: Yes, I could give many examples. I remember at the end of one trip to India, Chris mentioned to me that she felt she hadn't asked K.Sujin any questions and so I took her over to speak to K.Sujin in the airport waiting room. I think it was in Yangon. As I recall, she started to ask something about her meditation practice, a "metta practice", I believe. K.Sujin cut it short and simply advised her to drop the practice, the "formal meditation. "Let it go!" It didn't lead to any understanding of realities now or even to metta now. Plenty of dosa-less criticism/censure in the Teachings, such as: [MN65 "Bhaddaali Sutta", ~Naa.ma,oli/Bodhi transl.] "Here, Bhaddali, some bhikkhu does not fulfil the training in the Teacher's Dispensation. He considers thus: 'Suppose I were to resort to a secluded resting place: the forest, the root of a tree, a mountain, a ravine, a hillside cave, a charnel ground, a jungle thicket, an open space, a heap of straw - perhaps I might realise a superhuman state, a distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones.' "He resorts to some such secluded resting-place. While he lives thus withdrawn, the Teacher censures him, wise companions in the holy life who have made investigation censure him, gods censure him, and he censures himself. Being censured in this way by the Teacher, by wise companions in the holy life, by gods, and by himself, he realises no superhuman state, no distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. Why is that? That is how it is with one who does not fulfil the training in the Teacher's Dispensation." Ken O, perhaps it's time for another "formal" visit to Bangkok! Metta Sarah ======= #102055 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 6, 2009 11:59 pm Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 3, no 13. nilovg Dear friends, When a person can be seen as five khandhas, mere elements, which are arising and vanishing, there are conditions for being less inclined to attachment and aversion towards the vicissitudes of life, such as praise and blame, gain and loss, which play such an important role in our life. We read in “The Simile of the Elephant’s Footprint” (Middle Length Sayings I, number 28) that the Buddha’s disciple Såriputta explained to the monks realities by way of elements. He explained that the body should not be seen as “I”, “mine”, or “I am”. We read: …Your reverences, if others abuse, revile, annoy, vex this monk, he comprehends: “This painful feeling that has arisen in me is born of sensory impingement on the ear, it has a cause, it is not without a cause. What is the cause? Sensory impingement is the cause.” He sees that sensory impingement is impermanent, he sees that feeling… perception…mental activities are impermanent, he sees that consciousness is impermanent. His mind rejoices, is pleased, composed and is set on the objects of the element… We are inclined to blame other people when they speak in a disagreeable way, instead of realizing that there is merely sound impinging on the ear-sense, elements impinging on elements. So long as there is clinging to a self realities cannot be seen as mere elements. This sutta makes clear that it is beneficial to understand the truth of non-self. It can only be realized very gradually, in developing understanding of the realities included in the five khandhas. ---------- Nina. #102056 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:03 am Subject: Re: [dsg] chat with Scott gazita2002 hallo Nina and others, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > how nice both of you had a chat with Scott. > Op 6-nov-2009, om 14:42 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > > > Kusala as the remedy. Thinking of others, not oneself, advantages > > of kusala, especially being aware and understanding dhammas. > ------ > N: I am thinking here of all Kh Sujin's lovely reminders to think of > others, so that we are less concerned with "self, self, self". It is > especially valuable to get such reminders in a situation, while > traveling with her. > Nina. azita: this is very relevant for me at present as I am doin a yoga course on one of these beautiful islands in siam gulf and am realising how much 'self' is involved. There is a tendancy for some yogis to think that being peaceful and calm is good, but unless the moment is kusala then we are just collecting more tendancy for the good feelings that come with this calm of mind and healthy feeling of body. Never any mention of kusala/akusala moments, not that I expected to hear this kind of talk in a popular yoga school - and even saying this I can almost be sure its comes from mana. I enjoy doing yoga as have been doing it nearly all my life at least since I was a young teenager, so the yoga world is one very familiar to me. sometimes a reminder comes that it is all just citta, cetasika and rupa and that all the yoga philosophy is a little too cosmic for me. So you can see, Nina, lots of self is developed along with yoga, IMHO I must add, bec I'm sure others will see it differently. I realise that yoga philosophy comes from a different aspect than does Buddha's teaching and as long as these reminders keep coming that all is jst citta, cetasika and rupa [must add this does not come from yoga philosophy - at least not the one I am currently involved in - ] the reminders jst occasionslly 'pop into my head' so to speak. Patience, courage and good cheer, azita #102057 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! ashkenn2k Dear Sarah I am about to answer to Ken H reply on the censure/criticism. Buddha sometimes teach gently, sometimes roughly, sometimes both. But he and the Arahants can do that because the roots are totally eradicated. I suggest we do not because we dont know whether the roots are present or not. We are not in the position to critise because we are not Arahants. We may not understand the other level or understanding. We can say this is not what it meant in the ancient text. When K Sujin said let it go, there is no criticism. that is what I like about her, she dont critise others way, nor she encourages them. Cheers Ken O #102058 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:41 am Subject: Sangha politics in Thailand egberdina Hi all, A short quote follows, but the whole article is worth reading, IMO. Thai Sangha Treats Women as Untouchables A Buddhist scholar from England last week (early Oct) accused Theravada Buddhists in Thailand of being "incredibly uninterested" in studying the words of the Buddha, and said the "most pernicious and dangerous" effect of this neglect is "the scornful treatment of women." Richard Gombrich, founder and president of the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies, said the Thai Sangha "had taken the extremely retrograde step" of not allowing monks to take anything from a woman's hand, a prohibition neither justified by Buddhist texts nor proscribed even in Sri Lanka where Theravada is also the tradition. from http://wyaryan.blogspot.com/2009/10/buddhist-treatment-of-women-criticized.html Cheers Herman #102059 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Inseparability of Knowing and Known ashkenn2k Dear Herman What you are saying, Ken O, is that there are unexperienced experiences. >That is a contradiction in terms, and can be safely dismissed. > >Perhaps you mean that some of the necessary conditions for seeing are >present even for a blind man? But that is not what you are saying. Suffice >it to say that no individual condition is sufficient in itself, for there to >be visible object, which has multiple necessary conditions. One sheaf cannot >stand on it's own. KO: I am saying rupas can arise without cittas. A citta must arise with an object as what you describe as experience. Unexperience is not the correct term I would say, rupas that are not arise in cittas do not mean they do not arise as one of their cause is temperature. Maybe I should be clear on my dicussions, if we talk about just seeing, definitely there should be visible objects and cittas and other mentalities. I want to make it clear between rupas and cittas. when this is clear, then we realise what we see is only visible objects impinging on our seeing cittas. We take it as just visible objects that arise. Visible object I am talking about is not about concepts. Cheers Ken O #102060 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, It all comes back to the citta.... As you suggest, criticism is usally akusala and unhelpful - better to just point to our understanding of the teachings at this moment. If someone is told to "let it go", they may take it as criticism and as Lukas said, sometimes kindly intended comments are a condition for dosa. However, what is important is to understand our own cittas at this moment. Kusala or akusala, not to judge others' cittas, not even KS's:-) I look f/w to your further discussion with Ken H......butting out....:-)) Metta Sarah --- On Sat, 7/11/09, Ken O wrote: From: Ken O >I am about to answer to Ken H reply on the censure/criticism. Buddha sometimes teach gently, sometimes roughly, sometimes both. #102061 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! ashkenn2k Dear Ken H I know your intention but not everyone here is able to understand the meaning of not self like how we see it. It takes me a long time also. >------------ -- > >I will agree that no good ever came from dosa. But we can criticise >wrong view without having dosa. And we shouldn't feel intimidated. There >may be some hurt feelings when people are told their formal practices >are not the Way, but the chance to hear the true Dhamma is priceless. >Let's not deny it to people out of misdirected politeness. > >--------- KO: We should not critise because we are not Arahants where the roots are all eradicated. We may inevidently cause the arisen of dosa. I am not initmated, I believe in friendly discussion. Sometimes I am persistent but after a while, why should we be persistent. Is not a self being persistent. My take is just explain, if we explain people still dont understand, then leave it. By explaining we already leave a seed into them, whether it is useful or not, we dont know. We should be evenminded even to those who dont agree with our way. We accept their point of view and thats their view and also their dana. We share ours also out of dana. But if someone rejects our dana, then the gift comes back to us. So no point being persistent arguing whether their formal practise is correct or not. Each one has their own take of the dhamma. We should emphasis on understanding and not arguing whether formal mediation is correct or not. If they want to know about meditation, we should share what we know according to the anciet text. It may benefit them. >KO:> As Nina said there is confusion over the word formal. There is >astipulated method, pse check Visud. There is even a step by step >instruction on breathing meditation, and to some it could be classified >as a formal practise. >--------- > >If even just one tiny part of the Dhamma was to be understood as an >instruction - as distinct from a description of the way things are - >then the entire Dhamma may as well be seen that way. Dhammas are either >controllable or not controllable; they can't be both. > >------------ -------- KO: To me controllable or not controllable is not the matter in dhamma. The heart of the dhamma is not self. Formal practise should not be construe as one able to control, should be seem as a way of life, a routine which one use or discipline to improve one development. Just like we routinely read the dhammas, could we said it is not a formal practise then? >KO: > We cannot make such assertion that there is no formal or a >stipulated method, because in many cases of Visud the student take a >meditation subject from the teacher viz aside the pre-requisite for >taking it. Hence this could be seen as a formal practise. >------------ --------- > >With wrong understanding almost everything in the suttas could be seen >as an instruction to formally practise. It is our job to ask "How can >these apparent instructions be understood in the light of anatta? If >there are only the presently arisen, fleeting namas and rupas (with no >persisting thing or self), then how are we to understand 'do this' and >'don't do that'?" > >------------ --------- ------- KO: that is our intepretation, should not force it on others. We just share what we think is the correct in our own views. If they want to learn from our way of views, we encourage them. I >KO: > Formal practise should not equate to control, it could be a way of >live that they have accumulated since past aeons, the routine they have >learnt many lives ago. >------------ --------- ------- > >Then let's not use the term "formal practice" to describe normal >routines. Normal routines are performed without any expectations of >changing the present conditioned reality. Therefore, they are not formal >practices (as the term is used here at DSG). > >------------ ------- KO: to them it could be their routine or routine taught to them by their wise teachers, we dont know so we cannot judge. Cheers Ken O #102062 From: Ken O Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangha politics in Thailand ashkenn2k Dear all The dhamma is on the retreat, so things will happen to make it retreat. We should be full of lovng kindness towards those who are now intentionally or unintentionally causing the rift in the community because it has much dosa. I am not the moderator here but I appeal to all to stop posting messages on others views or letters or forums. It is not conducive to the growth of the understanding of the dhamma. With metta Ken O #102063 From: "sprlrt" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:12 am Subject: Grouping dhammas together sprlrt Hi (pt & all), Paramattha dhammas (citta, 52 cetasikas, 28 rùpas and nibbana - all anatta, and all anicca and dukkha but the last) are grouped, arranged in many ways in the tipitaka, depending on, according to which aspect of their manyfold, complex, variagated nature one is considering, especially when dealing with citta and cetasikas dhammas; here are a few: As a single unit, as the Dhamma; twofold, as nàma and rùpa dhammas; and also as sankhàra dhammas, the five khandas, and the asankhàta dhamma, nibbana; threefold, as kusala, akusala and abyàkata dhammas; fivefold as the five khandhas, leaving nibbana out;... twelvefold as àyatanas;... eighteenfold as dhatus etc. Cittas, and the cetasikas they arise associated, bound up with, can be grouped as: fourfold, by the plane, bhumi, to which they belong, either: kàma, sensous, consisting of 54 cittas; or fine-material (15), rùpa; or immaterial, arùpa (12); or supramundane, lokuttara, consisting either of 8 cittas, in the case of sukkhavipassaka puggala, one who, over many lifetimes, has developed pañña, the understanding of paramattha dhammas, to the required level, but not samatha to the level of jhànas, or 40, in the case of the jhànalabhi puggala, one who has developed, on top of vipassana/pañña, samatha to the required level for jhànas as well. The name of the first three planes, including the two jhàna planes, are compounded with the word avacara, a synonim of samsara. Fourfold, by their jàti, origin or nature: Either kusala or akusala, both a succession of up to seven instances of a citta associated with roots and other sankhàra khandha cetasikas, accumulating strenght in the process; or vipàka, resulting from kamma, cetana cetasika arising associated with cittas of the previous two jàtis; or kiriya, functional only, cittas that aren't neither resultant, vipàka, nor a cause for result, kusala and akusala. By their function, kicca or rasa, i.e. what a citta does once arisen and before falling away: bhavanga, life-continuum; avajjana, adverting (the object); dassana, seeing (the object); sampaticchana, receiving; santirana, investigating; votthabhana, determining; javana, running through (the object); tadarammana, registering (the object). Most cittas can only perform one function, for example, the resultant eye-consciousness can only see the (visible) object inpinging on the eye-sense, its physical base; kusala and akusala cittas can only run through it for up to seven times. Some cittas can perform more than one function, for example any of the three resultant mind-consciousness elements can do both the investigating, santirana, and the registering, tadarammana, jobs. Paññatti, concepts are the most common objects experienced by most cittas and associated cetasikas of the first three avacara planes, of these cittas only those arising exclusively in a five sense-door process can't experience concepts: the two sets of resultant five sense-doors consciousnesses (eye... body consciousness, with the function of seeing... touching), and the three mind elements, one functional (with the function of adverting the five sense-door objects) and two resultant (with the function of receiving the five sense-door objects) Hence concepts feature as dhamma àrammana in the sixfold grouping of the dhammas considering this aspect. Object, àrammana, is a necessary condition, a paccaya dhamma; and concepts are also a strong dependence on habits condition, they are pakatùpanissaya paccaya dhammas for citta and cetasikas (these are àrammana, pakatùpanissaya etc. paccayuppanna dhammas) to arise. Alberto #102064 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] characteristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- On Thu, 5/11/09, upasaka@... wrote: >/"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing... "When sensing... "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ (From the Kalaka Sutta) ... >S: For the Buddha (and arahats), no ma~n~nati, no lobha, conceit or wrong view on account of what is seen. >The following from the Udana commentary also refers to the lines from the Kalaka Sutta which you quote and may be of interest (Mucalinda Chapter, p301 Masefield transl.): <...> H:> Sarah - sorry, but I get *zero* from the foregoing. ... S: Yes, not an easy passage (snipped), so not surprising! What I understand is that the passage is pointing to how the Buddha does not proliferate with lobha (of any kind) about what is experienced. This is in contrast to worldlings who cling to the signs and details of what is experienced. In the commentary we read about the Buddha's omniscient wisdom - how he perfectly understands not only what is experienced (for him) through the eye-sense and other doorways, but also what is experienced by any beings in any realms whatsoever, past, future or present. He knows whether any visible object is desirable or undesirable. The same applies to any other sense objects - they are fully comprehended. Evenso, it's just visible object only which is ever seen. There is no discussion in this sutta about whether visible objects arise and fall regardless of whether they are seen or not. The point of the Teachings is to understand what appears now without being carried away by the details. " 'Having seen a form with mindfulness muddled, Attending to the pleasing sign, One experiences it with infatuated mind And remains tightly holding to it.' "When, firmly muddled, one sees a form, One is not inflamed by lust for forms; One experiences it with dispassionate mind And does not remain holding it tightly." (SN 35:95, Maalunkyaputta Sutta, Bodhi transl.) Metta Sarah ======= #102065 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Fw: DSG Welcome info sarahprocter... Hi Staisha, --- On Fri, 6/11/09, Staisha Perry wrote: >I have practiced abroad in England at the amaravati monastery in hemel hempstead,england. the nuns from this monastery will be opening the first training monastery for nuns in the theravada forest tradition of ajahn chah and ajahn sumedho. to find more aboutthis please feel free to visit: saranaloka foundation ( www.saranloka. org) ... S: I come from England, Staisha, and I knew Ven Sumedho and spent a little time with Ajahn Chah when Ven S first came to London and resided in Hampstead and then Chithurst. I once took K.Sujin to visit Chithurst and Ven S too. I hope Ven S is well. He was always very kind and friendly. ... >anyhow, there are more questions but one at a time works for me, it takes a little time for contemplation and practice, sometimes it takes someone elses explaination to make it click...to make all the pieces fit. ... S: One at a time works well for me too... ... >i have live in arizona for a number of years since 1996, this is were my son of 16 years lives with his father. last year my intention was to study abroad with goenka, and at a few monasteries in England. unfortunatly the trip was cut short, so back to the states i came. now i am working in Phoenix, ... S: As you say in your other note, "dhamma is right in front of you...", "...anywhere, everywhere". If we think of another time, another object for practice, it indicates there's no awareness, no understanding of the dhamma now. Fun chatting to you, Staisha. Metta Sarah ====== #102066 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (65) sarahprocter... Dear Han (& Lukas), I appreciate your further elaborations and Lukas's encouragement of this:). --- On Thu, 5/11/09, han tun wrote: >Han: Thank you very much for your kind interest. There are four characteristics common to all sabhaava ruupas. (1) arising or origination (upacaya) (2) continuity or development (santati) (3) decay or ageing (jarataa) (4) falling away or impermanence (aniccataa) <..> >However, as I love Pali words, I print below the definition of ageing as given in Visuddhimagga, with some Pali words inserted. 'Ageing' has the characteristic of maturing (ripening) [ruupa paripaaka] material instances. Its function is to lead on towards (their termination) [upanayana]. It is manifested as the loss of newness [navabhaavaapagama] without the loss of individual essence [sabhaavaanapagamep i], like oldness in paddy [viihipuraa. nabhaavoviya] . Its proximate cause is matter that is maturing (ripening) [paripaccamaana ruupa]. paripaaka: [m.] ripeness; maturity; digestion, development, perfection. upanayana: [nt.] 1. bringing near; 2. the ceremony of subsumption. nava: [adj.] 1. new; 2. nine. apagama [Sk. apagama] going away, disappearance navabhaava + apagama = new essence (newness) + loss sabhaavaa + na + apagama = individual essence + not + loss viihi: [m.] paddy. viya: [a particle of comparison] like; as. paripaacana: [nt.] ripening; maturing; development, digestion. ------------ -------- S: Thank you for sharing this and for your helpful breakdown of the Pali terms. We can see how ageing or decay can be understood on many different levels, beginning with a conventional understanding, as in the "oldness in paddy", right down to the ageing or ripening of a ruupa. It's really all most helpful and I look forward to any further analysis you give anytime. Metta Sarah ======== Han: I also noticed that the characteristics of ageing as given in Dhammasanga. nii which was quoted by Nina, is almost the same as the characteristics of ageing in DN 22 Mahaasatipa. t.thaana sutta. Please see below the characteristics of ageing as given in DN 22. And what is ageing? In whatever beings, of whatever group of beings, there is ageing, decrepitude [jiira.nataa] , broken teeth [kha.n.dicca. m], grey hair [paalicca.m] , wrinkled skin [valittacataa] , shrinking with age [aayuno sa.mhaani], decay of the sense faculties [indriyaana. m paripaako], that, monk, is called ageing. jiira.na: [nt.] decaying; getting old; digestion. kha.n.dicca: [nt.] the state of being broken, (said of teeth). paalicca: [nt.] greyness of hair. valittaca: [adj.] with wrinkled skin. aayu: [nt.] age, duration of life. saÅ‹haani (f.) [saÅ‹+haani] shrinking, decrease, dwindling away indriya: [nt.] controlling principal; faculty; sense. paripaaka: [m.] ripeness; maturity; digestion, development, perfection. ------------ -------- Han: Furthermore, I found some interesting points in Visuddhi magga about ageing. This is said with reference to the kind of ageing that is evident [paaka.ta-jara. m] through seeing alteration in teeth, etc., as their brokenness, and so on. But that of immaterial states, which has no such visible alteration, is called hidden ageing [pa.ticchanna- jaraa]. And that in earth, water, rocks, the moon, the sun, etc., is called incessant ageing [aviici-jaraa] . paakataa: open, unconcealed. pa.ticchanna : [pp. of pa.ticchaadeti] covered over; concealed, hidden. aviici: no intermission, incessant. [also one of the great hells] Kind regards, Han #102067 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 4:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Tue, 3/11/09, Herman wrote: >> S: No one has ever suggested here that there is seeing without a visual > object which is seen. H:> Good :-) S:>> However, the characteristics of seeing and visual object are very different > - the first experiences its object, the second does not experience anything. > H:>I am not avoiding your final question, but I want to clarify something first. >A characteristic is something that is known or experienced, right? ... S: Not necessarily. A sound has a characteristic regardless of whether it's experienced or not. ... >But you have introduced a negative here as being characteristic of something real, and I think that will be very important in coming to understand the differences in what we are saying to each other. The negative you have introduced is not-experiencing, or non-experience. Visible object, you say for example, has the characteristic of not knowing [anything]. I do not want to put words in your mouth, but you appear to be saying that not-knowing canbe known as a characteristic. >Have I got that right? ... S: In a way, yes. Any rupa has the characteristic of not knowing, not experiencing anything. This is what differentiates it from nama, which can experience. For example, the sound (of the watefall, say) does not know it can be heard. It doesn't experience anything at all. It is just a physical element which arises and falls away and which may or may not ever be experienced. It doesn't care! On the other hand, when hearing consciousness arises, because of the impact of the sound on ear-sense, it experiences sound and so do the other moments of consciousness in that ear-door process. Likewise, the phassa, sanna, vedana and other mental factors arising with these cittas, also experience the sound. This is why they are also namas. The distinction between the namas and the rupas have to be known in this regard, otherwise there will always be the underlying assumption of 'my experience' or 'something in the sound' and so on - any one of the sakkaya-ditthi arising. I hope that's clarified. Great question and I appreciate your friendly posts:). Metta Sarah ======= #102068 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More questions about nimitta sarahprocter... Dear pt, --- On Mon, 2/11/09, ptaus1 wrote: >> S: ...I think that the reason that objects are taken as "real and lasting" is because there is not the understanding of namas and rupas, let alone their rapid rising and falling away in succession. >pt: Okay, that makes sense, but then, even this taking of an object to be "lasting" has to be some kind of a dhamma arammana, presumably as another concept, aside from being accompanied by ditthi and other unwholesome cetasikas? ... S: Yes, it's the ditthi arising with the citta that has the concept of lastingness (nicca) as arammana (object). The sotapanna, does not take the anicca of nicca anymore, of course. (Again, we're talking about many mind-door processes.) ... > > >How does it happen that a certain concept all of sudden just pops into my head, without any seeming relevance to the present situation for example? > > >> S: Natural decisive support condition. Any object experienced can be recalled anytime later, even aeons later by this condition. >pt: Regarding pannatti, if it is conditioned as you say above, ... S: Actually, I didn't say the pannatti is conditioned. I never say this, but wasn't clear enough. It is the experiencing, the cittas and cetasikas that are conditioned ny this condition. They are conditioned to arise by habit or accumulation, experiencing particular concepts. ... >and it can also condition other dhammas as Nina just mentioned in a post to Lukas, ... S: Let's be clear that there can never be a concept without the experiencing of it. So when we read about dhammas, it may be a condition for wise reflection later. The concepts about dhammas on their own don't condition anything. There has to be the hearing and thinking about those concepts in order for them to condition wise attention. (I want to add a little more on the "climate" thread with Lukas and others - but later...) ... >then: >1. how is pannatti different from a regular dhamma that can also both condition and be conditioned (I know that usually it's said that concepts are not real as other dhammas, but I wonder on what basis this is said considering that concepts can both condition and be conditioned) ? ... S: Concepts cannot be conditioned because they don't arise and fall away. On the conditioning, see above. ... >2. why is it often said that concepts are unconditioned if we just said that concepts can both act as condition and be conditioned? what am I missing? ... S: Maybe missing the understanding of paramattha dhammas at this moment? :-)) A great thread as usual - pls pursue any points. Always helpful for me too. Metta Sarah ======= #102069 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 4:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's last word sarahprocter... Dear pt, --- On Mon, 2/11/09, ptaus1 wrote: >I was going through UP, there's this interesting quote in post 32017 and I'm wondering what's the source of the quote: "Thus all of this has been told and discussed for forty-five years from my enlightenment to my parinibbaana; three baskets, five Nikaayas, nine branches (a'nga), eight-four thousand groups of dhamma: these are the major divisions. Thus these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma remain. I alone attain parinibbaana, and now I alone advise and instruct. After I have attained parinibbaana, these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, will advise and instruct you." >From the context of the whole post, I'm guessing the quote is from commentary to Mahaparinibbana sutta, but would just like to confirm. ... S: Yes, from the same section as the other part quoted: translated as "The Buddha's Last Days" Ch VI, p.179 (PTS, Yang Gyu An) - the text I referred to the other day. If you are purchasing any books from the PTS (Pali Text Society in England), I recommend becoming a member and receiving a free book (of your choice) every year. It's also good to support them, I feel. When I have time, I'll type out the section which ends in these words in full. Metta Sarah ======== #102070 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 5:36 am Subject: Re: Dhamma Diaries szmicio Dear Sarah Let me add some comments. > As Lukas suggested, we don't wish to condition dosa, but would also like to give helpful pointers if we can. Again the problem lies in the expectations and lack of detachment to and understanding of what is conditioned at this moment, I find. L: The problem is that we consider everything as 'we'. Even doing kusala/akusala all the time we think about us. This is the true misery. I like to be reminded about sotapanna. I said once I cant develop kusala with such great assistance of Self. But when I am reminded on no Self, then kusala appears. For sure that is my way. I dont need to belive anyone here on the group. I know that from my experience. I can never give Ajahn more attention to some other teacher. But what she was saying was so according to my daily life experience. No world of people and things. Just different conditioned dhatus. Even there is no time to appreciate it in life. The right understandig is developed very gradualy. First then needs to be right view. Hearing right dhamma with yoniso manasikara. best wishes Lukas #102071 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 6:51 am Subject: Re: chat with Scott scottduncan2 Dear Sarah and Jon, Regarding: S: "We just had a nice chat with Scott..." Scott: Thanks again, I totally enjoyed the chat S: "- Anger management, suppression, instructions in the suttas, past discussions with other friends, such as Phil on this, considering other views." Scott: The aversion towards anger. The wish it wasn't there. The thoughts of past anger and an angry person, the yearning for a set of instructions which can facilitate the creation of the soothing concept of the person without anger... S: "- analysing the whys and why nots....just thinking, any awareness?" Scott: Taking the feeling to be self and thinking about an angry person and wanting to be a person who is free of anger and thinking about instructions and following them... S: "- expectations, 'how dare she...?', maana (conceit), judging what others do, the 'me-centric' view of the world." Scott: Lost in thinking about people including 'myself' and imbedded in thoughts and feelings and taking the whole and the flow as something - the world... S: "- how one sees the world, the bad drivers, the rude people, all back to 'me', no unpleasant sights..." Scott: The wish for peaceful experience, for pleasure, forgetting that 'one' doesn't 'see the world' at all but that 'one' and 'the world' are conceived, not comprehending the results of kamma... S: "- The Buddha's teachings to monks dealing with the removal of anger. Can anger be 'managed'? For a while, experience seems to bear out the view, but after a while, denial..." Scott: Getting caught up in the illusion that one can manage anger by following instructions - S: "- the teaching on latent tendencies....we never know what will be conditioned to arise at any moment, 'out of the blue'..." Scott: - but being given the chance to think otherwise about this so-called ability when anger arises again despite all 'efforts.' Thinking about one's self as an agent is wrong-thinking... S: "- Moods, provoked and unprovoked dosa.... Attachment at root, attachment to pleasant feeling. Who cares about this?" Scott: Yeah. What is the aim of wanting to 'suppress' anger by following instructions? The pleasure of thinking of one's self as good and calm - taking pleasure in moments without anger and seeking to have this pleasure. It feels so much better when the mood is gone and then one can think of having done something and succeeded in something which feels so good... S: "- Wanting a certain outcome, a result...Any detachment from what is conditioned now?" Scott: Never any use. Everyone wants an outcome. This is called attachment... S: "- Kusala as the remedy. Thinking of others, not oneself, advantages of kusala, especially being aware and understanding dhammas." Scott: Now here, this is not meant as an instruction, is it? Or is it? Are you saying that to have kusala one must 'think of others?' Or are you suggesting that in some way thinking of kusala, thinking of others, thinking of being aware and understanding may somehow condition kusala at some point, or be kusala in some way? S: "- the bhikkhuni ordination issue.... How does it help one's development of understanding?" Scott: I don't worry about it. I think it is simply the decline of the Dhamma and how worldly notions are exchanged for Dhamma. Rather than accept that the lineage died out, people get caught up in thoughts about women and patriarchy, and rights, and politics and religion and authority. I think of all the women and their attainments as depicted in the series that connie offered and have no worries about women being exempted from anything real the Dhamma promises. The whole thing totally misses the point as far as I'm concerned. Sincerely, Scott. #102072 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/7/2009 12:55:43 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (101823) > I'm simply > asking for the basis for the significance (as you see it) of the > distinction of knowing and known in the development of insight. > -------------------------------------------------------- > The significance is nothing more or less than it being a reality, and > being unconfused about what is real is the nature of insight, whereas being > confused is the opposite. But I have not been writing about insight. I've > made no claims about insight. > =============== To my understanding, there's a difference between: - knowing the dhamma that is visible object or sound as it truly is, i.e., as a rupa having the 3 characteristics, and - knowing that what is being seen or heard at the present moment is the object of consciousness, different from the consciousness of which it is the object. The former a level of insight knowledge, while the latter is conventional non-confusion about the present moment. ------------------------------------------------ I agree that there is radically more the former. ----------------------------------------------- That's why I do not see the significance of the distinction between knowing and known as regards the development of insight. ------------------------------------------------- If one is unaware of the distinction between knowing and known, one is mired in ignorance. ----------------------------------------------- > =============== > I assure you that sights and seeing are inseparable, one from the > other. There is neither without the other, ever. And the Buddha actually HAS > said so - in the Kalaka Sutta: There is no unseen sight. > > Emptiness of Consciousness > /"Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't > construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't > construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. > "When hearing... > "When sensing... > "When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] > cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an > [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer./ > (From the Kalaka Sutta) > =============== I'm not with you here. Which part of the quoted passage exactly do you read as saying that there is no unseen sight? ------------------------------------------- "He doesn't construe an unseen." ------------------------------------------------------ Of course, by definition a sight is something that is being seen (much like "object" implies the presence of consciousness). But "sight" is not the term used in the original Pali ("rupa"). So perhaps it's not a particularly good translation for that term. ------------------------------------------- I suggest you reread what I quoted from the Kalaka Sutta. I find it a clear assertion that there are no visible objects existing apart from the seeing of them, and also no seeing existing apart from a visible object. ------------------------------------------- Jon =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102073 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] characteristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/7/2009 6:12:27 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: What I understand is that the passage is pointing to how the Buddha does not proliferate with lobha (of any kind) about what is experienced. This is in contrast to worldlings who cling to the signs and details of what is experienced. ================================ Yes, but the passage is explicit as to what is not "proliferated". Had his passage been said by Nagarjuna, many would call it "Mahayana nonsense"! ;-) With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102074 From: "freawaru80" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 8:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. freawaru80 Dear Nina and pt, > > pt: Or in more > > scientific terms - all the light that reflects from the > > surroundings onto the retina at that moment? > ------- > N: No focussing on a specific colour, visible object is whatever > appears through eyesense. Kh Sujin used to say: close your eyes, open > them, is there not something appearing? This is a practicle way of > explanation of what is visible. No need to think of pasada ruupa or > retina. I fear I have to disagree with her in this case. When something apppears in this way it must be already mind door. It has been altered. There are processes in the mind that even alter the sense door itself. For example, hearing. The contact with the mind alters the way the ear door hears. Certain frequencies are pronounced, others filtered. By the small hairs inside the ear. The moment something appears through what feels as eye or ear when one opens the eye or unblocks the ear is already the filtered version. I doubt very much that without really discerning with the speed required for Abhidhamma anyone can understand the difference between mind door and other sense doors. > She also said: can you count all the colours in this room? In other > words, no need to worry or think about particular colours, or worry > what colour exactly is appearing at that moment. Seeing sees all that > is visible but it does not think about any colour. It just sees. No. That is just spreading out one's awareness instead of focusing on a single object. It is well known that one can focus on one voice (or instrument) when listening to music or on them all at the same time. The same is true for the other senses, one can focus on one limb or the whole body (whole body would be the starting point of Satipatthana sutta). The same of course works also for sight. It is a very useful practice to spread out one's awareness like that of course, but it cannot be what is meant in Abhidhamma as the time discernment is not high enough. Dear pt, I recommend reading Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's "Practical Dependent Origination", it describes in detail what you discuss here and confuse with Abhidhamma. It is on a different time scale than Abhidhamma. Personally, I think DO is Abhidhammic time scale, but the level of discussion on this board is about what one can discern with the personality. That is "Practical Dependent Origination" time scale and interpretation and while Ven. Buddhadhasa believed this to be DO he at least did not wrongly teach it as Abhidhamma. > N: When seeing is kusala vipaakacitta its object is pleasant, and > when it is akusala vipaakacitta its object is unpleasant, but, this > is something we cannot find out. Seeing is so short, like a flash of > lightning. and what is the use to find out? The use would be to understand Abhidhamma. To know the sense doors. To develop discernment, to use Majushri's sword. Freawaru #102075 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 8:26 am Subject: Formal instructions in VsM truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex and Herman > > whichever theory or path one choose, understanding comes first. The DSG is about Abhidhamma and following the ancient commentary way. We seriously follow such a way. Not everyone here is agreeable or like it this way. Each one of us has his or her path due to accumulations and inclinations. It is up to individual to decide. > > Our positions may be different, we hope by sharing we could benefit from each other. We dont know whether such discussions might be useful in future or a seed for future enlightment. We hope we all benefit from it. > > > With metta > Ken O Dear Ken O, KenH, Sarah, Jon, Nina, all, By ancient commentaries do you include Visuddhimagga? If so, how do you explain what it teaches about concentration and formal methods? === CHAPTER IV THE EARTH KASINA (pathavi-kasina-niddesa) 1. [118] Now it was said earlier: After that he should avoid a monastery unfavourable to the development of concentration and go to live in one that is favourable (Ch. HI, §28)... [THE EIGHTEEN FAULTS OF A MONASTERY] 2. Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there.... One that has the five factors beginning with *not too far from and not too near to' the alms resort is called favourable. For this is said by the Blessed One: 'And how has a lodging five factors, bhikkhus? Here, bhikkhus, (1) a lodging is not too far, not too near, and has a path for going and coming. (2) It is little frequented by day with little sound and few voices by night. (3) There is little contact with gadflies, flies, wind, burning [sun] and creeping things. (4) One who lives in that lodging easily obtains robes, alms food, lodging, and the requisite of medicine as cure for the sick. (5) In that lodging there are elder bhikkhus living who are learned, versed in the scriptures, observers of the Dhamma, observers of the Vinaya, observers of the Codes, and when from time to time one asks them questions, "How is this, venerable sir? What is the meaning of this?", then those venerable ones reveal the unrevealed, explain the unexplained, and remove doubt about the many things that raise doubts. This, bhikkhus, is how a lodging has five factors' (A.v,15) [THE EARTH KASINA] [123] When a bhikkhu has thus severed the lesser impediments, then, on his return from his alms round after his meal and after he has got rid of drowsiness due to the meal, he should sit down comfortably in a secluded place and apprehend the sign in earth that is either made up or not made up.... === And so on. With metta, Alex #102076 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. upasaka_howard Hi Freawaru (and Nina & pt) - In a message dated 11/7/2009 11:06:28 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, freawaru80@... writes: Dear Nina and pt, > > pt: Or in more > > scientific terms - all the light that reflects from the > > surroundings onto the retina at that moment? > ------- > N: No focussing on a specific colour, visible object is whatever > appears through eyesense. Kh Sujin used to say: close your eyes, open > them, is there not something appearing? This is a practicle way of > explanation of what is visible. No need to think of pasada ruupa or > retina. I fear I have to disagree with her in this case. When something apppears in this way it must be already mind door. It has been altered. ---------------------------------------------- Whatever prior sequence of activities, the entire visual panorama is the sight. It is irrelevant that it is mind-conditioned rupa. ----------------------------------------------- There are processes in the mind that even alter the sense door itself. For example, hearing. The contact with the mind alters the way the ear door hears. Certain frequencies are pronounced, others filtered. By the small hairs inside the ear. The moment something appears through what feels as eye or ear when one opens the eye or unblocks the ear is already the filtered version. -------------------------------------------------- Nonetheless, whatever is heard is the ear-door object. ---------------------------------------------------- I doubt very much that without really discerning with the speed required for Abhidhamma anyone can understand the difference between mind door and other sense doors. ----------------------------------------------------- When a sound is known AS sound, it is a mind-door object. ----------------------------------------------------- > She also said: can you count all the colours in this room? In other > words, no need to worry or think about particular colours, or worry > what colour exactly is appearing at that moment. Seeing sees all that > is visible but it does not think about any colour. It just sees. No. ---------------------------------------------------- Yes. ;-)) ---------------------------------------------------- That is just spreading out one's awareness instead of focusing on a single object. It is well known that one can focus on one voice (or instrument) when listening to music or on them all at the same time. ----------------------------------------------------- Whatever is seen is the visual object. --------------------------------------------------- The same is true for the other senses, one can focus on one limb or the whole body (whole body would be the starting point of Satipatthana sutta). The same of course works also for sight. It is a very useful practice to spread out one's awareness like that of course, but it cannot be what is meant in Abhidhamma as the time discernment is not high enough. ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102077 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 10:50 am Subject: Re: Formal instructions in VsM szmicio Dear Alex, Ken O, Suan > If so, how do you explain what it teaches about concentration and formal methods? L: What you call formal methods it just looks like that. It's not formal method. It is just Dhamma that can condition right understanding when heard. What about suttamayenanna, what about applaying the ear, first? This "formal methods" reminds me how Dhamma is vast and deep. Even when you hear on "sitting and doing" there can be understanding. But it can also be wrongly comprehended. It can be done with akusala. For example: The vinayya appreciation is one of the way of development, for people who have accumulations. If you feel like that, that's wonderful. But there is nothing against to hear more on right understanding. The patimakkhasiila can condition nibbana, when there are conditions. But belive me that a lot of people suffers form being bikkhu. They cannot appreciate and i think they need to hear more. being bhikkhu and not understand that is very common. It does not eradict misery. Sitting and making formal methods withou not understanding, does not change anything. There can be akusala, and we can be involved in thinking that's kusala. We can be involved in anything, misery is out of control. We cannot stop it. > === > CHAPTER IV > THE EARTH KASINA (pathavi-kasina-niddesa) > 1. [118] Now it was said earlier: After that he should avoid a monastery unfavourable to the development of concentration and go to live in one that is favourable (Ch. HI, §28)... L: It does not mean to avoid anything. There can be avoiding with kusala and with akusala. If you try to avoid because you want to have some more understanding. madness. akusala. The Theras just pointed out different realities here. This is still the Dhamma, that if you hear can condition in you wise consideration, or it can condition kusala citta with refraining. It really helps. But it can be easily misunderstood. Can you see how those concepts condition different considerations(cittas)? There is no formal way. > [THE EIGHTEEN FAULTS OF A MONASTERY] > 2. Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. > These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, > [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there.... L: Wow! That's true. That's Dhamma. It can condition in use wise consideration. It is Dhamma that applayed to the ear can condition kusala. Buddha and Theras didnt lose their words. They just pointed out to us the realities so that we can understand. No need to think , just Dhamma, that works on its own. No Self anywhere. > One that has the five factors beginning with *not too far from and > not too near to' the alms resort is called favourable. For this is said by the Blessed One: 'And how has a lodging five factors, bhikkhus? Here, bhikkhus, (1) a lodging is not too far, not too near, and has a path for going and coming. (2) It is little frequented by day with little sound and few voices by night. (3) There is little contact with gadflies, flies, wind, burning [sun] and creeping things. (4) One who lives in that lodging easily obtains robes, alms food, lodging, and the requisite of medicine as cure for the sick. (5) In that lodging there are elder bhikkhus living who are learned, versed in the scriptures, observers of the Dhamma, observers of the Vinaya, observers of the Codes, and when from time to time one asks them questions, "How is this, venerable sir? What is the meaning of this?", then those venerable ones reveal the unrevealed, explain the unexplained, and remove doubt about the many things that raise doubts. This, bhikkhus, is how a lodging has five factors' (A.v,15) L: Again. In the Nina's Conditions that i received form Tom recently, there was said on lodgings at pakatupanisayyapaccaya. Buddha just pointed it because he knew that is very subtle differentiation that can condition/help us understand. wise lodgings pointed in vinaya is a condition by way of upanissayapaccaya. This is not the method made by anyone. > [THE EARTH KASINA] > [123] When a bhikkhu has thus severed the lesser impediments, > then, on his return from his alms round after his meal and after he has got rid of drowsiness due to the meal, he should sit down comfortably in a secluded place and apprehend the sign in earth that is either made up or not made up.... L: Wow just different conditioned dhammas. Best wishes Lukas #102078 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:30 am Subject: Re: Formal instructions in VsM - Earth Kasina discussion truth_aerator Dear Lucas, Nina, Sarah, Jon all, Thank you for your reply. So what you are saying is that DSG allows for development of lets say Earth Kasina as outlined in VsM Chapter IV? Now as to technical aspects (which some of you may enjoy quite a bit). a) What is earth kasina itself made of in terms of Khandha, ayatana, dhatu? b) How is earth kasina perceived in terms of Khandha, ayatana, dhatu? c) What is its learning sign in terms of Khandha, ayatana, dhatu? d) What is its counterpart sign in terms of Khandha, ayatana, dhatu? With metta, Alex #102079 From: "colette" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's last word ksheri3 Sarah, are you suggesting what the Buddha's first words when he immerged from the incubator? colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear pt, > > --- On Mon, 2/11/09, ptaus1 wrote: > >I was going through UP, there's this interesting quote in post 32017 and I'm wondering what's the source of the quote: > > "Thus all of this has been told and discussed for forty-five years from my enlightenment to my parinibbaana; three baskets, five Nikaayas, nine branches (a'nga), eight-four thousand groups of dhamma: these are the major divisions. Thus these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma remain. I alone attain parinibbaana, and now I alone advise and instruct. After I have attained parinibbaana, these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, will advise and instruct you." #102080 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 12:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja moellerdieter Hi Sarah and all, may I ask for a little dance ...? ;-) there are 2 passages from your recent messages I like to talk about: from your exchange with Howard: quote: S:(esp. for those who like to suggest the Buddha urged all to live in the forest, at the foot of a tree.) H:> I haven't encountered any such "suggesters" yet. Whom do you have in mind? ... S: Good call! The wording may have been a tad strong, but there have certainly been many "suggesters" here over the years who've proclaimed that forest-dwelling is recommended by the Buddha for the development of samatha and vipassana. For example, to mention a relatively recent one, if you put 'Alex forest Buddha' into the search-engine on DSG, you come up with over 100 entries:-). How do you read his comments, such as the following one and those in the messages below: '...Running into the forest seems to be such a let down for most that some people like to make the teaching suit them rather than the other way around, sucking it up and doing the hard work.' See also recent messages by Alex (and Suan): 100833, 99851 (Suan), 99731, 99643, 99582, 99349 These were just from the first page. To me they read as suggestions that the Buddha urged/encouraged forest dwelling for any kind of bhavana. Perhaps I misunderstood them! I hope so!! unquote D: there is hardly any doubt that the Buddha recommended the forest /remote dwelling , finally that was the place of his enlightenment... and there is plenty of evidence in sutta sources, but of course this recommendation was for those ready for it so that 'the forest would not take over ..'. It is the idle place a monk may choose to develop 'samatha and vipassana'...and as such the tradition of forest monks is not without reason higly praised . Usually lay people don 't have such opportunity and therefore have not been addressed .. from your exchange with Scott: S: "- the bhikkhuni ordination issue.... How does it help one's development of understanding?" Scott: I don't worry about it. I think it is simply the decline of the Dhamma and how worldly notions are exchanged for Dhamma. Rather than accept that the lineage died out, people get caught up in thoughts about women and patriarchy, and rights, and politics and religion and authority. I think of all the women and their attainments as depicted in the series that connie offered and have no worries about women being exempted from anything real the Dhamma promises. The whole thing totally misses the point as far as I'm concerned. D: I think the development of understanding includes as well taking care of the Sangha , in which each Buddhist has taken refuge as well. And one may question whether a general decline of the Dhamma is not also due to the way followers pay attention to signs of decay , e.g. closing ears and eyes to public disputes which disturbs the harmony of the Sangha .. I am glad to be informed about such incidents in particular when a wellknown monk has been expelled from his group ( Ajahn Cha's forest tradition) due to his involvement of Bhikkhuni ordination and appreciate to discuss such issues . DSG isn't limited to discuss Abhidhamma respectively Ajahn Sujin's Dhamma interpretation , is it? with Metta Dieter #102081 From: Lukas Szmidt Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 1:26 pm Subject: Formal instructions in VsM szmicio Dear Alex I just read a bit of Chapter IV. I wanna add something. >[THE EIGHTEEN FAULTS OF A MONASTERY] >2. Herein, one that is unfavourable has any one of eighteen faults. >These are: largeness, newness, dilapidatedness, a nearby road, a pond, [edible] leaves, flowers, fruits, famousness, a nearby city, nearby timber trees, nearby arable fields, presence of incompatible persons, a nearby port of entry, nearness to the border countries, nearness to the frontier of a kingdom, unsuitability, lack of good friends. [119] One with any of these faults is not favourable. He should not live there.... L: Those 18 faults. Buddha/Theras were so accurate of realities. They pointed it out excelant. It reminds me on 'different bhikkhu minds'. How they arise, how they are conditioned. This passage of 18 faults is so good. This is on realities. How different dhammas of largness of monastery can influance people. excelant. Dhamma. This is so accuarate. In my life this different concepts also influance different behaviours. I dont think of 'me doing'. Just different reminders influance and they act on its own way. All's conditioned. I dont need to think of 'me doing'. I dont need Lukas to be happy. Just different moments. Just couple of my thoughts. Best wishes Lukas #102082 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:24 pm Subject: Re: chat with Scott philofillet Hi Scott and Sarah and all > S: "- Anger management, suppression, instructions in the suttas, past discussions with other friends, such as Phil on this, considering other views." > > Scott: The aversion towards anger. The wish it wasn't there. The thoughts of past anger and an angry person, the yearning for a set of instructions which can facilitate the creation of the soothing concept of the person without anger... Ph: Personally, in my case, it's not about the creation of a person without anger, it's all about the elimination of behaviour that hurts oneself and others. (And that, of course, is ultimately about dhammas performing functions etc, but ultimately in a degree that we are not directly aware of unless we like to fantasize about being aware of it.) It's happening, gradually but clearly in my case. Nothing that anyone says at DSG about this being a "yearning for a soothing concept" will convince me that this progression towards harmfulness is not in line with the Buddha's teaching, and not to be celebrated with gratitude to the Buddha! Metta, Phil #102083 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:27 pm Subject: Re: chat with Scott philofillet Oops >this progression towards harmfulness is not in line with the Buddha's teaching, and not to be celebrated with gratitude to the Buddha! harmlessness, of course. I love that. "progressions towards harmlessness." I would like to know how to say that in Pali. I'd also like to know how to say "soothing concept of being aware of presently arisen realities in daily life" in Pali! Metta, Phil #102084 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:38 pm Subject: Re: Formal instructions in VsM philofillet Hi Lukas May I suggest that at some point in addition to looking at kasina practice you take a look at the instruction for "the clansman who is a beginner" for meditation on the breath in Vism. The standard Sujinist line that meditation on the breath is too difficult to be undertaken is shot to pieces by that section. But of course you can present it all very clearly and you'll be told that it's because people in that day had better understanding or whatever so it doesn't apply to us. That line is always the final slippery tango step for los sujinistos. Metta, Phil #102085 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:41 pm Subject: Re: Formal instructions in VsM philofillet Hi alll Oops again! Sorry, I shouldn't post on the run. That should have been "Hi Alex." Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philofillet" wrote: > > > Hi Lukas > > May I suggest that at some point in addition to looking at kasina practice you take a look at the instruction for "the clansman who is a beginner" for meditation on the breath in Vism. The standard Sujinist line that meditation on the breath is too difficult to be undertaken is shot to pieces by that section. But of course you can present it all very clearly and you'll be told that it's because people in that day had better understanding or whatever so it doesn't apply to us. That line is always the final slippery tango step for los sujinistos. > > Metta, > > Phil > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > > #102086 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 2:57 pm Subject: Re: chat with Scott philofillet Hi again Actually, come to think of it, you're right that the creation of the concept of a person without anger does come into play when progressing towards reduction and eventual elimination of transgression rooted in anger. And it's in the suttanta. I don't have it at hand, but I love the sutta that urges the monk to reflect that the transgressive path is a dangerous path etc, "a path for inferior people, not for superior people....it is not for you." This is in black and white in the suttanta. The Buddha understood that concepts of self were helpful in eliminating harmful behaviour, I think. He knew that concepts of self were inevitable for people like us, so turned them to good use, of course. And the beautiful thing is that rather than thickening attachment to self this helps to condition eventual freedom from self. (through the sila > samdahi > panna dynamic...) But please remember that this concept of a person without anger is just something that is built and disposed of along the way, in line with the Buddha's teaching... Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philofillet" wrote: > > > > Hi Scott and Sarah and all > > > S: "- Anger management, suppression, instructions in the suttas, past discussions with other friends, such as Phil on this, considering other views." > > > > Scott: The aversion towards anger. The wish it wasn't there. The thoughts of past anger and an angry person, the yearning for a set of instructions which can facilitate the creation of the soothing concept of the person without anger... > > Ph: Personally, in my case, it's not about the creation of a person without anger, it's all about the elimination of behaviour that hurts oneself and others. (And that, of course, is ultimately about dhammas performing functions etc, but ultimately in a degree that we are not directly aware of unless we like to fantasize about being aware of it.) > > It's happening, gradually but clearly in my case. Nothing that anyone says at DSG about this being a "yearning for a soothing concept" will convince me that this progression towards harmfulness is not in line with the Buddha's teaching, and not to be celebrated with gratitude to the Buddha! > > Metta, > > Phil > #102087 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:22 pm Subject: Re: Formal instructions in VsM truth_aerator Hi Phil, Nina, Sarah, KenH, KenO and all, It is true that everything, including Jhana, energetic striving and so on is conditioned. However all the teachings of "don't strive, don't meditate, live a normal life, I can't do anything, etc, etc" to be a negative conditioning itself, not to mention an ajivika excuse not to do things. In VsM III,29 it states that one must severe 10 impediments to Samadhi. "he should sever any of the ten impediments that he may have. [90] Now the 'ten impediments' are: A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." DSG'ers Please tell me any of 40 kamatthana's that do not require seclusion. For example some smart people on the board where ridiculing the development of loving kindness in seclusion. However VsM itself states "A meditator who wants to develop firstly lovingkindness among these, if he is a beginner, should sever the impediments and learn the meditation subject. Then, when he has done the work connected with the meal and got rid of any dizziness due to it, he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place. To start with, he should review the danger in hate and the advantage in patience." Note: "should sever the impediments" and "he should seat himself comfortably on a well-prepared seat in a secluded place." - VsM Brahmavihara-niddesa IX, 1 ======= 1) Noble 8Fold path is required for Awakening (DN16) 2) Samma-Samadhi is part of it (MN141) 3) Samma-Samadhi is defined as the Jhanas (mn141) 4) Jhana IS the path to awakening MN36 Some say that Jhana could be merely a moment of magga-phala and not "mundane Jhana". If lets say your awakening magga-phala corresponds to 2nd Jhana (or higher) this proves the existence of mundane Jhana that happened prior to this moment on your way to that level. Just like you can't get from 1st floor to the 4th floor without going through 2nd & 3rd floor, you can't get to the 2nd Jhana without going through the first one. What about Buddha recollection reaching Jhana as a young boy and saying that "This is path to awakening"? Since I doubt that Magga-Phala can last for decades, and he awoken from 4th Jhana & nirodha samapatti. In Tapussa Sutta the Buddha talked about his struggle and overcoming of difficulties at mastering 9 jhanas (4 rupajhanas 4 aruppa and nirodha samapatti). All these states prior to His Awakening WERE Mundane. In Anupada Sutta, MN111, Venerable Sariputta had to go through the same 9 levels (4 rupajhanas + 4 aruppa + nirodha samapatti). The satipatthana doesn't have to be stand-alone. Ven. Sariputta did see rise & fall of nama&rupa in Jhana. MN111. "For seven days I sat in one spot, absorbed in rapture & bliss. On the eighth, I stretched out my legs, having burst the mass of darkness. " Thig 3.2 In this case a nun Uttama, was meditating in one sitting position for 7 days! Prior to the moment of magga-phala she was doing "conventional" meditation filled with piti-sukkha (1st or 2nd Jhana). Recall that in SN 22.5 one needs Samadhi to really see "things as they are"(yathabhutananadassana). Before this all the talk about "things as they are", ultimates, anicca-dukkha-anatta is conceptual at best. It is required to learn the basics, but there comes a point where one needs to directly witness them rather than delude oneself that one has "understanding and vision of things as they are". Many people think that they are wise, but how can one know that? Enter Samadhi, at least that way you will know if your knowledge is real and useful or just another mental baggage of dry scholastic philosophy. Satipatthana (DN22) has a phrase in the beginning, even before 1st satipatthana "having removed covetenous & displeasure for the world. " "vineyya loke abhijjhadomanassam" And how does one do that? In MN68 it is said that Jhana (or at least state immediately prior to that) does that! Again, 5 hindrances block the arising of wisdom. Jhana removes 5 hindrances and allows the wisdom to come through to the thick mind. Recall that AN 5.51 states that hindrances block wisdom from arising, suppression of hindrances gives wisdom a chance. When hindrances are suppressed well enough and all the supportive causes are set (mindfulness, wisdom, energy, etc), the mind gets insight which will remove hindrances forever. When it comes to Wisdom, Right View, Right Understanding, etc etc I believe that there are 2 aspects to it a) Removal of existing wrong views b) Removal of the CAUSE FOR WRONG VIEWS. One of the causes feeding the views of Self, wrong views, belief in rites & rituals is CRAVING (MN9). Craving as one of the hindrances that is temporary removed by Jhana and while it is suppressed, the wisdom may be able to cut it off for good. It is like drugging a strong opponent and then killing him (or like cutting Samson's hair and then overpowering him). Superficial samatha = superficial seeing as it is. DEEP samatha as part of N8P = deep insights. It is like being lost in the forest at night with a flashlight & a map. Dim flashlight will bright very little of forest and make the path out slower. Bright flashlight will reveal more area and will make one see the important places & features more clearly, thus making the escape from the forest of ignorance quicker. In this similie the flashlight is the Jhana, the map is the insight-showing-the-path. Furthermore, the Satipatthana sutta has a strange set of instructions about seeing external feelings & mind states. This implies telepathic abilities, abilities that can be gained FROM JHANA, especially 4th one. In DN#2 the vipassana nana happen based on 4th Jhana. It is interesting that about 1/3 of DN sutta talk about the same path of sense restraint, contentment, mindfulness & alertness, removing hindrances getting into jhanas, achieving liberation. 1) Conscience & concern 2) Purity of conduct 3)Restraint of the senses 4) Moderation in eating 5) Wakefulness 6)Mindfulness & alertness 7) Abandoning the hindrances 8) The four jhanas 9) The three knowledges Note the above path is mentioned in 12 suttas in DN DN# 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 =12 Some suttas omit certain steps but they all talk about getting to the Jhanas and gaining arhatship from there. Indriyasamvaro -> Satisampajannam -> Santoso-> Nivaranappahanam -> 4 jhana -> iddhi -> Arhatship - DN#2 restraint of senses -> mindfulness & alertness -> contentment -> abandoning the hindrances -> 4 Jhana -> iddhi -> arhatship In DN#3 Vipassana nana (in that case 4 elements body contemplation that is described in Satipatthana sutta) happens *after* (or during) 4th Jhana. Note: (step #6, Mindfulness & Alertness) is part of a gradual instruction on getting to the Jhana and it follows AFTER #3, Restraint of the senses. So it is NOT an activity that is done "everywhere in lay life". It is activity done in a retreat (physical as well as mental) or as a Buddhist Monk, where one guards the senses so to avoid giving more fuel to the hindrances. Taking trips to Rome, Fuji, Bangkok, strip clubs, marketplaces is out of the question (for that would break restraint of the senses, moderation, contentment part of the instructions). Therefore, Jhana (with other parts of N8P) is required and it is an integral part of the path. ===== notes & references ===== "And what, friends, is the noble truth of the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress? Just this very noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. "61. And the Blessed One spoke, saying: "In whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, there is not found the Noble Eightfold Path, neither is there found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, or fourth degree of saintliness. But in whatsoever Dhamma and Discipline there is found the Noble Eightfold Path, there is found a true ascetic of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness.54 Now in this Dhamma and Discipline, Subhadda, is found the Noble Eightfold Path; and in it alone are also found true ascetics of the first, second, third, and fourth degrees of saintliness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html#t-54 "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/mn/mn.141.than.html Tapussa Sutta ""Ananda, as long as I had not attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, I did not claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. But as soon as I had attained & emerged from these nine step-by-step dwelling-attainments in forward & backward order in this way, then I did claim to have directly awakened to the right self-awakening unexcelled in the cosmos with its devas, Maras, & Brahmas, with its contemplatives & priests, its royalty & common people. Knowledge & vision arose in me: 'My release is unshakable. This is the last birth. There is now no further becoming.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.041.than.html Buddha Awoke (some translated, discovered) Jhana http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn02/sn02.007.than.html And how does one see rise and fall? From Samadhi: "The Blessed One said: "Develop concentration, monks. A concentrated monk discerns in line with what has come into being. And what does he discern in line with what has come into being? The origination & disappearance of form. The origination & disappearance of feeling... perception... fabrications. The origination & disappearance of consciousness." - SN22.5 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.005.than.html Jhana IS the path to awakening - MN36 Jhana Is what Buddha awakened to. AN9.42 & SN2.7 Jhana Is Practiced by awakened ones: Dhp 23 Jhana Leads to 4 fruits: From Stream to Arhatship. (DN29) Jhana Is Right Concentration - SN 45.8 Ending of Mental Fermentations depend on Jhana - AN 9.36 Samadhi is proximate condition to "knowledge and vision of things as they really are" - SN12.23 Samadhi -> seeing rise & fall of 5 aggregates (which is wisdom) SN 22.5 Samadhi -> wisdom Samadhi is the path - AN 6.64 Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions thay Buddha praised. -MN108 Jhana goes together with discernment (panna): Dhp 372 Jhana Is a mark of a great discernment, great man - AN4.35 Jhana is the escape from confinement. AN 9.42 Released through Panna (Pannavimutti) = Jhanas 1-9 AN 9.44 7 Parts of Noble 8Fold path are support for Jhana- MN117 Jhana + discernment is a single thing that can lead one to Arhatship - AN 11.17 The Buddha has recomended Jhana for trainees - MN107 It is *impossible* to break 5 lower and 5 upper fetters without Jhana (and insight after it). - MN64 Jhana are 4 stations of mindfulness (anussatithana) AN 3.322 Udayin sutta iii, 320, VI, iii, 29 Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, non-concentration the no-whither way. Samadhi Maggo, asamadhi kummaggo AN6.64 No wonder that Buddha has frequently exhorted his monks "Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana,. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." - MN152 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.152.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.051.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/thig/thig.03.02.than.html http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/1Digha-Nikaya/Digha1/02-samannaphala-e2.h\ tml With metta, Alex #102088 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:25 pm Subject: Re: chat with Scott philofillet Hi again again Just thinking aloud as I iron, make lunch etc before rushing off to work. I have never talked about "being without anger". I talk about avoiding transgression rooted in anger, I put it that way intentionally for good reason. There is a very important difference.And it's because of this gap between being with anger and committing trangressions rooted in anger that the Buddha says that the path of holiness is a difficult path, that one lives it with tears and sighing etc. As for being with anger, happens all the time and one can see it come and go, no illusions about being "without anger." Metta, Phil #102089 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:06 pm Subject: Divorced Freedom! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Regarding all Phenomena with aloof Equanimity! When one has understood constructions by seeing the three characteristics in them and their voidness, then one can leave both terror & delight by becoming indifferent and neutral to all states, taking them neither to be 'I' nor 'mine'! One becomes like a man who has recently divorced his wife: The man who were married to a lovely, gorgeous, & charming wife & so deeply in love with her as to be unable to bear separation from her for a moment. He would be disturbed & displeased to see her standing, talking & laughing with another man, and would be very unhappy, but later, when he had found out that woman's faults, and he had divorced her, he would no more take her as 'mine'; and thereafter, even though he saw her doing whatever it might be, with whomsoever it might be, he would neither be disturbed, nor displeased, but only neutral & indifferent! So too with the meditating disciple who wants to get free from all phenomena, he recognizes all constructions as impermanent, and void of pleasure and self, thus seeing that nothing is possible to take as 'I' or 'mine', he abandons both terror and delight, and becomes indifferent & neutral towards all phenomena... Vism 656 Divorced from Possessiveness, Egoism, Clinging and Frustration! <...> Equanimity describes the unattached awareness of one's experience as a result of perceiving the impermanence of momentary reality. It is a peace of mind and dwelling in even calmness that cannot be shaken by any grade of both fortunate and unfortunate circumstance. It is a concept promoted by several religions...! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equanimity Have a nice divorced day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ <...> #102090 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 3:49 pm Subject: Formal instructions in VsM - Anapanasati excerpts truth_aerator Hеllo all, In VsM III,29 it states that one must severe 10 impediments to Samadhi. "he should sever any of the ten impediments that he may have. [90] Now the 'ten impediments' are: A dwelling, family, and gain, A class, and building too as fifth, And travel, kin, affliction, books, And supernormal powers: ten." VIII. 145 'Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty place, sits down; having folded his legs crosswise, set his body erect, established mindfulness in front of him, [267] ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. VIII.153 "Gone to the forest ...or to an empty place: this signifies that he has found an abode favourable to the development of concentration through mindfulness of breathing. For this bhikkhu's mind has long been dissipated among visible data, etc., as its object, and it does not want to mount the object of concentration-through-mindfulness-of-breathing; it runs off the track like a chariot harnessed to a wild ox.41 Now suppose a cowherd [269] wanted to tame a wild calf that had been reared on a wild cow's milk, he would take it away from the cow and tie it up apart with a rope to a stout post dug into the ground; then the calf might dash to and fro, but being unable to get away, it would eventually sit down or lie down by the post. So too, when a bhikkhu wants to tame his own mind which has long been spoilt by being reared on visible data, etc., as object for its food and drink, he should take it away from visible data, etc., as object and bring it into the forest or to the root of a tree or to an empty place and tie it up there to the post of in-breaths and out-breaths with the rope of mindfulness. And so his mind may then dash to and fro when it no longer gets the objects it was formerly used to, but being unable to break the rope of mindfulness and get away, it sits down, lies down, by that object under the influence of access and absorption." VIII,155 "now—is not easy to develop without leaving the neighbourhood of villages, which resound with the noises of women, men, elephants, horses, etc., noise being a thorn to jhana (see A.v,135), whereas in the forest away from a village a meditator can at his ease set about discerning this meditation subject and achieve the fourth jhana in mindfulness of breathing; and then, by making that same jhana the basis for comprehension of formations [with insight] (Ch. XX, §2f.), he can reach Arahantship, the highest fruit. That is why the Blessed One said 'gone to the forest', etc., in pointing out a favourable abode for him." 160 "Herein, crosswise is the sitting position with the thighs fully locked. Folded: having locked. Set his body erect: having placed the upper part of the body erect with the eighteen backbones resting end to end. For when he is seated like this, his skin, flesh and sinews are not twisted, and so the feelings that would arise moment by moment if they were twisted do not arise. That being so, his mind becomes unified, and the meditation subject, instead of collapsing, attains to growth and increase." 173. "Herein, he trains: he strives, he endeavours in this way. Or else the restraint here in one such as this is training in the higher virtue, his consciousness is training in the higher consciousness, and his understanding is training in the higher understanding (see Ps.i,184). So he trains in, repeats, develops, repeatedly practises, these three kinds of training, on that object, by means of that mindfulness, by means of that attention. This is how the meaning should be regarded here." With metta, Alex #102091 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 6:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Jhana egberdina Hi Alex, 2009/11/6 truth_aerator > Hello all, > > In my book, wisdom without action is mere theory, impotent and with very > little practical usefulness. IMHO, to know the hindrances, is to be able to > abandon them at least temporary, from where reaching Jhana becomes easy. A > sure way to test one's practical wisdom is to see how easy one can abandon > the hindrances and reach Jhana. > > I agree with your thoughts. Wisdom facilitates letting go. Cheers Herman #102092 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 6:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] "Come inside the show's about to start" ELP egberdina Hi colette, 2009/11/7 colette > Hi Herman, > > I have no idea what you're talking about or what you are questioning.\ > > Where did I mention an absence? Where did I mention a "lacking of"? > > I, like the Buddha, speak of that which is and not that which is not. > > Where did I propose that something OTHER than a "wind" exists? I speak of > the buddhist terminology of Winds and Drops in the aspect of Tantra aka > Vajrayana NOT THERAVADAN although the foundations are exactly the same. > > You suggest that something exists and that another person has cognized this > existance and now you are here or there to play the role of Satan and to > question the actuality of that which was never proposed to exist. <...> I > may suggest that your focus is not proper to the MEDITATION which I am > working on. > > There are countless troubles and waves in the apprehension of the > individual subjects that I have given HOWEVER I simply made a statement > concerning the Winds through the Shashumna as it activates each chakra > individually. <...> > > Where is the requirement that the question "What is there" be honored as > being a valid question? Is it a question at all since it is an endless > question that has absolutely no significance to the Tantra practices which I > am participating in. > > Sorry that I was unclear. You are exactly right in your last paragraph regarding the validity of the question "what is there?" Not meaning to say it is an invalid question, it is just that all answers will be like the holding up of a mirror. The question is not intention-free, and therefore the answer will only reveal the intention. The reason I asked my unclear question was because it seemed to me that you were writing along the lines of ''things are this way" or "things are that way". Sorry for misunderstanding. Cheers Herman #102093 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 6:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] What teaching should one follow? egberdina Hi Alex, 2009/11/7 truth_aerator > Hello Herman, KenH, RobertK, all, > > > What should be chosen is that which actually leads to cessation of Dukkha, > rebirth and so on - Not the theory that makes one feel learned, wise and > have lots of understanding that allows one to publish books, participate in > Buddhist councils and earn a PhD. > > > > IMHO if someone's understanding doesn't allow them to reach at least 1st > Jhana (and thus avoid, at least temporary, the suffering brought by 5 > hindrances and kamaloka) I think that would be a useful barometer of how well the theory is understood. Cheers Herman #102094 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 6:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja egberdina Hi Phil, 2009/11/6 philofillet > > Hi Herman > > > This is the real world, welcome to the uncertainty that is inherent in it > > :-). > > > > Do you believe that being a fundamentalist, ie someone who chooses which > > texts are to be held as sacred and literal truth while denying their own > > judgment in that, is an improvement on uncertainty? > > Yes, it's interesting. I was thinking after posting that that I am quite > the fundamentalist. > Sorry, Phil, I wasn't meaning to suggest that I thought of you as a fundamentalist. In actual fact, I think of you as having undergone a fundamental transformation of approach, which has been visible for all to see here at dsg. It is rare to see that in mature adults, who tend to become more entrenched in their views as time goes. But not you, you have up-ended the apple cart, and have become very acknowledging of choosing your own way (which everyone, including fundies, always have done, they just won't admit to it :-)) That change in your approach has been very encouraging for me. > > I think it's a matter of where we exercise our own judgement. I'm quite > ready to make judgement calls with respect to my dealings with people, in > very conventional settings, and there is certain leeway there to judge > whether or not I am in line with the Dhamma. But I shy away from the kind of > thing you and Howard and others enjoy a lot, trying to arrive at your own > understanding of deep aspects of cognition and perception and consciousness > and so on based on your experience of them. I guess you are following in the > Buddha's footsteps in doing so, but my mind (so to speak) just doesn't work > that way. I would rather study from a great distance descriptions in the > texts of the great ones achieving enlightenment, and even find the model > laid out in Abhidhamma helpful whether it was taught by the Buddha or not > because it was certainly taught by the great ones. So if it is a model that > can't actually be confirmed in experience by me what possible use is it? > Well, that's a good question but for now it doesn't bother me. And in fact > I'm not spending much time on those teachings these days. > And it is good for me to come across posts by you and others who do not shy > away from taking things into your own hands and trying to enlighten > experience. > > Thanks Phil. I'm sure we'll get to discuss more in the future. Cheers Herman #102095 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 7:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja egberdina Hi Sarah, Howard, Alex and all, 2009/11/7 sarah abbott > Hi Howard, > > --- On Thu, 5/11/09, upasaka@... wrote: > > >>S:(esp. for those who like to suggest the Buddha urged all to live in the > forest, at the foot of a tree.) > ============ ========= ======== > H:> I haven't encountered any such "suggesters" yet. Whom do you have in > mind? > ... > S: Good call! The wording may have been a tad strong, but there have > certainly been many "suggesters" here over the years who've proclaimed that > forest-dwelling is recommended by the Buddha for the development of samatha > and vipassana. > > > This discussion prompted me to post the following sutta in it's entirity. > It's not very long :-) > Sn 1:3 Khaggavisana Sutta Renouncing violence for all living beings, harming not even a one, you would not wish for offspring, so how a companion? Wander alone like a rhinoceros. For a sociable person there are allurements; on the heels of allurement, this pain. Seeing allurement's drawback, wander alone like a rhinoceros. One whose mind is enmeshed in sympathy for friends & companions, neglects the true goal. Seeing this danger in intimacy, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Like spreading bamboo, entwined, is concern for offspring & spouses. Like a bamboo sprout, unentangling, wander alone like a rhinoceros. As a deer in the wilds, unfettered, goes for forage wherever it wants: the wise person, valuing freedom, wanders alone like a rhinoceros. In the midst of companions — when staying at home, when going out wandering — you are prey to requests. Valuing the freedom wander alone like a rhinoceros. There is sporting & love in the midst of companions, & abundant fondness for offspring. Feeling disgust at the prospect of parting from those who'd be dear, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Without resistance in all four directions, content with whatever you get, enduring troubles with no dismay, wander alone like a rhinoceros. They are hard to please, some of those gone forth, as well as those living the household life. Shedding concern for these offspring of others, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Cutting off the householder's marks, 1 like a kovilara tree that has shed its leaves, the prudent one, cutting all household ties, wander alone like a rhinoceros. If you gain a mature companion, a fellow traveler, right-living & wise, overcoming all dangers go with him, gratified, mindful. If you don't gain a mature companion, a fellow traveler, right-living & wise, wander alone like a king renouncing his kingdom, like the elephant in the Matanga wilds, his herd. We praise companionship — yes! Those on a par, or better, should be chosen as friends. If they're not to be found, living faultlessly, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Seeing radiant bracelets of gold, well-made by a smith, clinking, clashing, two on an arm, wander alone like a rhinoceros, [thinking:] "In the same way, if I were to live with another, there would be careless talk or abusive." Seeing this future danger, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Because sensual pleasures, elegant, honeyed, & charming, bewitch the mind with their manifold forms — seeing this drawback in sensual strands — wander alone like a rhinoceros. "Calamity, tumor, misfortune, disease, an arrow, a danger for me." Seeing this danger in sensual strands, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Cold & heat, hunger & thirst, wind & sun, horseflies & snakes: enduring all these, without exception, wander alone like a rhinoceros. As agreat white elephant, with massive shoulders, renouncing his herd, lives in the wilds wherever he wants, wander alone like a rhinoceros. "There's no way that one delighting in company can touch even momentary release." Heeding the Solar Kinsman's words, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Transcending the contortion of views, the sure way attained, the path gained, [realizing:] "Unled by others, I have knowledge arisen," wander alone like a rhinoceros. With no greed, no deceit, no thirst, no hypocrisy — delusion & blemishes blown away — with no inclinations for all the world, every world, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Avoid the evil companion disregarding the goal, intent on the out-of-tune way. Don't take as a friend someone heedless & hankering. wander alone like a rhinoceros. Consort with one who is learned, who maintains the Dhamma, a great & quick-witted friend. Knowing the meanings, subdue your perplexity, [then] wander alone like a rhinoceros, Free from longing, finding no pleasure in the world's sport, love, or sensual bliss, abstaining from adornment, speaking the truth, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Abandoning offspring, spouse, father, mother, riches, grain, relatives, & sensual pleasures altogether, wander alone like a rhinoceros. "This is a bondage, a baited hook. There's little happiness here, next to no satisfaction, all the more suffering & pain." Knowing this, circumspect, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Shattering fetters, like a fishin the water tearing a net, like a fire not coming back to what's burnt, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Eyes downcast, not footloose, senses guarded, with protected mind, not oozing — not burning — with lust, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Taking off the householder's marks,2 like a coral tree that has shed its leaves, going forth in the ochre robe, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Showing no greed for flavors, not careless, going from house to house for alms, with mind unenmeshed in this family or that, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Abandoning barriers to awareness, expelling all defilements — all — non-dependent, cutting aversion, allurement, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Turning your back on pleasure & pain, as earlier with sorrow & joy, attaining pure equanimity, tranquillity, wander alone like a rhinoceros. With persistence aroused for the highest goal's attainment, with mind unsmeared, not lazy in action, firm in effort, with steadfastness & strength arisen, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Not neglecting seclusion, absorption, constantly living the Dhamma in line with the Dhamma, comprehending the danger in states of becoming, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Intent on the ending of craving & heedful, learned, mindful, not muddled, certain — having reckoned the Dhamma — & striving, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Unstartled, like a lion at sounds. Unsnared, like the wind in a net. Unsmeared, like a lotus in water: wander alone like a rhinoceros. Like a lion — forceful, strong in fang, living as a conqueror, the king of beasts — resort to a solitary dwelling. Wander alone like a rhinoceros. At the right time consorting with the release through good will, compassion, appreciation, equanimity, unobstructed by all the world, any world, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Having let go of passion, aversion, delusion; having shattered the fetters; undisturbed at the ending of life, wander alone like a rhinoceros. People follow & associate for a motive. Friends without a motive these days are rare. They're shrewd for their own ends, & impure. Wander alone like a rhinoceros. Oh well, it's a bit long, but worth reading, hey what? Cheers Herman #102096 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 9:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Ken O, 2009/11/6 Ken O > Dear Herman > > >> When you experience a blue, what experience it. > > > H: Do you think it is a necessary question to ask/answer? > > > > KO: yes, aggregate exist. if not we will fall into annhilism. > Maybe we are talking about words, not about what the words refer to? I prefer to talk in terms of blue happening in the presence of this and that condition, and not happening in the absence of any of those requisite conditions. That is what I understand by the middle way, not postulating blue and consciousness as things that exist independently of each other. > >> If you said it is conditoins that experiences it, what is the cause of > >> these conditions. > > > H: You have found the problem with asking questions about conditionality. > There > >is no beginning or end to it. > > KO: defiinitely there is a cause, is said by Buddha in DO > Yes, we agree on DO. But DO is not linear, it does not specify a single cause or starting point, does it? > >> If there is no external or internal, why did Buddha say eye objects and > >> eye consciousness, in numerous suttas. Is not eye object and eye > >> consciouness are condtions. > >> > > > H: Do you believe the Buddha's emphasis is that it is important to know > >everything that is possible to know, or is the emphasis on coming to > >understand that whatever is possible to know is not-self (other), anicca > and > >dukkha? > > KO: it is important to know about these or not why did Buddha bother to > talk in so many suttas about eye and eye citta, he may as well save his > breath and talk about other dhammas. I do not understand why I should have to grasp at the aggregates, in order to stop grasping?? > > >> Yes conceiving of oneself is the root of the problem. That does not mean > >> we could not deconstruct it. Just like in the DO, it is > >> properly deconstruct for the understanding on how conditions depend on > each > >> other. Just like the aggregates, the elements, they are descontructing > the > >> premises we have about there is oneself. Could we say there is no > >> experience of seeing? If there is no experience in seeing, then what > see? > >> > > > H: I'd like to differentiate between two types of deconstructing. > > > >There is deconstructing, which is an act of discursive thinking about > >concepts that can be a lot of fun, and/or it satifies a thirst for > knowing, > >and/or it helps to stave of boredom, and/or it helps to avoid seeing the > >inherently unsatisfactory underlying reality of the way things are etc. > > > >And there is the act of not-constructing concepts, which is the road to > the > >jhanas and beyond. > > > >In the first, conceptual thinking about seeing remains, no matter how much > >deconstruction takes place. > > > > K: I disagreed that not-constructing concepts is the road to jhanas. > Because concept cannot decay, cannot show impermance . Without showing > impermanance and pain it is difficult to understand not self. Also > deconstructing is taught by Buddha, again why waste time talking it if it is > not impt. Deconstuction like five aggregates show causes and conditons and > there is no self. > What if I say non-papanca, instead of not-constructing? Deconstructing sounds to me like thinking [about concepts], and will result in just more thinking. Non-papanca is not-thinking, it is not-constructing those clung to things. It is good to discuss with you Ken O Cheers Herman #102097 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 10:49 pm Subject: Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading kenhowardau Hi Ken O, ------- KH: > >If even just one tiny part of the Dhamma was to be understood as an >instruction - as distinct from a description of the way things are then the entire Dhamma may as well be seen that way. Dhammas are either >controllable or not controllable; they can't be both. KO:> To me controllable or not controllable is not the matter in dhamma. The heart of the dhamma is not self. ------- All dhammas are not self. Therefore there is no control over them. Simple as that! :-) ----------- <. . .> KO: >Formal practise should not be construe as one able to control, should be seem as a way of life, a routine which one use or discipline to improve one development. Just like we routinely read the dhammas, could we said it is not a formal practise then? ----------- It has to be one or the other. We can read Dhamma books just to find out more about the present reality, or we can read Dhamma books with a desire to improve ourselves and become better Buddhists. One or the other! One is wise consideration, the other is formal practice. One is right, the other is wrong. --------- <. . .> KO: > that is our interpretation, should not force it on others. --------- Sure, but there is no need to walk on eggshells. -------------- KO: > to them it could be their routine or routine taught to them by their wise teachers, we dont know so we cannot judge. -------------- If someone has wrong understanding at the theoretical level, can't we safely assume their practice is micha-ditthi? Ken H #102098 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! egberdina Hi KenH, 2009/11/7 kenhowardau > > Firstly I should apologise to Herman. After complaining I had already > told him something "one million times" I then asked him a question he > had already answered one million times. (Or more than once, anyway.) > Thanks, Ken. > Herman, if I am not mistaken you have said that actions do ultimately > exist but physical and mental phenomena do not . We'll just have to > agree to disagree on that. > That's fine by me :-) Cheers Herman #102099 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:37 pm Subject: Re: chat with Scott philofillet Hi again, Scott and all A few hours later, at work. Would just like to thank you quickly for that brief comment,Scott, that obviously triggered a lot of reflection on my part. A good example of how hearing from someone who sees things differently can be very helpful. A sign, I hope, of good discussion to come - someday, when I'm ready. (Now the topics that interest me most don't require much discussion. The benefits are in the practice rather than the theory, though of course some would deny that the notion of practice without theory is faulty.) Metta, Phil p.s won't carry on with this topic, for now. As always apologies for my one-sided posting style, it'll change someday. #102100 From: "philofillet" Date: Sat Nov 7, 2009 11:39 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja philofillet Hi Herman > > Sorry, Phil, I wasn't meaning to suggest that I thought of you as a > fundamentalist. Thanks Herman. Talk to you later. Metta, Phil #102101 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 12:22 am Subject: Physical Phenomena (66) hantun1 Dear All, This is the serial presentation of The Buddhist Teaching on Physical Phenomena by Nina. Chapter 8. Characteristics of Ruupas (continuation) Questions and comments are welcome. ---------------------------------- As to impermanence, aniccataa, the "Visuddhimagga" (Ch XIV, 69) states about it as follows: [Note 2] "'Impermanence of matter' has the characteristic of complete breaking up. Its function is to make material instances subside. It is manifested as destruction and fall (cf. Dhs. 645). Its proximate cause is matter that is completely breaking up." The Commentary to the "Visuddhimagga" speaks about the impermanence as the falling away of each ruupa: "It is said that its function is to make (material instances) subside, since this (impermanence) causes the materiality that has reached (the moments of) presence as it were to subside. And since this (impermanence), because of the state of dissolution of material phenomena, should be regarded as destruction and fall, it is said that it is manifested as destruction and fall." As soon as ruupa has arisen, it is led onward to its termination and it breaks up completely, never to come back again. Remembering this is still theoretical knowledge of the truth of impermanence, different from right understanding that realizes the arising and falling away of a naama or a ruupa. When understanding has not yet reached this stage one cannot imagine what it is like. One may tend to cling to ideas about the arising and falling away of phenomena but that is not the development of understanding. Naama and ruupa have each different characteristics and so long as one still confuses naama and ruupa, their arising and falling away cannot be realized. Understanding is developed in different stages and one cannot forego any stage. First there should be a precise understanding of naama as naama and of ruupa as ruupa so that the difference between these two kinds of realities can be clearly seen. It is only at a later stage in the development of understanding that the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa can be directly known. [Note 2] See Dhammasanga.nii § 645 and Atthasaalinii, II, Book II, Part I, Ch II, 328 ------------------------------ Chapter 8. Characteristics of Ruupas (to be continued) with metta, Han #102102 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 12:53 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 4, no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 4 The mind The Buddha taught the truth of non-self. What is called the mind or the soul is not a self, but ever-changing mental elements which are arising and falling away. The implication of this truth is difficult to grasp. Before coming into contact with Buddhism we considered the mind to be the core and essence of the human personality. We considered the mind as that which thinks, takes decisions and charts the course of our life. In order to understand the Buddha’s teaching on the mind as non-self, it is necessary to have a more detailed knowledge of the mind. The word mind is misleading since it is associated with particular concepts of Western philosophy, it is usually associated merely with thinking. The mind according to the Buddhist teaching experiences or cognizes an object, and this has to be taken in its widest sense. I prefer therefore to use the Påli term citta (pronounced “chitta”). Citta is derived from the Påli term “cinteti”, being aware or thinking. Citta is conscious or aware of an object. “Mind”, “soul” or “spirit” are “conventional realities”. Through the Buddhist teachings we learn about ultimate realities as I explained in the preceding chapter. All mental activities we used to ascribe to “our mind” are carried out by citta, not by one citta, but by many different cittas. Cittas are moments of consciousness which are impermanent, they are arising and falling away, succeeding one another. Our life is an unbroken series of cittas. If there were no citta, we would not be alive, we could not think, read, study, act or speak. When we walk or when we stretch out our hand to take hold of something, it is citta which conditions our movements. It is citta which perceives the world outside; if there were no citta nothing could appear. The world outside appears through eyes, ears, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind. We think of what is seen, heard or experienced through the other senses. There are not merely cittas which think, the cittas which think are alternated with cittas which see, hear or experience objects through the other senses. When we touch something which is hard or soft, there are cittas which experience tangible object through the bodysense, and then there are cittas which think of what was touched, a table or a chair. ****** Nina. #102103 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. nilovg Dear Freawaru (and Howard) Op 7-nov-2009, om 17:04 heeft freawaru80 het volgende geschreven: > There are processes in the mind that even alter the sense door > itself. For example, hearing. The contact with the mind alters the > way the ear door hears. Certain frequencies are pronounced, others > filtered. By the small hairs inside the ear. ------- N: The eardoor does not hear. It is the physical base for hearing and it is ruupa, it does not know anything. Earsense is a very tiny ruupa in the ear which is physical base. Earsense and colour, also a ruupa, are conditions for hearing, which is naama. Hearing knows something. -------- > F: The moment something appears through what feels as eye or ear > when one opens the eye or unblocks the ear is already the filtered > version. > I doubt very much that without really discerning with the speed > required for Abhidhamma anyone can understand the difference > between mind door and other sense doors. ------- N: Yes, only pa~n~naa developed through insight which clearly and directly knows the difference between naama and ruupa can know the difference between sense-door and mind-door. Now the mind-door process is concealed. We just know in theory about it. Sound is experienced through the eardoor, in an ear-door process of cittas. After there have been bhavangacittas a mind-door process of cittas begins and these cittas also experience sound. After that there are other processes of cittas which define the sound, think about the source, etc. As you understand well, the speed of cittas is very high. But pa~n~naa which has been developed can understand different characteristics. The difference between the characteristics of naama and ruupa has to be understood, but this is a long process. Naama conditions ruupa and ruupa conditions naama, but their characteristics are different. I quote from the 'Visuddhimagga': The Visuddhimagga (XVIII, 34) explains: Furthermore, nåma has no efficient power, it cannot occur by its own efficient power... It does not eat, it does not drink, it does not speak, it does not adopt postures. And rúpa is without efficient power; it cannot occur by its own efficient power. For it has no desire to eat, it has no desire to drink, it has no desire to speak, it has no desire to adopt postures. But rather it is when supported by rúpa that nåma occurs; and it is when supported by nåma that rúpa occurs. When nåma has the desire to eat, the desire to drink, the desire to speak, the desire to adopt a posture, it is rúpa that eats, drinks, speaks and adopts a posture.... Furthermore (XVIII, 36) we read: And just as men depend upon A boat for traversing the sea, So does the mental body need The matter-body for occurrence. And as the boat depends upon The men for traversing the sea, So does the matter-body need The mental body for occurrence. Depending each upon the other The boat and men go on the sea. And so do mind and matter both Depend the one upon the other. ****** Nina. #102104 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 1:30 am Subject: Re: Physical Phenomena (66) hantun1 Dear Lukas (Nina, Sarah), This is the fourth characteristic of sabhaava ruupas, i.e., falling away or impermanence (aniccataa). The definition of it is given in Vism. XIV.69: 'Impermanence of matter' has the characteristic of complete breaking up. (paribheda lakkha.naa ruupassa aniccataa) Its function is to make material instances subside. (sa.msiidana rasaa) It is manifested as destruction and fall (cf. Dhs. 645). (khaya vaya paccupa.t.thaanaa) Its proximate cause is matter that is completely breaking up.†(paribhijjamaana ruupa pda.t.thaanaa) paribheda: breaking, breaking up, falling to pieces. sa.msiidana: [nt.] sinking off, fallen off, destroyed. khaya: [m.] waste; destruction; decay; consummation of. vaya: [m.; nt.] loss; decay; fall. pari: [a prefix denoting completion] all round; altogether; completely. bhijjamaana: [pr.p. of bhijjati] breaking; destroying. ------------------------------ In Dhammasanga.nii 645, its characteristics are: (1) khaya: [m.] waste; destruction; decay; consummation of. (2) vaya: [m.; nt.] loss; decay; fall. (3) bheda: [m.] breach; breaking, disunion; dissension. (4) paribheda: breaking, breaking up, falling to pieces. (5) anicca: [adj.] not stable; impermanent. (6) antaradhaana: [nt.] disappearance. ------------------------------ In the Text, Nina wrote: (1) First there should be a precise understanding of naama as naama and of ruupa as ruupa so that the difference between these two kinds of realities can be clearly seen. Han: I understand this. (2) As soon as ruupa has arisen, it is led onward to its termination and it breaks up completely, never to come back again. Remembering this is still theoretical knowledge of the truth of impermanence, different from right understanding that realizes the arising and falling away of a naama or a ruupa. It is only at a later stage in the development of understanding that the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa can be directly known. Han: I do not think I can "directly know" any dhamma. The truth is I do not know what it is actually meant by "directly known". For me, if I have the "theoretical knowledge" of the truth of impermanence, I will be quite happy, because I believe that such "theoretical knowledge" will help me to have at least samvega ~naana if not vipassanaa ~naana. Kind regards, Han #102105 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 2:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: chat with Scott nilovg Dear Scott, I read your report with interest. Stressing anattaa. Op 7-nov-2009, om 15:51 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > S: "- Kusala as the remedy. Thinking of others, not oneself, > advantages of kusala, especially being aware and understanding > dhammas." > > Scott: Now here, this is not meant as an instruction, is it? Or is > it? Are you saying that to have kusala one must 'think of others?' > Or are you suggesting that in some way thinking of kusala, thinking > of others, thinking of being aware and understanding may somehow > condition kusala at some point, or be kusala in some way? ------- N: Not meant as an instruction. But thinking of Kh Sujin's book on the Perfections is inspiring. All these good qualities are essential to become detached from self. Metta, patience, generosity are not developed for one's own sake, to gain something for oneself. The perfections are the assistance of pa~n~naa leading to enlightenment. We are so weak to walk the long, long way to enlightenment. The perfections are the fortifyers, needed so much. Nina. #102106 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 2:13 am Subject: From the commentary on the Last Words of the Tathaagata sarahprocter... Dear pt & all, Here is the full quote from the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, from which the extracts were taken: From the beginning of part 6 of the Mahaparinibbana Sutta, the last words of the Buddha, transl. by Sister Vajiraa and Francis Story (BPS): "Now, the Blessed One spoke to the venerable Aananda saying: 'It may be, Aananda, that to some among you the thought will come: 'Ended is the word of the Master; we have a Master no longer.' But it should not, Aananda, be so considered. For that which I have proclaimed and made known as the Dhamma and the Discipline, that shall be your Master when I am gone." From the commentary to the last sentence above, taken from the beginning of Ch VI, Commentary on the Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta, transl. by Yang-Gyu An (PTS) in "The Buddha's Last Days": " 'That which was taught and made known (pa~n~natta)': The Dhamma is both taught and made known. The Vinaya is also both taught and made known. 'Made known' means set up, established. 'That is your teacher, after I am gone': The Dhamma and the Vinaya are your teacher after I am gone. While I remained alive, I taught you: 'This is slight (lahuka); this is serious (garuka); this is curable (satekiccha); this is incurable (atekiccha); this is what is to be avoided by the world (loka-vajja); this is what is to be avoided by specific precept (pa~n~natti-vajja); this offence (aapatti) is removable in the presence of an individual (puggala) this offence is removable in the presence of a group (ga.na); this offence is removable in the presence of the Order (sa"ngha).' Thus concerning the subject matter handed down as seven groups of offences (aapatti-kkhandha), I have taught what is called the Vinaya: the Khandhaka, the Parivaara and the two Vibha"ngas. All of that, the basket of the Vinaya, will perform the role of Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana. "And during my life, I have taught these: the four foundations of mindfulness (satipa.t.thaana), the four right efforts (sammapphadhaana), the four roads to supernormal power (iddhipaada), the five spiritual faculties (indriya), the five mental powers (bala), the seven factors of enlightenment (bojjha"nga), the noble eightfold path (magga). In various ways I have analysed these doctrinal matters and have taught the basket of Suttanta. All of that basket of Suttanta will peform the role of Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana. "And during my life, I have taught these: the five aggregates, twelve sphere (aayatana), eighteeen elements (dhaatu), four truths (sacca), twenty-two faculites (indriya), nine causes (hetu), four foods (aahaara), seven contacts (phassa), seven feelings (vedanaa), seven perceptions (sa~n~naa), seven intentions (cetanaa), seven thoughts (citta). And here too, a certain number of things are of the sensual realm (kaamaavacara), a certain number are of the form realm (ruupaavacara), and a ceertain number are of the formless realm (aruupaavacara); a certain number are included (pariyaapanna), a certain number are not included (apariyaapanna); a certain number are mundane (lokika), a certain number are supramundane (lokuttara). "I have analysed these things in detail and taught the Abhidhamma-pi.taka, which is adorned by the Mahaapa.t.thaana with its countless methods and its twenty-fourfold complete origin (samantapa.t.thaana). All of that, the basket of the Abhidhamma, will perform the role of the Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana. " Thus all of this has been told and discussed for forty-five years from my enlightenment to my parinibbaana; three baskets, five Nikaayas, nine branches (a"nga), eight-four thousand groups of dhamma: these are the major divisions. Thus these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma remain. I alone attain parinibbaana, and now I alone advise and instruct. After I have attained parinibbaana, these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, will advise and instruct you. "Thus giving many reasons, the Blessed One advised: 'It is your Teacher after I am gone....' " ***** I'll be glad to hear any further comments. Metta Sarah ======= #102107 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Third kind of nibbana element and cessation sarahprocter... Dear pt & all, --- On Fri, 6/11/09, ptaus1 wrote: >>S: At the death of an arahat, parinibbana, no nama aggregates ever arise again and no further rupas arise conditioned by kamma. There's no more life-force. As you say, nibbana can only be experienced "from stream-entry to parinibbana" , depending on particular conditions of the arahat in the "up to parinibbana" case. >pt: I take it that the Mahayana notion that it is only the clinging aggregates (afflicted aggregates) that cease for a Buddha at death, but not non-clinging aggregates, is invalid in Theravada? .... S: let me go through in steps: There are two meanings of upadana khandha: a) rupa conditioned by past clinging, i.e. kammaja rupa b) khandhas as object of clinging While still alive, the rupas conditioned by past kamma of the Buddha and all arahats are still a) upadana khandha. Furthermore, any of the khandhas of the Buddha and arahats are still upadana khandha for those that cling to them even though they (the Buddha and arahats) have no more lobha (attachment). The only dhammas that can never be clung to, which can never be upadana khandha, are the lokuttara dhammas. This means the lokuttara cittas (magga and phala cittas and associated cetasikas) and nibbana cannot be upadana khandha. On attaining parinibbana at death, there are no further rupas arising conditioned by kamma, so there is no more upadana khanda of type a) above. There are no further cittas and cetasikas arising, but as discussed, rupas conditioned by temperature can continue to arise for quite a while. These, such as the rupas of the relics, can still be upadana khandha for devotees. As for the lokuttara cittas which cannot be upadana khandha, these cannot arise after parinibbana. When lokuttara cittas do not arise, the unconditioned dhamma, nibbana, cannot be experienced. It's quite a complex topic, I know. Let me know if anything seems unclear or questionable. (More under "khandhas -upadana" in U.P.) Metta Sarah ======== #102108 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 3:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More questions about nimitta sarahprocter... Dear pt, (Alberto & all), To recap for others, you were asking about phassa (contact) arising with vipaka cittas in D.O. and in particular, B.Bodhi's note on p.297 of CMA referring to how "mind-contact is the contact associated with the twenty-two kinds of resultant consciousness, excluding the two sets of fivefold sense consciousness." We did the math(s and found: --- On Fri, 6/11/09, ptaus1 wrote: >S: Sense-shere cittas: > - 7 ahetuka (rootless) unwholesome vipaka cittas* > - 8 ahetuka wholesome vipaka cittas** > =15, less 10 dvi-pa~nca vi~n~naana cittas (the two sets referred to) > =5 > > - 8 sahetuka (rooted) kaamaavacara vipaka cittas, the results of the 8 kinds of wholesome kamaavacara cittas > > So that gives us 5 +8 = 13 sense-sphere vipaka cittas, excluding the 5 pairs). > > Then, add: > > 5 ruupavacara (fine-material sphere) results > > + > > 4 aruupavacara (immaterial- shere) results > = 9 > > So the total is 13 + 9 = 22 > ************ ********* ******** > S: *- 7 ahetuka (rootless) unwholesome vipaka cittas > = 5 sense consciousness beginning with seeing, + sampaticchana + santiirana > > **- 8 ahetuka wholesome vipaka cittas** > = 5 sense consciousness + sampaticchana + 2 kinds of santiirana, one with upekkha, one with somanassa. .... >pt: Just to check - contact for patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti cittas is not included in the 22 by Bhikkhu Bodhi becasue these cittas are process-freed so they do not relate to D.O. context of contact as a link? ... S: They are very much included in D.O. in this context (as well as others beginning with "sankhaarapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na.m, there referring to patisandhi and all subsequent vipaka cittas). Under the ayatanas, "sa.laayatanapaccayaa phasso", patisandhi and all the other vipaka cittas (except lokuttara phala cittas) are included in the 6th inner ayatana, manayatana. Each citta, including these, is accompanied by phassa and vedana. Back to our counting, as Alberto said, most cittas can only perform one function, but some can perform more than one. 19 cittas can perform the functions of patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti (rebirth-linking, life-continuum and death). These 19 are: a) 2 kinds of santiirana (investigating)citta accompanied by equanimity [i.e one under the 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas and one under the ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas above]. b) 8 sahetuka (rooted) kaamaavacara vipaka cittas [any of these above] c) 9 ruupavacara and aruupavacara vipaka citas [any of these 5+4 above] ... >Tadarammana cittas in sense-door process are not included in the 22 because they are in fact either santirana or sahetuka kaamaavacara vipaka cittas, which were already counted, right? ... S: Yes, you've got it. Again we have to distinguish between kinds of cittas and functions. (see ch 3 in CMA for more detail). 11 cittas can perform the function of tadarammana (registration). These 11 are: a) 8 sahetuka kaamaavacara vipaka cittas (aka mahaavipaaka cittas) b) 3 santiirana cittas ***** Not an easy topic, but then none of the ones you raise are:-). Thanks for exploring these areas with me. Metta Sarah ========= #102109 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 4:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: chat with Scott sarahprocter... Dear Scott, Great responses and all so true, thanks:-) --- On Sat, 7/11/09, scottduncan2 wrote: S: "- Wanting a certain outcome, a result...Any detachment from what is conditioned now?" Scott: Never any use. Everyone wants an outcome. This is called attachment.. . ... S: :-) ... >>S: "- Kusala as the remedy. Thinking of others, not oneself, advantages of kusala, especially being aware and understanding dhammas." >Scott: Now here, this is not meant as an instruction, is it? Or is it? ... S: As Nina said, "no". Just reminders of what is kusala, what is akusala, what leads to happiness, what leads to misery. For example, we read about the 11 benefits of developing metta: "One sleeps easily, wakes easily, dreams no evil dreams. One is dear to human beings, dear to non-human beings. The devas protect one. Neither fire, poison, nor weapons can touch one. One's mind gains concentration quickly. One's complexion is bright. One dies unconfused and if penetrating no higher is headed for the Brahma worlds. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.016.than.html People read this as an instruction to go and have metta in order to obtain such results. That would all be attachment again. The Buddha just points out the benefits of metta, not as something to cling to, but as a conditioned dhamma to be understood. Ken H has been in good form recently and so let me use our discussion as an excuse to requote the following comments as I'd like to re-read them myself(#102010) K:> If even just one tiny part of the Dhamma was to be understood as an instruction - as distinct from a description of the way things are - then the entire Dhamma may as well be seen that way. Dhammas are either controllable or not controllable; they can't be both. -------------------- K:> With wrong understanding almost everything in the suttas could be seen as an instruction to formally practise. It is our job to ask "How can these apparent instructions be understood in the light of anatta? If there are only the presently arisen, fleeting namas and rupas (with no persisting thing or self), then how are we to understand 'do this' and 'don't do that'?" ---------------------------- K:> Then let's not use the term "formal practice" to describe normal routines. Normal routines are performed without any expectations of changing the present conditioned reality. Therefore, they are not formal practices (as the term is used here at DSG). ------------------- KO: > Just like ancients ask us to reflect ourselves everyday, do we said it is formal. ------------------- K:> Some people certainly would. Some people would say that reflection was something we could *do* (with or without the required conditions). But you and I know differently. Reflection is entirely dependent on conditions - just like every other reality in daily life. ... ---- Scott:> Are you saying that to have kusala one must 'think of others?' ... S: No, there can be alobha, (adosa and amoha) arising without thinking of others, such as at moments of satipatthana. However, we hold ourselves very, very dearly and appreciating the value of metta in daily life (not "one must do" anything), is a condition for metta to arise. For example, now we're thinking of other people, associating with other people. If there's no metta, no kusala friendliness, then the cittas at such moments of thinking of the others are bound to be akusala. ... >Or are you suggesting that in some way thinking of kusala, thinking of others, thinking of being aware and understanding may somehow condition kusala at some point, or be kusala in some way? ... S: This all sounds like a "trying to do" or a subtly bringing back of the instruction book again. It's not a matter of specially thinking or trying to have kusala in anyway, but an understanding of what is conditioned already - seeing, dosa, metta, thinking or any other nama or rupa appearing. What's gone is gone, the future hasn't come - just the present reality appearing... ... >>S: "- the bhikkhuni ordination issue.... How does it help one's development of understanding? " >Scott: I don't worry about it. I think it is simply the decline of the Dhamma and how worldly notions are exchanged for Dhamma. Rather than accept that the lineage died out, people get caught up in thoughts about women and patriarchy, and rights, and politics and religion and authority. I think of all the women and their attainments as depicted in the series that connie offered and have no worries about women being exempted from anything real the Dhamma promises. The whole thing totally misses the point as far as I'm concerned. ... S: Yes, as Nina said, we love our concepts and stories....even so, there can be awareness at any moment whilst thinking, whilst caught up in the drama of life. Daily life again - just the same dramas even in the Buddha's life... Thanks for responding, Scott. Metta Sarah =========== Sincerely, Scott. #102110 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 4:35 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiiti Sutta Fives (315, 5) and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, sutta 5 RDs [ 5.5 ] Five forms of meanness,5.5 to wit, in hospitality, in [monopolizing a ministering] family, in gains acquired, in beauty physical and moral, in [manopolizing learnt] truths. (Pa~nca macchariyaani - aavaasamacchariya.m, kulamacchariya.m, laabhamacchariya.m, va.n.namacchariya.m, dhammamacchariya.m.) ------- N: Stinginess as to dwelling place, aavaasa. The co. explains that a monk who is stingy sees a guest and says that here are the requisites of the stupa or the community. Having said this he obstructs also the giving of the dwelling places belonging to the community. When he has died he is reborn as a ghost or a boa constrictor. As to stinginess regarding a clan or family, a monk prevents others to approach a family that supports him. As to stinginess regarding gains, a monk is also stingy as to gains of the community and prevents others from obtaining them. As to physical beauty and beauty of good qualities, a stingy person does not want others to be praised on account of them. As to stinginess with regard to Dhamma, a stingy person who has learnt Dhamma does not want to help others lest they would surpass him in understanding. The subco explains: The ariyans have directly realized the truth of dhamma, they attained pa.tivedha dhamma, and they are not stingy, they have completely eradicated stinginess. There is no stinginess for those who do not give assistance with the Dhamma to people who will distort its meaning so that the Dhamma will disappear. Evenso there is no stinginess when they do not asist people who will become arrogant and haughty, and who will accumulate akusala. ***** N: Stinginess is a fetter, sa.myojana, which fetters us to the cycle of birth and death. The sotaapanna has eradicated avarice, because through insight he realizes that his prosperity or possessions are only conditioned dhammas that do not last and do not belong to anyone. He has perfect generosity, but this does not mean that he should give away all possessions. He has perfect generosity as to Dhamma, he wishes to share the Dhamma he has realized in order to help others to also realize the four noble Truths. However, this does not mean that he should teach Dhamma to those who will abuse Dhamma. In the ultimate sense there are no things we can possess, there are only naama and ruupa which are impermanent. Dhammas which arise and fall away do not belong to us and we cannot keep them. Why are we stingy about what does not belong to us? ****************************************************************** Pali Co: AAvaase macchariya.m aavaasamacchariya.m. Tena samannaagato bhikkhu aagantuka.m disvaa ‘‘ettha cetiyassa vaa sa"nghassa vaa parikkhaaro .thapito’’tiaadiini vatvaa sa"nghikampi aavaasa.m nivaareti..... ******** Nina. #102111 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 4:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (66) nilovg Dear Han, Op 8-nov-2009, om 10:30 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > As soon as ruupa has arisen, it is led onward to its termination > and it breaks up completely, never to come back again. Remembering > this is still theoretical knowledge of the truth of impermanence, > different from right understanding that realizes the arising and > falling away of a naama or a ruupa. > > It is only at a later stage in the development of understanding > that the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa can be > directly known. --------- > > Han: I do not think I can "directly know" any dhamma. The truth is > I do not know what it is actually meant by "directly known". -------- N: This is when sati sampaja~n~na arises and is aware of any naama or ruupa appearing at the present moment. But for all of us this is difficult. However, if we correctly understand what naamas and ruupas are which arise because of their proper conditions, this kind of understanding can condition later on awareness and direct understanding. Most important is understanding that dhammas, including sati and pa~n~naa, are beyond control. Nobody can direct their arising. -------- > H: For me, if I have the "theoretical knowledge" of the truth of > impermanence, I will be quite happy, because I believe that such > "theoretical knowledge" will help me to have at least samvega > ~naana if not vipassanaa ~naana. ---------- N: This helps to some extent. Nina. #102112 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 6:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Formal instructions in VsM nilovg Dear Alex, Op 8-nov-2009, om 0:22 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > 1) Noble 8Fold path is required for Awakening (DN16) > 2) Samma-Samadhi is part of it (MN141) > 3) Samma-Samadhi is defined as the Jhanas (mn141) > 4) Jhana IS the path to awakening MN36 ------- N: First of all, Alex, I am glad you understand that for samatha it is necessary to know when the citta is kusala and when akusala. Some poeple think that just concentration on a subject is enough, and I am glad you do not say this. Further, you raise so many points, I can take out only this one above. True in many suttas, though not all, we read about concentration defined as the jhaanas. Those who had the inclination and skill for jhaana could develop it. But, if we do not understand what the eightfold Path is and what its object there could be misunderstandings. I quote from a study I am making now for the Pali list about the Dhammacakkappavattanasutta. < All these Path factors are cetasikas, mental factors arising with the citta that cultivates the Path. Citta never arises alone, it has to be accompanied by cetasikas that assist the citta. The Path that is mundane, being developed, not lokuttara, has as object a mental phenomenon (naama) or physical phenomenon (ruupa) that is experienced at the present moment through one of the six doors. We take realities for self, we take them for a person, for the world. We take seeing, hearing, thinking, good qualities and bad qualities for self. In being mindful and developing right understanding of realities that appear one at a time wrong view can be eliminated. The cetasikas that are Path-factors perform their own function while they accompany the citta that develops the eightfold Path. Sammaadi.t.thi, another word for pa~n~naa, can realize the true nature of naama and ruupa; it understands them as elements that are not self, not belonging to a self, arisen because of conditions. It is assisted by sammaasa"nkappo,the cetasika vitakka, thinking. It ‘touches’ or hits the object that presents itself so that sammaadi.t.thi can realize its true nature. sammaad.t.thi and sammaasa"nkappo are called the wisdom of the eightfold Path. Sammaavaacaa, sammaakammanto, sammaa-aajiivo are called the siila of the eightfold Path. As we have seen, when the Path is mundane, they arise one at a time as the occasion presents itself. Sammaavaayaamo, sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi are called the concentration of the eightfold Path. When there is awareness of a nama or rupa there is also right effort and right concentration that focusses on the naama or ruupa that appears at that moment. > Thus, these Pathfactors develop together. The concentration in jhaana has as object a subject of samatha, such as a kasina, not nama or rupa appearing now. Those who develop jhaana and insight have to emerge from jhaana so that right understanding of the present object can develop. --------- Nina. #102113 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 10:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (66) szmicio Dear Han and Nina, You say you cannot have direct understanding. The same with me. But I rememeber old Sarah's reminders, we think a lot of Self. Not understand? Because that's Self. She used to say to me when I got here for the first time. I considered this as extremaly helpful. Let me say my story. If you dont mind. In my life I learned a lot because I get anger or I was distracted when I want not to be distracted. I was stressed when I had to made some speach at school. My hands were shiver. I coudnt control that. I was very young. But I started to consider it as Buddha used say anatta, not yours, out of control. It helped me very much. Do you have such reflections sometimes? It is very helpful to see no control. It makes us not be the controlers, but more 'observer'. Do you agree? There is no happiness in controling. And when we allow everything to just appear naturaly and fall away ist happiness. If I can add also what I think to be very true. dukkha is out of control, can we control unpleasant feeling when it appears? And change it for pleasant? I think this wise consideration is very important. It does not change anything. But it support right understanding very gradually. And we cannot feel this. But that works. Isnt it only thinking now, that thinks on different things appeared by conditions? arising and falling away. Oh it's so hard to appraciate this. But no one can made this kind of appreciation to appear. Really no need to worry on right understanding. Just see all just elements. It will really help. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Han, > Op 8-nov-2009, om 10:30 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > > > As soon as ruupa has arisen, it is led onward to its termination > > and it breaks up completely, never to come back again. Remembering > > this is still theoretical knowledge of the truth of impermanence, > > different from right understanding that realizes the arising and > > falling away of a naama or a ruupa. > > > > It is only at a later stage in the development of understanding > > that the arising and falling away of naama and ruupa can be > > directly known. > --------- > > > > Han: I do not think I can "directly know" any dhamma. The truth is > > I do not know what it is actually meant by "directly known". > -------- > N: This is when sati sampaja~n~na arises and is aware of any naama or > ruupa appearing at the present moment. But for all of us this is > difficult. However, if we correctly understand what naamas and ruupas > are which arise because of their proper conditions, this kind of > understanding can condition later on awareness and direct > understanding. Most important is understanding that dhammas, > including sati and pa~n~naa, are beyond control. Nobody can direct > their arising. > -------- > > H: For me, if I have the "theoretical knowledge" of the truth of > > impermanence, I will be quite happy, because I believe that such > > "theoretical knowledge" will help me to have at least samvega > > ~naana if not vipassanaa ~naana. > ---------- > N: This helps to some extent. > Nina. > #102114 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 12:22 pm Subject: Knowing lobha, dosa, etc - Virtue, Vinaya, Practice truth_aerator Hello allm Some say that one must "know lobha, dosa, etc" . From a sutta perspective there is even more important thing. One should not just "know" defilements, one should restrain them (see 4 right efforts, part of N8P) and the sila/vinaya rules are to restrain expressions of lobha, dosa and so on. Passive knowing is not enough. Ajahn Brahm has really expressed the purpose of mindfulness well: "Some rich people have these guards to make sure that burglars do not get in and steal their goods. And they know that mindfulness is much more than bare attention, because if you tell that gatekeeper to just be mindful, be aware, just watch what's going on, you can imagine what happens. When you go home from the temple, you find that people have burgled your house. You ask the guard, "Weren't you mindful? I told you to guard this house." And the guard says, "Yes, I was mindful. I saw the burglars going in and I saw them going out with your stereo. I watched them go in again and take all your jewels. I was very mindful. I was fully aware all the time." Would you be very happy with that guard? Of course you wouldn't. Remember that this guard `mindfulness' has a job to do and that job is to abandon, to let go of certain things. You have to tell that guard very clearly that you want to let go of the past and the future, so that you can dwell in the present moment. When you tell your guard that, the mind can do it quite easily as you go deeper into the present moment and become accustomed to the happiness and freedom of just being in the now." Mindfulness and "knowing" should not be passive! "There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for: "[i] the sake of the non-arising [anuppadaya] of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen. "[ii] There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for: the sake of the abandonment [pahanaya] of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen." Virtue is very important: "For a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue, there is no need for an act of will, 'May freedom from remorse arise in me.' It is in the nature of things that freedom from remorse arises in a person endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue. [Repeat the above]… "For a dispassionate person, there is no need for an act of will, 'May I realize the knowledge & vision of release.' It is in the nature of things that a dispassionate person realizes the knowledge & vision of release." - AN11.2 This is why the Buddha taught Sila and Vinaya. In fact Buddha's teaching is Dhamma-Vinaya and sila comes first, then samadhi, then panna. Remember the AN11.2 quote. Samadhi and awakening can occur from "endowed with virtue, consummate in virtue,". In Nettipakarana it says that: "Herein, the Blessed One makes one of keen faculties (ugghatitannu) understand by means of the training in the higher understanding; the Blessed One makes one of medium faculties (vipancitannu) understand by means of the training in the higher cognizance; the Blessed One makes one of blunt faculties (neyya) understand by means of the training in the higher virtue." Tattha bhagava ugghatitannussa adhipannasikkham pannapayati, adhicittam vipancitannussa, adhisilam neyyassa. PTS 125 If we are the lowest level (neyya), then our training should be in higher virtue, not higher panna. Sila – Morality and rightful conduct A brief instruction for the Monks: 1. Abstain killing, weapons, violence. 2. Abstain from taking things which were not given. 3. Abstain from Alchohol & drugs. Live soberly, piously, and honestly. 4. Abstain from sexual relationships. 5. Abstain from lying. 6. Speak only the truth, believeable and reliable, and never contradict his own words. 7. Abstain from slander. 8. Promote, speak, and love union (harmony) and not division conflict. 9. Abstain from rough, insulting words. 10. Speaking polite, likeable, exact, well chosen words that will make people's hearts joyful, not wasting time in idle gossip. 11. Discuss the Dhamma and the Vinaya at the right time. 12. Discuss in clear, detailed, and understandable words. 13. Abstain from hurting seeds, plants, roots, branches, cheating, trading, slavery, forgery, bribery, and criminal conduct. 14. Abstain from hoarding food, drink, clothes (robes), bedding, perfume, spices, and other tools. 15. Taking food once a day. 16. Abstain from watching shows (dances, exhibitions, matches, music performances, parades, etc). 17. Abstain from playing games (card games, board games, dice games, games of chance, racing games, acrobatics, word games, etc). 18. Abstain from using luxurious furniture and bedding. 19. Abstain from using cosmetics, make-up, and fancy or luxurious clothes (robes). 20. Abstain from discussing people, politicians, criminals, terrors, food and beverages, clothing, places, families, cities, wars and battles, heroes, ghosts, street rumors, speculation on how the world is created, or about existence and non-existence. 21. Abstain from accusing, denying, goading or challenging (e.g., 'I practised the Dhamma devoutly, but you don't!' or 'What you say is old rubbish!' or 'You are wrong!' or 'Free yourself if you can!'). 22. Abstain from being the courier or messenger of politicians or higher administrations. 23. Abstain from deceiving lay people by uttering spells to exorcise demons or make someone's fortune, acting like a holy person by reciting mantras. 24. Abstain from earning money from fortune-telling, divination, clairvoyance, exorcism, conjuring, magic tricks, spells, making false medicine and herbs, healing people through magic, leading/conducting ceremonies in order to gain something (wealth, fertility, etc), 25. mutilating, executing, imprisoning, highway robbery, plunder, Abstain from determining lucky and unlucky gems, garments, staffs, swords, spears, arrows, bows, and other weapons; women, boys, girls, male slaves, female slaves; elephants, horses, buffaloes, bulls, cows, goats, rams, fowl, quails, lizards, long-eared rodents, tortoises, and other animals Abstain from reading marks on the limbs [e.g., palmistry]; reading omens and signs; interpreting celestial events [falling stars, comets]; interpreting dreams; reading marks on the body [e.g., phrenology]; reading marks on cloth gnawed by mice; offering fire oblations, oblations from a ladle, oblations of husks, rice powder, rice grains, ghee, and oil; offering oblations from the mouth; offering blood-sacrifices; making predictions based on the fingertips; geomancy; laying demons in a cemetery; placing spells on spirits; reciting house-protection charms; snake charming, poison-lore, scorpion-lore, rat-lore, bird-lore, crow-lore; fortune-telling based on visions; giving protective charms; interpreting the calls of birds and animals Abstain from forecasting: the rulers will march forth; the rulers will march forth and return; our rulers will attack, and their rulers will retreat; their rulers will attack, and our rulers will retreat; there will be triumph for our rulers and defeat for their rulers; there will be triumph for their rulers and defeat for our rulers; thus there will be triumph, thus there will be defeat Abstain from forecasting: there will be a lunar eclipse; there will be a solar eclipse; there will be an occultation of an asterism; the sun and moon will go their normal courses; the sun and moon will go astray; the asterisms will go their normal courses; the asterisms will go astray; there will be a meteor shower; there will be a darkening of the sky; there will be an earthquake; there will be thunder coming from a clear sky; there will be a rising, a setting, a darkening, a brightening of the sun, moon, and asterisms; such will be the result of the lunar eclipse... the rising, setting, darkening, brightening of the sun, moon, and asterisms Abstain from forecasting: there will be abundant rain; there will be a drought; there will be plenty; there will be famine; there will be rest and security; there will be danger; there will be disease; there will be freedom from disease; or they earn their living by counting, accounting, calculation, composing poetry, or teaching hedonistic arts and doctrines Abstain from calculating auspicious dates for marriages, betrothals, divorces; for collecting debts or making investments and loans; for being attractive or unattractive; curing women who have undergone miscarriages or abortions; reciting spells to bind a man's tongue, to paralyze his jaws, to make him lose control over his hands, or to bring on deafness; getting oracular answers to questions addressed to a mirror, to a young girl, or to a spirit medium; worshipping the sun, worshipping the Great Brahma, bringing forth flames from the mouth, invoking the goddess of luck Abstain from promising gifts to devas in return for favors; fulfilling such promises; demonology; teaching house-protection spells; inducing virility and impotence; consecrating sites for construction; giving ceremonial mouthwashes and ceremonial bathing; offering sacrificial fires; administering emetics, purges, purges from above, purges from below, head-purges; administering ear-oil, eye-drops, treatments through the nose, ointments, and counter-ointments; practicing eye-surgery (or: extractive surgery), general surgery, pediatrics; administering root-medicines binding medicinal herbs. "A monk thus consummate in virtue sees no danger anywhere from his restraint through virtue. Just as a head-anointed noble warrior king who has defeated his enemies sees no danger anywhere from his enemies, in the same way the monk thus consummate in virtue sees no danger anywhere from his restraint through virtue. Endowed with this noble aggregate of virtue, he is inwardly sensitive to the pleasure of being blameless. This is how a monk is consummate in virtue. - DN#1.2 For lay people: refrain from killing or hurting living creatures. refrain from stealing of any kind. refrain from sexual activity of any kind even in thought. refrain from lying, harsh and useless speech refrain from drinking Alchohol and taking recreational drugs They should never be broken even if life is on the line. We are all going to die anyways, but Kamma stays until its effects expire. Minor amount of alchohol in medicine may be acceptable for medical, non-recreational purposes. Optional, do when it is possible: refrain from dancing, singing, music, going to see entertainments, wearing garlands, using perfumes, and beautifying the body with cosmetics. refrain from eating after noon, 12:00. refrain from lying on a high or luxurious sleeping place. refrain from accepting or handling any money, check or transaction. "When anyone feels no shame in telling a deliberate lie, there is no evil, he will not do." Before doing any action though body, speech or thought, reflect, "will it lead to my harm, or will it harms others?". While doing anything , reflect: "Is it causing me or anyone else harm?" After you have done it reflect if what you've done caused yourself or anyone any harm. Avoid harmful activities and do beneficial activites. - MN61 The purpose of Vinaya/Sila is to restrain defilements (which hinder samadhi and wisdom). Restraining is much more potent than merely knowing and willingly submitting to tyranny of desires. With metta, Alex #102115 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 2:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: chat with Scott egberdina Hi Scott, It is truly good to hear from you. 2009/11/8 scottduncan2 > Dear Sarah and Jon, > > Regarding: > > S: "We just had a nice chat with Scott..." > > Scott: Thanks again, I totally enjoyed the chat > > S: "- Anger management, suppression, instructions in the suttas, past > discussions with other friends, such as Phil on this, considering other > views." > > Scott: The aversion towards anger. The wish it wasn't there. The thoughts > of past anger and an angry person, the yearning for a set of instructions > which can facilitate the creation of the soothing concept of the person > without anger... > > S: "- analysing the whys and why nots....just thinking, any awareness?" > > Scott: Taking the feeling to be self and thinking about an angry person and > wanting to be a person who is free of anger and thinking about instructions > and following them... > I think what is missing from the above is the understanding that anger is an act, a particular response to the world, fully intended to bring about changes in the world. An angry person has expectations that are not being met. To the extent that a person believes they are entitled to their expectations, then anger is bound to arise again. Cheers Herman #102116 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 2:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangha politics in Thailand egberdina Hello Ken O, 2009/11/7 Ken O > Dear all > > The dhamma is on the retreat, so things will happen to make it retreat. > We should be full of lovng kindness towards those who are now intentionally > or unintentionally causing the rift in the community because it has much > dosa. > > I am not the moderator here but I appeal to all to stop posting messages on > others views or letters or forums. It is not conducive to the growth of the > understanding of the dhamma. > > If I can ask you, if you see a group of persons treating another person very badly as you are walking down the street, what do you do? Cheers Herman #102117 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 2:51 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (66) hantun1 Dear Lukas, Lukas: You say you cannot have direct understanding. The same with me. But I rememeber old Sarah's reminders, we think a lot of Self. Not understand? Because that's Self. She used to say to me when I got here for the first time. I considered this as extremaly helpful. Let me say my story. If you dont mind. In my life I learned a lot because I get anger or I was distracted when I want not to be distracted. I was stressed when I had to made some speach at school. My hands were shiver. I coudnt control that. I was very young. But I started to consider it as Buddha used say anatta, not yours, out of control. It helped me very much. Do you have such reflections sometimes? It is very helpful to see no control. It makes us not be the controlers, but more 'observer'. Do you agree? There is no happiness in controling. And when we allow everything to just appear naturaly and fall away ist happiness. If I can add also what I think to be very true. dukkha is out of control, can we control unpleasant feeling when it appears? And change it for pleasant? I think this wise consideration is very important. It does not change anything. But it support right understanding very gradually. And we cannot feel this. But that works. Isnt it only thinking now, that thinks on different things appeared by conditions? arising and falling away. Oh it's so hard to appraciate this. But no one can made this kind of appreciation to appear. Really no need to worry on right understanding. Just see all just elements. It will really help. -------------------- Han: I thank you very much, Lukas, for your kind message and telling me your own experiences. I am writing all these messages as just my comments on what I read in Nina's book. I am not worried about my shortcomimgs. Whether right or wrong, I am happy where I stand at the moment. Furthermore, I do not expect others to agree with me. That is why I use such words as "as for me" or "I feel that way" and so on, using the word "I" and not "we". It is not meant for others to follow my example or to have the same idea with me. As Phil used to say, my writings are "descriptive" and not "prescriptive". As I do not expect others to agree with me, I usually do not say anything if I disagree with someone. I usually mention the positive aspect, i.e., I say I agree when I agree, but I seldom say I do not agree when I do not agree. In such a case, I just say "as for me" and then state my position. -------------------- Having said that, I will come to some of your specific points. You wrote: [But I started to consider it as Buddha used say anatta, not yours, out of control. It helped me very much. Do you have such reflections sometimes?] Yes, I do have. I believe in "anatta" as it is stated in Anattalakkhana sutta. But "sometimes", it is difficult for me to realize that there is "no Han Tun". I believe in "not mine". I am a strong believer of Dhammapada Verse 62, and SN 22.33 Natumhaaka sutta: Not Yours. I believe in "out of control" as it is stated in Anattalakkhana sutta. But "at times", I also believe that I should be able to control things "to some extent". So, you may see that I am still far away from the "right understanding". -------------------- You wrote: [Really no need to worry on right understanding. Just see all just elements. It will really help.] No, I am not worried. I am not worried about anything. I will do, speak, and think those things that I consider wholesome. But I will leave the "results" of my actions (including the arising of right understanding), to my kamma and to my accumulations. The complex Law of Kamma will bring for me the"results" that I deserve. (This itself may be taken as my admission for no control!) Kind regards, Han #102118 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 3:29 pm Subject: Buddha on violence. Use Metta! truth_aerator Hello all, >In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hello Ken O, > > 2009/11/7 Ken O > > > Dear all > > > > The dhamma is on the retreat, so things will happen to make it >retreat. > > We should be full of lovng kindness towards those who are now >intentionally > > or unintentionally causing the rift in the community because it >has much > > dosa. > > > > I am not the moderator here but I appeal to all to stop posting >messages on others views or letters or forums. It is not conducive >to the growth of the > > understanding of the dhamma. > > > > > If I can ask you, if you see a group of persons treating another >person very badly as you are walking down the street, what do you do? > > Cheers > > > Herman This is sutta quotes, use loving kindness. Violence cannot be stopped with violence. "Phagguna, it is not suitable for the son of a clansman, who has gone forth as a homeless to spend much time with the bhikkhunis. Therefore Phagguna, when anyone blames the bhikkhunis in your presence, you should give up that worldly interest and worldly thoughts. Phagguna, there you should train like this: `My mind will not change, I will not utter evil words, I will abide with compassion and loving kindness without an angry thought.' ßAgain Pagguna, if anyone beat those bhikkhunis with their hands or with clods, or sticks, or weapons, you should train as above. Again Phagguna, if anyone blames you in the face, you should train as above. If anyone beats you with hands, or clods, or sticks, or weapons, you should give up that worldly interest and worldly thoughts. Phagguna, there you should train like this: `My mind will not change, I will not utter evil words, I will abide with compassion and loving kindness, without an angry thought'. O Bhikkhus, even if robbers cut your limbs one after another with a two handled saw, if your mind be defiled on account of that, you have not done the duty in my dispensation Then too you should train thus. Our minds will not change, we will not utter evil words. We will abide compassionate with thoughts of loving kindness not angry. We will pervade that person with thoughts of loving kindness. With that same sign, grown great and developed extensively, I pervade and abide. Bhikkhus, you should train thus. Bhikkhus, you should constantly attend to the advice on the simile of the saw. Is there anything small or large in those words of others which you would not endure. Therefore bhikkhus, constantly attend to the advice on the simile of the saw, it will be for your welfare and happiness for a long time." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima1/021-kakacupama\ -sutta-e1.html With metta, Alex #102119 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 5:00 pm Subject: Re: Knowing lobha, dosa, etc - Virtue, Vinaya, Practice kenhowardau Hi Alex, -------- A: > Some say that one must "know lobha, dosa, etc" . From a sutta perspective there is even more important thing. One should not just "know" defilements, one should restrain them (see 4 right efforts, part of N8P) and the sila/vinaya rules are to restrain expressions of lobha, dosa and so on. Passive knowing is not enough. ------ I don't know who you could be talking about. At DSG we explain that right mindfulness (samma sati) and right understanding (samma ditthi) are *always* accompanied by right effort (samma vayanma). Therefore, as far as we are concerned, there is no passive right understanding - or "passive knowing" as you call it. ------------- A: > Ajahn Brahm has really expressed the purpose of mindfulness well: ------------- I don't know anything about Ajahn Brahm. Presumably, he is a teacher of formal meditation? But I feel sorry for all students of formal meditation. Just as I feel sorry for all students of the various "self help" courses that are currently flourishing in America and elsewhere. -------------- > "Some rich people have these guards to make sure that burglars do not get in and steal their goods. And they know that mindfulness is much more than bare attention, because if you tell that gatekeeper to just be mindful, be aware, just watch what's going on, you can imagine what happens. When you go home from the temple, you find that people have burgled your house. You ask the guard, "Weren't you mindful? I told you to guard this house." And the guard says, "Yes, I was mindful. I saw the burglars going in and I saw them going out with your stereo. I watched them go in again and take all your jewels. I was very mindful. I was fully aware all the time." Would you be very happy with that guard? Of course you wouldn't. Remember that this guard `mindfulness' has a job to do and that job is to abandon, to let go of certain things. You have to tell that guard very clearly that you want to let go of the past and the future, so that you can dwell in the present moment. When you tell your guard that, the mind can do it quite easily as you go deeper into the present moment and become accustomed to the happiness and freedom of just being in the now." --------------- That's the sort of thing that makes me feel sorry for people. Read it again and ask yourself what does it tell you? Apart from impressive sounding words, what is its content? Nothing! That sort of thing gets people's hopes up for a while, gives them unrealistic expectations and leads to nothing. Just disappointment, a sense of failure, and self loathing. And so they meekly buy another book, attend another self-help course, and fail again. Very sad! Ken H #102120 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 5:21 pm Subject: Re: Knowing lobha, dosa, etc - Virtue, Vinaya, Practice truth_aerator Hi KenH, all, > "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Alex, > > -------- > A: > Some say that one must "know lobha, dosa, etc" . From a sutta > perspective there is even more important thing. One should not just > "know" defilements, one should restrain them (see 4 right efforts, >part of N8P) and the sila/vinaya rules are to restrain expressions >of lobha, dosa and so on. Passive knowing is not enough. > ------ > > I don't know who you could be talking about. At DSG we explain that > right mindfulness (samma sati) and right understanding (samma ditthi) > are *always* accompanied by right effort (samma vayanma). > So what and how does one develop this right mindfulness and understanding? What about other parts of N8P? > Therefore, as far as we are concerned, there is no passive right > understanding - or "passive knowing" as you call it. > > ------------- > A: > Ajahn Brahm has really expressed the purpose of mindfulness well: > ------------- > > I don't know anything about Ajahn Brahm. Presumably, he is a teacher of > formal meditation? But I feel sorry for all students of formal > meditation. Just as I feel sorry for all students of the various "self > help" courses that are currently flourishing in America and elsewhere. > > -------------- > > "Some rich people have these guards to make sure that burglars do not > get in and steal their goods. And they know that mindfulness is much > more than bare attention, because if you tell that gatekeeper to just be > mindful, be aware, just watch what's going on, you can imagine what > happens. When you go home from the temple, you find that people have > burgled your house. You ask the guard, "Weren't you mindful? I told you > to guard this house." And the guard says, "Yes, I was mindful. I saw the > burglars going in and I saw them going out with your stereo. I watched > them go in again and take all your jewels. I was very mindful. I was > fully aware all the time." Would you be very happy with that guard? Of > course you wouldn't. Remember that this guard `mindfulness' has a job to > do and that job is to abandon, to let go of certain things. You have to > tell that guard very clearly that you want to let go of the past and the > future, so that you can dwell in the present moment. When you tell your > guard that, the mind can do it quite easily as you go deeper into the > present moment and become accustomed to the happiness and freedom of > just being in the now." > --------------- > > That's the sort of thing that makes me feel sorry for people. Read it > again and ask yourself what does it tell you? It tells that passive bare awareness may not be enough. Active actions are required! ======== There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, arouses persistence, upholds & exerts his intent: for the sake of the non-arising of evil, unskillful qualities that have not yet arisen... *for the sake of the abandoning of evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen... * for the sake of the arising of skillful qualities that have not yet arisen...(and) * for the maintenance, non-confusion, increase, plenitude, development, & culmination of skillful qualities that have arisen." ====== "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 And what is the exertion to guard? There is the case where a monk, on seeing a form with the eye, does not grasp at any theme or variations by which — if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye — evil, unskillful qualities such as greed or distress might assail him. He practices with restraint. He guards the faculty of the eye. He achieves restraint with regard to the faculty of the eye. (Similarly with the ear, nose, tongue, body, & intellect.) This is called the exertion to guard. And what is the exertion to abandon? There is the case where a monk does not acquiesce to a thought of sensuality that has arisen [in him]. He abandons it, destroys it, dispels it, wipes it out of existence. He does not acquiesce to a thought of ill will... a thought of violence... any evil, unskillful qualities that have arisen [in him]. He abandons them, destroys them, dispels them, wipes them out of existence. This is called the exertion to abandon. And what is the exertion to develop? There is the case where a monk develops the mindfulness factor for Awakening dependent on seclusion... dispassion... cessation, resulting in letting go. He develops the investigation of qualities factor for Awakening... the persistence factor for Awakening... the rapture factor for Awakening... the serenity factor for Awakening... the concentration factor for Awakening... the equanimity factor for Awakening dependent on seclusion... dispassion... cessation, resulting in letting go. This is called the exertion to develop. And what is the exertion to maintain? There is the case where a monk maintains a favorable theme of concentration — the skeleton perception, the worm-eaten perception, the livid perception, the festering perception, the falling-apart perception, the bloated perception. This is called the exertion to maintain. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/wings/part2.html#passage-5\ 0 With metta, Alex #102121 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 8:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading ashkenn2k Dear Ken H > >KO:> To me controllable or not controllable is not the matter in >dhamma. The heart of the dhamma is not self. >------- > >All dhammas are not self. Therefore there is no control over them. > >Simple as that! :-) >----------- KO: there is no control does not mean there is no influence. If there is no influence, then there is no wise consideration which is influence or condition by panna. ><. . .> >KO: >Formal practise should not be construe as one able to control, >should be seem as a way of life, a routine which one use or discipline >to improve one development. Just like we routinely read the dhammas, >could we said it is not a formal practise then? >----------- > >It has to be one or the other. We can read Dhamma books just to find out >more about the present reality, or we can read Dhamma books with a >desire to improve ourselves and become better Buddhists. One or the >other! One is wise consideration, the other is formal practice. One is >right, the other is wrong. > >--------- KO: Are we assumming that they do not read. The distinction between formal practise and wise consideration is by us and not by the books. Read Visud please thanks. Reading books could be considered formal practise. Any action that becomes a routine could be considered as formal practise. It is how we understand the dhamma before we practise is the gist of development. Only Buddha can be a judge on others action. We could only say this is in what being taught and this is not. I just want to caution of being over judgemental towards other actions. If they practise meditation, we should encourage the correct practise of mediation as prescribed by Visud and not otherwise. Or we could say this is not what we practise here, we practise this way and not judge the action. ><. . .> >KO: > that is our interpretation, should not force it on others. >--------- > >Sure, but there is no need to walk on eggshells. > >------------ -- KO: hmm, I already made my point of view of not forcing our own intepretation on others. >KO: > to them it could be their routine or routine taught to them by >their wise teachers, we dont know so we cannot judge. >------------ -- > >If someone has wrong understanding at the theoretical level, can't we >safely assume their practice is micha-ditthi? > KO: No, we cannot. We can only advise this is what we know and we like to share it you. We dont go into argument of discussions that are not conduvice to the dhamma. Or trying to prove our point of view. Isnt proving is self effacing? Cheers Ken O #102122 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 8:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: colour, seeing. was: samaadhi in a wider sense. ashkenn2k Dear Freawaru and pt read from Visud, chapter XVII there is a whole chapter on dependent origination. thanks Ken O > >Dear pt, > >I recommend reading Buddhadasa Bhikkhu's "Practical Dependent Origination" , it describes in detail what you discuss here and confuse with Abhidhamma. It is on a different time scale than Abhidhamma. Personally, I think DO is Abhidhammic time scale, but the level of discussion on this board is about what one can discern with the personality. That is "Practical Dependent Origination" time scale and interpretation and while Ven. Buddhadhasa believed this to be DO he at least did not wrongly teach it as Abhidhamma. > >> N: When seeing is kusala vipaakacitta its object is pleasant, and >> when it is akusala vipaakacitta its object is unpleasant, but, this >> is something we cannot find out. Seeing is so short, like a flash of >> lightning. and what is the use to find out? > >The use would be to understand Abhidhamma. To know the sense doors. To develop discernment, to use Majushri's sword. > >Freawaru > > > #102123 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 3:21 pm Subject: The 3 Gateways... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: There are Three Gateways to Enlightenment! It is the 3 contemplations that produce the three gateways to Awakening! These three gateways to liberation lead to the only outlet from the world: Seeing mainly impermanence leads the firm one to the signless liberation: Seeing of all constructions as impermanent, limited in space, circumscribed in time, and liable to destruction makes mind enter into the signless state. When such disciple, with great determination, attends to all phenomena as impermanent, transient & vanishing, then he acquires the signless liberation! Considering mainly suffering leads the calm one to the desireless liberation: Regarding of all constructions as an ultimately painful misery thus seeing all phenomena as a terror, stirring up and torturing any being, makes the mind enter into the desireless state. When one who has great tranquillity regards all formations as great suffering, then he acquires the desireless liberation! Meditating mainly on no-self leads the intelligent one to the void liberation: Comprehending all things, constructions, phenomena and states as alien and remote, ownerless, selfless, egoless, impersonal, and neither-I-me-nor-mine, makes mind enter into the void empty state. When one who has great wisdom comprehends all phenomena as no-self, then he acquires the void liberation! These three gateways to liberation lead to the only Exit from this world: Enlightenment! This is therefore Knowledge and Vision of the Noble Way! Ps II 48+58, Vism 658 <...> The Enlightenment reached is in all 3 cases the very same! Have a nicely liberated day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ <...> #102124 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 8:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Jhana ashkenn2k Dear Alex and Herman isnt understanding dhammas as impermanent, dukkha and anatta, is letting go? At the moment of this awareness, isnt this action? Thanks and cheers Ken O > >From: Herman >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Sunday, 8 November 2009 10:29:19 >Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Jhana > > >Hi Alex, > >2009/11/6 truth_aerator > >> Hello all, >> >> In my book, wisdom without action is mere theory, impotent and with very >> little practical usefulness. IMHO, to know the hindrances, is to be able to >> abandon them at least temporary, from where reaching Jhana becomes easy. A >> sure way to test one's practical wisdom is to see how easy one can abandon >> the hindrances and reach Jhana. >> >> >I agree with your thoughts. Wisdom facilitates letting go. > >Cheers > >Herman > #102125 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 9:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangha politics in Thailand ashkenn2k Dear Herman I have to make clear, firstly, different context. For the example below, I will call the police to stop them. Most importanly, I have loving kindness towards them especially towards those who cause the aksuala actions. Cheers Ken O #102126 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 8:55 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (66) szmicio Dear Han, Your ruupas corner is very helpful to me. Thanks for that. If there is something that is controversional to you just leave it. Find the way you like to deal with. I think there is a lot problems on DSG that has never happend ;> But Han, for me especially this KS anattaness , no self, no control is so helpful. So sorry if I bother you or something. But it is the only thing that calm me down, that makes me to forget the whole world. Usually I am so stressed on kusala development so I dont thin anything else. And when I am reminded of non Self it's so helpful. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > > Lukas: > You say you cannot have direct understanding. The same with me. > But I rememeber old Sarah's reminders, we think a lot of Self. Not understand? Because that's Self. She used to say to me when I got here for the first time. I considered this as extremaly helpful. Let me say my story. If you dont mind. > In my life I learned a lot because I get anger or I was distracted when I want not to be distracted. I was stressed when I had to made some speach at school. My hands were shiver. I coudnt control that. I was very young. But I started to consider it as Buddha used say anatta, not yours, out of control. It helped me very much. Do you have such reflections sometimes? > It is very helpful to see no control. It makes us not be the controlers, but more 'observer'. Do you agree? There is no happiness in controling. And when we allow everything to just appear naturaly and fall away ist happiness. > If I can add also what I think to be very true. dukkha is out of control, can we control unpleasant feeling when it appears? And change it for pleasant? I think this wise consideration is very important. It does not change anything. But it support right understanding very gradually. And we cannot feel this. But that works. > Isnt it only thinking now, that thinks on different things appeared by conditions? arising and falling away. Oh it's so hard to appraciate this. But no one can made this kind of appreciation to appear. > Really no need to worry on right understanding. Just see all just elements. It will really help. > > -------------------- > > Han: I thank you very much, Lukas, for your kind message and telling me your own experiences. > > I am writing all these messages as just my comments on what I read in Nina's book. I am not worried about my shortcomimgs. Whether right or wrong, I am happy where I stand at the moment. Furthermore, I do not expect others to agree with me. That is why I use such words as "as for me" or "I feel that way" and so on, using the word "I" and not "we". It is not meant for others to follow my example or to have the same idea with me. As Phil used to say, my writings are "descriptive" and not "prescriptive". > > As I do not expect others to agree with me, I usually do not say anything if I disagree with someone. I usually mention the positive aspect, i.e., I say I agree when I agree, but I seldom say I do not agree when I do not agree. In such a case, I just say "as for me" and then state my position. > > -------------------- > > Having said that, I will come to some of your specific points. You wrote: [But I started to consider it as Buddha used say anatta, not yours, out of control. It helped me very much. Do you have such reflections sometimes?] > > Yes, I do have. > > I believe in "anatta" as it is stated in Anattalakkhana sutta. But "sometimes", it is difficult for me to realize that there is "no Han Tun". > > I believe in "not mine". I am a strong believer of Dhammapada Verse 62, and SN 22.33 Natumhaaka sutta: Not Yours. > > I believe in "out of control" as it is stated in Anattalakkhana sutta. But "at times", I also believe that I should be able to control things "to some extent". > > So, you may see that I am still far away from the "right understanding". > > -------------------- > > You wrote: [Really no need to worry on right understanding. Just see all just elements. It will really help.] > > No, I am not worried. I am not worried about anything. I will do, speak, and think those things that I consider wholesome. But I will leave the "results" of my actions (including the arising of right understanding), to my kamma and to my accumulations. The complex Law of Kamma will bring for me the"results" that I deserve. (This itself may be taken as my admission for no control!) > > Kind regards, > Han > #102127 From: han tun Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 10:31 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (66) hantun1 Dear Lukas, Thank you very much for your kind understanding. Lukas: If there is something that is controversional to you just leave it. Find the way you like to deal with. I think there is a lot problems on DSG that has never happend ;> Han: I do not have any controversy with other people, because I always respect others' opinion and if I have any disagreement I keep it to myself. --------------------- Lukas: But Han, for me especially this KS anattaness , no self, no control is so helpful. So sorry if I bother you or something. But it is the only thing that calm me down, that makes me to forget the whole world. Usually I am so stressed on kusala development so I dont thin anything else. And when I am reminded of non Self it's so helpful. Han: I also like KS anattaness. But I cannot apply with the same clarity and understanding of anattaness to everything in my daily life. I am glad to know that you benefit from her teachings, and that it is very helpful for you. You do not bother me at all. I know that whatever you wrote to me you wrote with your cetanaa and compassion. Thank you very much. Kind regards, Han #102128 From: Ken O Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 10:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! ashkenn2k Dear Freawaru >Seriously, how can something taught on the discernment level of less that milliseconds be simple? >Someone who has a stable sati-sampajanna during wake can practice in this way, down to the Abhidhamma level. I don't see how one can practice it without the awareness that enables one to insight. >It is not learning Abhidhamma until one can discern with the speed of a particle accelerator. Until then it is just playing with a formalism. KO: this is a fact.   We always discern our mind in our level, learning is always at our own level first. She did not say we must practise in milliseconds, she is stating a fact. IAN i.10 : “I consider, bhikkhus, that there is no phenomenon that comes and goes so quickly as mind. It is not easy to find a simile to show how quickly mind comes and goes.† SN II, 20:6  The Archers“Bhikkhus, as swift as the man is, still swifter are the sun and the moon. As swift as the man is, and as swift as are the sun and moon, and as swift as are the dieties that run before the sun and moon, the vital formations perish even more swiftly than that. Therefore, Bhikkhus, you should train yourself thus: “ we will dwell diligently.†thus should you train yourselves. (vital formations = physical life faculty) >> KO:  Aggregates by itself has no self, we could not control it. If we could, we would have been able to stop from growing old. One would have said, let my form be thus, let my form not be thus.   This is stated very clearly in the Not Self Sutta,  > >All you need to alter your form is the vikubbana iddhi (the power of transconstruction) > >http://what- buddha-said. net/library/ DPPN/wtb/ g_m/iddhi. htm > >See, that is what I mean. You (and others) come to such an conclusion as that it is impossible to transconstruct because an-atta is not interpreted correctly. The right understanding of an-atta comes from the experience, from insight. Reading suttas and discussing them is not enough and leads to the wrong conclusions. > >KO:   Sorry, why do you need to alter your form. Why do one want to change a self into another self?  This is just a spiritual power which even jhanas practitioner who are not Buddhists could have. They still do not gain enlightment. Buddha in many of his earlier lives before become enlighted had these powers, still did not get enlightment until his final enlightment. That is the reason to understand Abhidhamma. It helps us to see things in perspective and holisticly. Yes right understanding comes from experience. Ain't reading suttas and discussing them require experiences and help to growth experiences. If not, why did the students of the old ask questions from their wise teachers or Buddha.  Why Buddha in certain suttas urge them to listen to the dhamma. These help to growth their learning of the dhamma.  I agree that you can have your views but lets not judge others. Let discuss dhamma Thanks Cheers Ken O #102129 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 10:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Physical Phenomena (66) szmicio Dear Han, I know you are very steady in your dealings with some issues. Like death, I know you are not afraid. > Han: I also like KS anattaness. But I cannot apply with the same clarity and understanding of anattaness to everything in my daily life. > You do not bother me at all. I know that whatever you wrote to me you wrote with your cetanaa and compassion. L: When there are conditions :> I really dont own this elements. They are not mine. That's true, cetana plays its own role in kammic process. But its just condition dhatu. We cannot control cetana. conditioned. comapassion is also a nama. I cannot make it to arise. best wishes Lukas #102130 From: "gazita2002" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 10:58 pm Subject: lost in sea of concepts gazita2002 hallo dhamma friends, climbed to the roof of current accommodation to watch a stunning monsoonal sunrise and realised how much more attachment was/is being accumulated. the vipaka citta that merely sees is result of long forgotten past action. the javana cittas that arise in that sense door process - and ones following - be it kusala/akusalaa, can condition future seeing etc, citta to arise and xperience an object either pleasant or unpleasant. I heard today "where the mind goes, the energy flows". the proliferation of concepts via the mind door processes can condition action thro body, speech or mind. if there is a moment of understanding that knows in reality its just citta, cetasika and rupa, generally its me thinking about these realities, no actual xperience of present moment realities. may all beings be happy azita #102131 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 11:12 pm Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 4, no 2. nilovg Dear friends, Before we studied the Buddhist teachings we did not consider the mind as a reality which can see or hear. The Buddha taught that also seeing and hearing are cittas. There is a great variety of cittas which each experience an object. The citta which sees, seeing- consciousness, experiences an object: visible object or colour. It experiences visible object through the eye-sense. Eye-sense is the “doorway” through which seeing-consciousness experiences visible object. Hearing-consciousness experiences sound through the doorway of the ear-sense. Seeing and hearing are entirely different cittas which are depending on different conditions. Cittas experience objects through the doorways of eye, ear, nose, tongue, bodysense and mind. Before studying the Buddhist teachings we did not pay attention to seeing as being a citta experiencing visible object through the eye-door, or to hearing as being a citta experiencing sound through the ear-door. Cittas, objects and doorways are ultimate realities taught by the Buddha. One may doubt the usefulness of knowing details on cittas, objects and doorways. It is important to know more thoroughly the phenomena of our life which are occurring all the time. We are deluded as to the truth when we believe that they are lasting and that they are “self”, or belonging to a “self”, that we can exert control over them. The Buddha taught that they are impermanent, dukkha and non- self. These characteristics are not abstract categories, they pertain to seeing, eye-sense, visible object, to all phenomena which are arising and falling away from moment to moment. Since understanding of the truth of these phenomena can only gradually develop, we should begin to investigate them more closely. In the ultimate sense there are merely mental phenomena and physical phenomena. So long as they cannot be distinguished from each other, there cannot be a precise knowledge of them. ******* Nina. #102132 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 4, no 2. szmicio Dear Nina, It's so easy to forget the essence. the citta that experience now. seeing and hearing are now appearing with their own sabhava. There is something now. The seeing is different than hearing. It so hard to appreciate this in life. But we can hear and be reminded, And another cittas of appreciation can arise. This is our way. We dont expect results. Best wishes Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > Before we studied the Buddhist teachings we did not consider the mind > as a reality which can see or hear. The Buddha taught that also > seeing and hearing are cittas. There is a great variety of cittas > which each experience an object. The citta which sees, seeing- > consciousness, experiences an object: visible object or colour. It > experiences visible object through the eye-sense. Eye-sense is the > "doorway" through which seeing-consciousness experiences visible > object. Hearing-consciousness experiences sound through the doorway > of the ear-sense. Seeing and hearing are entirely different cittas > which are depending on different conditions. Cittas experience > objects through the doorways of eye, ear, nose, tongue, bodysense and > mind. Before studying the Buddhist teachings we did not pay attention > to seeing as being a citta experiencing visible object through the > eye-door, or to hearing as being a citta experiencing sound through > the ear-door. Cittas, objects and doorways are ultimate realities > taught by the Buddha. > One may doubt the usefulness of knowing details on cittas, objects > and doorways. It is important to know more thoroughly the phenomena > of our life which are occurring all the time. We are deluded as to > the truth when we believe that they are lasting and that they are > "self", or belonging to a "self", that we can exert control over > them. The Buddha taught that they are impermanent, dukkha and non- > self. These characteristics are not abstract categories, they pertain > to seeing, eye-sense, visible object, to all phenomena which are > arising and falling away from moment to moment. Since understanding > of the truth of these phenomena can only gradually develop, we should > begin to investigate them more closely. In the ultimate sense there > are merely mental phenomena and physical phenomena. So long as they > cannot be distinguished from each other, there cannot be a precise > knowledge of them. #102133 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Nov 8, 2009 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading kenhowardau Hi Ken O, ----------- <. . .> KO: > there is no control does not mean there is no influence. If there is no influence, then there is no wise consideration which is influence or condition by panna. ----------- I don't understand your point. Are not saying that nama influences the object it experiences? That can't be right. When panna (or any other nama) experiences an object it cannot affect or influence it in any way. It cannot, for example, make the impermanent permanent. --------------------- KH: > <. . .> We can read Dhamma books just to find out >more about the present reality, or we can read Dhamma books with a >desire to improve ourselves and become better Buddhists. One or the >other! One is wise consideration, the other is formal practice. One is >right, the other is wrong. > >--------- KO: > Are we assumming that they do not read. ---------------------- I can see one cause of our communication breakdown. In the above, I was talking about two ways of reading Dhamma books. I suggested one was a form of wise consideration while the other was a formal practice. You seem to have misunderstood me. ------------------- KO: > The distinction between formal practise and wise consideration is by us and not by the books. ------------------- Yes, but it is a convenient distinction. The ancient texts caution us against getting confused by conventional language. But apart from that, I agree they don't discuss conventional practices very much at all. And why should they? It is only in recent times that conventional vipassana and samatha practices have crept into Buddhism. Now we find they have almost completely taken over. We need a name to identify them. ------------------------------ <. . .> KO: > We could only say this is in@what being taught and this is not.@ I just want to caution of being over judgemental towards other actions.@ If they practise meditation, we should encourage the correct practise of mediation as prescribed by Visud and not otherwise.@ Or we could say this is not what we practise here, we practise this way and not judge the action. ------------------------------- Sometimes someone at DSG will refer to "my practice" or they will say "I practise in [this or that] way" "I follow the dry insight method" or "I practise jhana and insight in tandem" etc. It's only a means of expression but, even so, whenever I read that kind of remark I immediately suspect the writer has not grasped the basic fact of anatta. -------------- <. . .> KH: > If someone has wrong understanding at the theoretical level, can't we >safely assume their practice is micha-ditthi? > KO: >No, we cannot. We can only advise this is what we know and we like to share it you. dont go into argument of discussions that are not conducive to the dhamma. Or trying to prove@our point of view.@ Isnt proving is self effacing? --------------- We both agree we should avoid arguments and discussions that are "not conducive." But we disagree on what is conducive and what is not. Where to from here? :-) Ken H #102134 From: "philofillet" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 12:14 am Subject: Re: Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading philofillet Hi Ken and all > But apart from that, > I agree they don't discuss conventional practices very much at all. And > why should they? It is only in recent times that conventional vipassana > and samatha practices have crept into Buddhism. Now we find they have > almost completely taken over. We need a name to identify them. I don't know whether so-called "vipassana meditation" is a completely modern invention or not (and even practicioners such as U Silananda in the Mahasi tradition state in talks that this is a misnomer, "in the neighbourhood of vipassana" would be more accurate, he says in a talk I heard) but it is really nutty to insist that the ancient texts (if Vism. is an ancient text) don't teach conventional samattha practice. I *think* you are the only one of the Sujinists who denies it, so you had best catch up with the rest of the gang! I think the more correct line is to say that the instructions given in Vism don't apply to us, or something like that. Which *might* be a fair statement, since there is something in Vism. about the suitability of different meditation techniques based on such things as living space, temperament(?) and other factors. But to deny that Vism teaching conventional practices when it contains such things as detailed breath counting instructions (between 5 and 10, if I recall) and lengthy instructions on how to make kasinas is just so deluded Ken! You will be able to help people who are being misled by modern practices that are not in line with the ancient practices taught in great detail in such texts as Vism if and only if you get rid of your somewhat weird delusion that there are not ancient practices tauhgt in conventional terms in the ancient texts that can still be practiced correctly, *if* suitable conditions are present. Just trying to be helpful here! I'm surprised that no one in the Sujinist fold has steered your correctly on this. As far as I know you're the only one that denies the ancient texts taught meditation practices. If I'm not mistaken, other people are perfectly willing to admit meditation is taught in the ancient texts, but question the suitability for people in this day and age. Wouldn't it be less deluded for you to take that line as well? I'll just leave that with you to reflect on. Metta, Phil p.s again, I don't know about vipassana. I have a feeling that there may be truth to the statement that the ancient texts don't give detailed instructions on "vipassana meditation", but since I currently don't practice it I'm not in a hurry to find out the truth right now. p.p.s I'm not keen to read Ken telling me "when will you learn that there are only dhammas, only rupa and nama" as an off-the-point(I certainly don't deny that the enlightened mind awakens to the deep truth that there are only nama and rupa) way of dodging the above, so I won't be responding. #102135 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 3:00 am Subject: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 8. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 2 Which are the Latent Tendencies? Second Issue: what is the meaning of latent tendencies and what are their characteristics? Conclusion of this Issue: latent tendencies are subtle akusala dhammas which are powerful and lie dormant in the succession of cittas of living beings. They are realities which are powerful because they can only be eradicated by the supramundane Paths. The seven latent tendencies are: the latent tendency of sense desire (kåmarågånusaya), of aversion (patighånusaya), of conceit (månånusaya), of wrong view (ditthånusaya), of doubt (vicikicchånusaya), of craving for existence (bhava-rågånusaya) and of ignorance (avijjånusaya). These latent tendencies are actually six kinds of cetasikas, namely: attachment (lobha), aversion (dosa), conceit (måna), wrong view (ditthi), doubt (vicikicchå) and ignorance (moha). The sources which give the reason for this conclusion: Many Commentary texts explain the meaning of the latent tendencies. We read in the “Pañcappakaranatthakathå”, the Commentary to the “Yamaka”, in the section on the latent tendencies: “Question: As to the word latent tendency, anusaya, why is this term used for the latent tendencies? Answer: the term latent tendency is used because it lies dormant [1]. Question: why is a latent tendency said to lie dormant? Answer: It is so called because it is unabandoned (appahiina). It is true that these defilements are said to lie dormant in the succession of beings’ cittas because they cannot be eradicated. Therefore the teachers call these defilements latent tendencies.” (Pali: anusayaati kena.t.thena anusayaa? anusayana.t.thena. ko esa anusayana.t.tho naamaati? appahiina.t.tho. ete hi appahiina.t.thena tassa tassa santaane anusenti naama, tasmaa anusayaati vuccanti.) The Commentary to the “Path of Discrimination”, the “Saddhammappakåsiní” under the Explanation (Niddesa) of “Knowledge of Beings’ Biasses and Underlying Tendencies”, states: “The word anusaya, latent tendency, is used in the explanation of latent tendency. Why is the name anusaya used? Because it lies dormant. What is called dormant? The defilements that cannot yet be eradicated. Truly, these defilements lie dormant in the succession of beings’ cittas because they cannot yet be eradicated. Therefore they are called anusaya, latent tendencies.” --------- footnote 1: As to the word anusaya: sayati or seti is to lie down or to sleep. It lies dormant. Anu can mean: it follows closely, or: again and again, persistingly or continuously. ******* Nina. #102136 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:03 am Subject: [dsg] Re: More questions about nimitta ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for your reply. Nice doing arithmetics with you :) Best wishes pt > >pt: > Just to check - contact for patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti cittas is not included in the 22 by Bhikkhu Bodhi becasue these cittas are process-freed so they do not relate to D.O. context of contact as a link? > ... > S: They are very much included in D.O. in this context (as well as others beginning with "sankhaarapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na.m, there referring to patisandhi and all subsequent vipaka cittas). Under the ayatanas, "sa.laayatanapaccayaa phasso", patisandhi and all the other vipaka cittas (except lokuttara phala cittas) are included in the 6th inner ayatana, manayatana. Each citta, including these, is accompanied by phassa and vedana. > > Back to our counting, as Alberto said, most cittas can only perform one function, but some can perform more than one. > > 19 cittas can perform the functions of patisandhi, bhavanga and cuti (rebirth-linking, life-continuum and death). These 19 are: > > a) 2 kinds of santiirana (investigating)citta accompanied by equanimity [i.e one under the 7 ahetuka akusala vipaka cittas and one under the ahetuka kusala vipaka cittas above]. > b) 8 sahetuka (rooted) kaamaavacara vipaka cittas [any of these above] > c) 9 ruupavacara and aruupavacara vipaka citas [any of these 5+4 above] #102137 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Third kind of nibbana element and cessation ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for your reply. Admittedly, this topic is scrambling my synapses :) I'm not sure how much I'm misunderstanding here. > S: There are two meanings of upadana khandha: > a) rupa conditioned by past clinging, i.e. kammaja rupa > b) khandhas as object of clinging > > While still alive, the rupas conditioned by past kamma of the Buddha and all arahats are still a) upadana khandha. pt: Makes sense. > S: Furthermore, any of the khandhas of the Buddha and arahats are still upadana khandha for those that cling to them even though they (the Buddha and arahats) have no more lobha (attachment). pt: You mean that other unawakened people cling to the khandas of the arahats and the Buddha, right? So, how about nama khandas of the Buddha and arahats before parinibbana? Considering that there is no more lobha or moha for them, these are not clinging-aggregates anymore, right? ...after parinibbana... > S: There are no further cittas and cetasikas arising, but as discussed, rupas conditioned by temperature can continue to arise for quite a while. These, such as the rupas of the relics, can still be upadana khandha for devotees. pt: Yes, I got that this is the Theravada position, which is why I'm trying to remember what exactly was the counterargument by a Mahayana person who explained me just as convincingly that there are afflicted khandas, and then there are non-afflicted khandas, which continue after parinibbana, because they are in fact vipaka (or something like that) of wisdom and mahakaruna... Something to do with Buddhafields... Can't remember exactly now, other than that it was convincing :) Best wishes pt #102138 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:51 am Subject: Re: From the commentary on the Last Words of the Tathaagata ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for the quote. It is a very interesting one, because I didn't know of any other quote (other than atthasalini one) that mentions 3 pitakas, 5 nikayas, and 9 angas, together. Moreover, these appear to be the actual words of the Buddha, not the commentators, right? Are there many instances in the commentaries that have the actual words of the Buddha that are not found elsewhere in the tipitaka? I ask, because the usual consensus among those that have never read the commentaries (like me) is that they do not contain the Buddha's words at all. Best wishes pt > From the commentary to the last sentence above, taken from the beginning of Ch VI, Commentary on the Mahaaparinibbaana Sutta, transl. by Yang-Gyu An (PTS) in "The Buddha's Last Days": > ... > "And during my life, I have taught these: the four foundations of mindfulness (satipa.t.thaana), the four right efforts (sammapphadhaana), the four roads to supernormal power (iddhipaada), the five spiritual faculties (indriya), the five mental powers (bala), the seven factors of enlightenment (bojjha"nga), the noble eightfold path (magga). In various ways I have analysed these doctrinal matters and have taught the basket of Suttanta. All of that basket of Suttanta will peform the role of Teacher for you when I attain parinibbaana. > > "And during my life, I have taught these: the five aggregates, twelve sphere (aayatana), eighteeen elements (dhaatu), four truths (sacca), twenty-two faculites (indriya), nine causes (hetu), four foods (aahaara), seven contacts (phassa), seven feelings (vedanaa), seven perceptions (sa~n~naa), seven intentions (cetanaa), seven thoughts (citta). And here too, a certain number of things are of the sensual realm (kaamaavacara), a certain number are of the form realm (ruupaavacara), and a ceertain number are of the formless realm (aruupaavacara); a certain number are included (pariyaapanna), a certain number are not included (apariyaapanna); a certain number are mundane (lokika), a certain number are supramundane (lokuttara). > > "I have analysed these things in detail and taught the Abhidhamma-pi.taka, > which is adorned by the Mahaapa.t.thaana with its countless methods and > its twenty-fourfold complete origin (samantapa.t.thaana). All of that, > the basket of the Abhidhamma, will perform the role of the Teacher for you > when I attain parinibbaana. > > " Thus all of this has been told and discussed for forty-five years from my > enlightenment to my parinibbaana; three baskets, five Nikaayas, nine > branches (a"nga), eight-four thousand groups of dhamma: these are the > major divisions. Thus these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma remain. > I alone attain parinibbaana, and now I alone advise and instruct. After I > have attained parinibbaana, these eighty-four thousand groups of dhamma, > will advise and instruct you. #102139 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 12:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading upasaka_howard Hi, KenH (and KenO) - In a message dated 11/9/2009 2:45:37 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Ken O, ----------- <. . .> KO: > there is no control does not mean there is no influence. If there is no influence, then there is no wise consideration which is influence or condition by panna. ----------- I don't understand your point. Are not saying that nama influences the object it experiences? That can't be right. When panna (or any other nama) experiences an object it cannot affect or influence it in any way. It cannot, for example, make the impermanent permanent. =============================== There is a category of mind-made matter. When we lift our arm or open a hand, that motion is mind-created rupa (i.e., wind element). Volition is not impotent. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102140 From: Ken O Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading ashkenn2k Dear Ken H >----------- > >I don't understand your point. Are not saying that nama influences the >object it experiences? That can't be right. When panna (or any other >nama) experiences an object it cannot affect or influence it in any >way. It cannot, for example, make the impermanent permanent. > KO: Sorry, I am not very clear. You are right at the moment of panna arise with an object, there is no influence for the next succession of javana cittas, to a very clear object up to registration cittas. But past accumulations is the influence for the present arisen of this panna which in turn accumulates and infuence for the next javanas of panna to arise just like latency for akusala. That is the influence I am saying and not otherwise. We dinosaurs must not lack metta towards others that do not have the same views as us. Some of them do not accept our point of view. This is something I like to remind the dinosaurs, we should be patient and not arguing over and over again on control or no control, formal meditation etc. I felt this forum at times is getting a bit of a witch hunt and it seems that at times we are getting very argumentative. What is the root for the some discussion, we should be very mindful of the subtle akusala where we assume dana which in fact could be akusala. If there are doubts to clarify, we share. If the other party dont accept, we should leave it. Three times is the policy Sorry I would not carry on this discussion with you longer. Please allow me to leave thanks and metta Ken O #102141 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: chat with Scott scottduncan2 Dear Herman, H: "It is truly good to hear from you..." Scott: Thank you. Apologies for not wishing to discuss. Sincerely, Scott. #102142 From: Ken O Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta ashkenn2k Dear Herman >Maybe we are talking about words, not about what the words refer to? I >prefer to talk in terms of blue happening in the presence of this and that >condition, and not happening in the absence of any of those requisite >conditions. That is what I understand by the middle way, not postulating >blue and consciousness as things that exist independently of each other. K: Your point of middle way is different from the way I see it. Lets leave it. >> KO: defiinitely there is a cause, is said by Buddha in DO >> > >Yes, we agree on DO. But DO is not linear, it does not specify a single >cause or starting point, does it? KO: I am talking in terms of cause for the condition of the blue and not about questions the beginning. Sorry of not being clear > >I do not understand why I should have to grasp at the aggregates, in order >to stop grasping?? > KO: Understanding is not grasping. If understanding is grasping, then there is no way we could eradicate ignorance. Your basis of dhamma is letting go. Without understanding aggregates as not self, there is no letting go. > >What if I say non-papanca, instead of not-constructing? > >Deconstructing sounds to me like thinking [about concepts], and will result >in just more thinking. Non-papanca is not-thinking, it is not-constructing >those clung to things. > KO: We do need to think in order to investigate dhamma. Citta also need to investigate that the object is impermanance, dukkha and anatta in order to develop panna. Citta thinks, that is the function. We cannot run away from it. It is the correct thinking that is important, the investigating of dhammas in its aggregates (material and mental), into its elements, its bases etc. When we think in this way, we do not clung to objects. Seeing arise because of visible objects and citta and not self that arise to see. That is to me understanding of the aggregates, no grasping, no papanca. Cheers Ken O #102143 From: Ken O Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 9:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta ashkenn2k Dear Herman I am about to sleep and realise I make this mistake. Better correct it first before Sarah ask me to again. Citta thinks, panna investigates. I rephrase my paragraph again to correct my errors as I have mix up panna and citta KO:  We do need to think about the dhamma. Citta with the arisen of panna is able  to investigate that the object is impermanance, dukkha and anatta Citta thinks, that is the function. We cannot run away from it. It is the correct thinking (panna with citta) that is important, the investigating of dhammas in its aggregates (material and mental), into its elements, its bases etc. When we think (with panna) in this way, we do not clung to objects.  Seeing arise because of visible objects and citta and not self that arise to see. That is to me understanding of the aggregates, no grasping, no papanca.  > > >From: Ken O >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Tuesday, 10 November 2009 12:42:02 >Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta > > >Dear Herman > >>Maybe we are talking about words, not about what the words refer to? I >>prefer to talk in terms of blue happening in the presence of this and that >>condition, and not happening in the absence of any of those requisite >>conditions. That is what I understand by the middle way, not postulating >>blue and consciousness as things that exist independently of each other. > >K: Your point of middle way is different from the way I see it. Lets leave it. > >>> KO: defiinitely there is a cause, is said by Buddha in DO >>> >> >>Yes, we agree on DO. But DO is not linear, it does not specify a single >>cause or starting point, does it? > >KO: I am talking in terms of cause for the condition of the blue and not about questions the beginning. Sorry of not being clear > >> >>I do not understand why I should have to grasp at the aggregates, in order >>to stop grasping?? >> >KO:   Understanding is not grasping. If understanding is grasping, then there is no way we could eradicate ignorance. Your basis of dhamma is letting go. Without understanding aggregates as not self, there is no letting go.   > >> >>What if I say non-papanca, instead of not-constructing? >> >>Deconstructing sounds to me like thinking [about concepts], and will result >>in just more thinking. Non-papanca is not-thinking, it is not-constructing >>those clung to things. >> >KO:  We do need to think in order to investigate dhamma. Citta also need to investigate that the object is impermanance, dukkha and anatta in order to develop panna. Citta thinks, that is the function. We cannot run away from it. It is the correct thinking that is important, the investigating of dhammas in its aggregates (material and mental), into its elements, its bases etc. When we think in this way, we do not clung to objects.  Seeing arise because of visible objects and citta and not self that arise to see. That is to me understanding of the aggregates, no grasping, no papanca.  > > #102144 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 9:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Some thoughts on Jhana truth_aerator >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex and Herman > >isnt understanding dhammas as impermanent, dukkha and anatta, is >letting go? At the moment of this awareness, isnt this action? > > > Thanks and cheers > Ken O > Hi KenO, all, Understanding dhammas as anicca, dukkha, anatta conditions nibbida. Then nibbida conditions viraga. Seeing things as they are has samadhi as proximate condition. Thriugh samadhi the subjective misinterpretations caused by 5 hindrances are removed. Then when the enemy is knocked out, citta does all the work and nana can arise. This is an important aspect of meditation, to set the causes for wisdom by removing obstructions to "seeing as it is". As long as 5 hindrances are there, one does NOT "see things are they are". One sees things as hindrances want us to "see". With metta, Alex #102145 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 1:50 pm Subject: Re: charactoristic of citta jonoabb Hi Howard (102072) > If one is unaware of the distinction between knowing and known, one > is mired in ignorance. > =============== But if knowing this distinction is a matter of conventional knowledge only, then I don't see why it needs to be given special emphasis. Of more relevance surely is the knowing of dhammas as they truly are. > =============== > I'm not with you here. Which part of the quoted passage exactly do you > read as saying that there is no unseen sight? > ------------------------------------------- > "He doesn't construe an unseen." > =============== The statement "He doesn't construe an unseen" and the statement "There is no unseen visible object" are surely not saying the same thing. The former seems to refer to the absence of any construing (or wrong view) in relation to things not currently the object of seeing consciousness. The latter asserts that the arising and falling away of visible object is exactly contemporaneous with, and hence linked to, that of seeing consciousness. > =============== > I suggest you reread what I quoted from the Kalaka Sutta. I find it a > clear assertion that there are no visible objects existing apart from the > seeing of them, > =============== Yes, and it is on that basis that you use "sight" as a translation of the Pali "rupa" ("form/visible object"); but that is in fact your own gloss on the Pali term. > =============== and also no seeing existing apart from a visible object. > =============== As mentioned before, this point is not in issue. Jon #102146 From: Herman Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: chat with Scott egberdina Hi Scott, 2009/11/10 scottduncan2 > Dear Herman, > > H: "It is truly good to hear from you..." > > Scott: Thank you. Apologies for not wishing to discuss. > > That's fine, of course. No need to apologise. But now that I am assured of the last word :-), I am happy that we live in a world where nobody can make anyone discuss against their will, nor make anyone angry against their will :-) Cheers Herman #102147 From: Herman Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 3:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangha politics in Thailand egberdina Hi Ken O, 2009/11/9 Ken O > Dear Herman > > I have to make clear, firstly, different context. Thank you for clarifying. > For the example below, I will call the police to stop them. Most > importanly, I have loving kindness towards them especially towards those who > cause the aksuala actions. > > Would the following example be closer to the context in which we are discussing? You are walking down the street, and you see a group of police treating a person, a woman, very badly. What do you do? Cheers Herman #102148 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 3:54 pm Subject: Re: Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading kenhowardau Hi Phil, ----------- <. . .> Ph: > p.p.s I'm not keen to read Ken telling me "when will you learn that there are only dhammas, only rupa and nama" as an off-the-point(I certainly don't deny that the enlightened mind awakens to the deep truth that there are only nama and rupa) way of dodging the above, so I won't be responding. ----------------- It will be a sad day when satipatthana (the realisation that there are only namas and rupas) is considered off-topic at DSG. ---------------- Ph: > it is really nutty to insist that the ancient texts (if Vism. is an ancient text) don't teach conventional samattha practice. ---------------- All Dhamma discussion must be based on the premise that there are only namas and rupas. Any purported Dhamma discussion that is not based on that premise is bound to go horribly wrong. How could anyone possibly argue that the ancient texts taught conventional practices? Remember "conventional" (pannatti) translates as "illusory in the ultimate sense." Why would the texts teach illusory practices? ---------------- Ph: > I *think* you are the only one of the Sujinists who denies it, so you had best catch up with the rest of the gang! ---------------- If only I could catch up! I can assure you there are people here who know "there are only namas and rupas" with much greater certainty than I do. Admittedly, I am more vocal about it. I have the fervour of a convert.:-) ---------------- Ph: > the rest of the gang know with I think the more correct line is to say that the instructions given in Vism don't apply to us, or something like that. Which *might* be a fair statement, since there is something in Vism. about the suitability of different meditation techniques based on such things as living space, temperament(?) and other factors. ------------------ Maybe when pressed they will say that, but the overall idea is to leave ourselves out of Dhamma discussion. Just understand the ways of conditioned dhammas, the rest will take care of itself. If instructions to select a meditation object ever apply to us we will be the first to know about it. Right understanding comes first, not last. ---------------- Ph: > But to deny that Vism teaching conventional practices when it contains such things as detailed breath counting instructions (between 5 and 10, if I recall) and lengthy instructions on how to make kasinas is just so deluded Ken! ---------------- When a person knows what calm (samatha) is, and when samatha has become a regular part of his daily life, then that person may, possibly, become interested in concentrating samatha to the point of absorption. Until that day, the idea of taking jhana lessons would be ridiculous. It would make a mockery of the real thing. -------------------- Ph: > You will be able to help people who are being misled by modern practices that are not in line with the ancient practices taught in great detail in such texts as Vism if and only if you get rid of your somewhat weird delusion that there are not ancient practices taught in conventional terms in the ancient texts that can still be practiced correctly, *if* suitable conditions are present. -------------------- I am only one voice at DSG. There are also mature, capable, helpful people here who can say the right things in the right way. But they have little more success (if any) than I do. Wrong view and the desire for an eternal soul are very powerful; they resist all kinds of persuasion. ---------------------- Ph: > Just trying to be helpful here! I'm surprised that no one in the Sujinist fold has steered your correctly on this. As far as I know you're the only one that denies the ancient texts taught meditation practices. If I'm not mistaken, other people are perfectly willing to admit meditation is taught in the ancient texts, but question the suitability for people in this day and age. Wouldn't it be less deluded for you to take that line as well? I'll just leave that with you to reflect on. ----------------------- Thanks, Phil, and don't feel guilty about abandoning the discussion as soon as you have started it. As far as I am concerned all Dhamma discussions are based on the understanding that there are only namas and rupas. So, if that doesn't suit you, I can understand your reticence. :-) Ken H #102149 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 11:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: charactoristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Jon - In a message dated 11/9/2009 4:54:13 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: Hi Howard (102072) > If one is unaware of the distinction between knowing and known, one > is mired in ignorance. > =============== But if knowing this distinction is a matter of conventional knowledge only, then I don't see why it needs to be given special emphasis. ----------------------------------------------- I don't know what you mean here by "conventional knowledge." Knowledge that is a matter of thinking? That's not what I have in mind. ------------------------------------------------- Of more relevance surely is the knowing of dhammas as they truly are. ------------------------------------------------ How are they? They are anicca, dukkha, and anatta. That can be "know" by thinking or it can be known by direct insight. But if we don't even know the difference between knowing and known, well, fat chance of truly knowing the tilakkhana! ----------------------------------------------- > =============== > I'm not with you here. Which part of the quoted passage exactly do you > read as saying that there is no unseen sight? > ------------------------------------------- > "He doesn't construe an unseen." > =============== The statement "He doesn't construe an unseen" and the statement "There is no unseen visible object" are surely not saying the same thing. The former seems to refer to the absence of any construing (or wrong view) in relation to things not currently the object of seeing consciousness. ------------------------------------------------- I totally disagree. I guess we'll have to just check it out with Sid. ;-) ------------------------------------------------ The latter asserts that the arising and falling away of visible object is exactly contemporaneous with, and hence linked to, that of seeing consciousness. > =============== > I suggest you reread what I quoted from the Kalaka Sutta. I find it a > clear assertion that there are no visible objects existing apart from the > seeing of them, > =============== Yes, and it is on that basis that you use "sight" as a translation of the Pali "rupa" ("form/visible object"); but that is in fact your own gloss on the Pali term. ------------------------------------------------- What is being discussed is "what is seen." The normal English for what is seen is 'sight. I prefer to use normal English. You are, of course, free to use whatever terminology you like. ----------------------------------------------- > =============== and also no seeing existing apart from a visible object. > =============== As mentioned before, this point is not in issue. ------------------------------------------------- But it is part of the sutta. Had I not mentioned it there is always the chance of my being accused of atta-view. It's happened before more than once of DSG, and I prefer avoiding that. --------------------------------------------------- Jon ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102150 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Sangha politics in Thailand truth_aerator Hi Herman, all, > Herman wrote: > > Hi Ken O, > > Would the following example be closer to the context in which we are > discussing? > >You are walking down the street, and you see a group of police >treating a person, a woman, very badly. What do you do? > > Cheers > > Herman Develop compassion and equanimity. Furthermore take that bad event as a lesson, and resolve not to make bad kamma so as not to be in that situation. With metta, Alex #102151 From: "James" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:41 pm Subject: Photo Uploaded buddhatrue Hi All, I just uploaded a photo of Lodewijk's book presentation where he presents the first book to Nina. Check it out. They make an adorable couple. :-) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/photos/album/2012842897/pic/18393\ 69566/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=101&count=20&dir=asc Metta, James #102152 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:56 pm Subject: Re: Reply to Ken O /with a new subject heading truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, "Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? insight preceded by tranquillity tranquillity preceded by insight tranquillity in tandem with insight "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. "Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.170.than.html Note all 4 paths have samatho/samadhi. Only 3 have insight (vipassana) ""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 With metta, Alex #102153 From: Herman Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] charactoristic of citta egberdina Hi Jon, 2009/11/7 jonoabb > Hi Herman > > (101810) > > OK, thanks for that. However, all my readings of what (for the sake of > ease > > I will call) the KS clan have written over the years suggested that citta > is > > given exactly the same characteristics that are given to a being or a > person > > ie a distinct, separate reality that acts on an object that is other than > > it. If I have misunderstood all these years, I am more than happy to > breathe > > a sigh of relief and apoligise for my misunderstanding :-) > > =============== > > You seem to be defining/describing a person as "a distinct, separate > reality that acts on an object that is other than it". > > I'm afraid I don't understand this at all. Would you mind elaborating on > how cittas are being given the same characteristics as a person? Thanks. > Persons are entities that have a life span (they exist for a period of time) and during that time they do things. That is exactly what is being attributed to cittas, is it not? > > To my understanding of the teachings, there can be a concept of a person > but there is no distinct, separate reality that is "a person". > > > =============== > > > I would say the characteristic of consciousness is the experiencing of > an > > > object. > > > > > > > > > Thank you for that. Is that different in any way for you than just the > > object? > > =============== > > I have no difficulty with the idea of the consciousness that experiences > being different from the object that is experienced. What is the problem > with that? > Mainly that it is only an idea, it is a thought reality only. The division does not exist apart from thinking. > > > =============== > > Are there unexperienced objects? > > =============== > > By definition, I suppose there can be no unexperienced objects (because if > unexperienced it would not be an object). > > But in the case of an object that is a rupa, I see no reason why the rupa > could not have arisen before becoming the object. > > So let me ask you: Is it your understanding that rupas arise only as > object of consciousness? > No, it is not. But an experienced rupa is not identical with an unexperienced one. There seem to be two different definitions of rupas that are being intermixed in the discussion. There are rupas (forms) that are contacted, and that are not contacted: "Now if internally the eye is intact but externally forms do not come into range, nor is there a corresponding engagement, then there is no appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness. If internally the eye is intact and externally forms come into range, but there is no corresponding engagement, then there is no appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness. But when internally the eye is intact and externally forms come into range, and there is a corresponding engagement, then there is the appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness." MN28 That, however, does not equate to an uncontacted form being identical with a contacted form. An uncontacted form lacks any characteristic. It may as well be nibbana. > > =============== > > There are also a number of references to the way out of being stuck in > that > > scenario. They have to do with "consciousnes" finding no foothold > anywhere, > > and the subsequent release that follows naturally from that. > > =============== > > Interesting. Happy to discuss any suttas or other texts you'd like to > bring up. > > The current scope of the discussion will do just fine for the moment, Jon :-) Cheers Herman #102154 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 5:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo Uploaded hantun1 Dear James (Nina and Lodewijk), Thank you very much for the photo. They are indeed a very adorable couple!  with metta and respect, Han --- On Tue, 11/10/09, James wrote: Hi All, I just uploaded a photo of Lodewijk's book presentation where he presents the first book to Nina. Check it out. They make an adorable couple. :-) http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/photos/ album/2012842897 /pic/1839369566/ view?picmode= &mode=tn& order=ordinal& start=101& count=20& dir=asc Metta, James #102155 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 6:49 pm Subject: Re: Reply to Ken O /with a new subject heading kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello KenH, all, > > > > "Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of four paths. Which four? > > insight preceded by tranquillity > tranquillity preceded by insight > tranquillity in tandem with insight > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > "Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these four paths." Hi Alex, All four have insight. As I understand this sutta the fourth way is the way of insight and it is common to all four ways. The other three, however, have additional features which manifest as psychic powers. This sutta (or another one just like it?) was proclaimed as a result of a conversation between some arahants and a travelling monk who had never met an arahant before. The monk assumed that they would all have psychic powers, but the arahants he was speaking to said, no, in their case they had insight only. As I understand it, the arahants who attained jhana mastery either before or after their enlightenment had psychic powers, but they were the same type of powers that were common to all (Buddhist and non-Buddhist) jhana masters. Those who attained insight with jhana 'in tandem' had much greater powers. They had powers possessed only by Buddhas and their chief disciples. Corrections welcome. Ken H #102156 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 7:30 pm Subject: Re: Reply to Ken O /with a new subject heading ptaus1 Hi Ken, Alex (and all), It's interesting that your different interpretations of this sutta passage are also different from my interpreation :) I wonder what's the classical interpretation. My understanding was that the first 3 paths have both jhana and insight development in whatever combination (psychic powers being just an occasional by-product of jhana, and so, not the point of the sutta) long before the first lokuttara citta. While the fourth path is what is usually referred to as "dry insight path", the main difference being that there is no development of jhana prior to the first lokuttara citta, but jhana does occur "spontaneously" with the lokuttara citta, but not afterwards. The main consequence of this again has nothing to do with psychic powers but with the ability to re-experienece the phala citta (nibbana) afterwards - dry insighter cannot do it because he has no mastery of jhana, while those who do (the other 3 paths), can re-experience it. Also, > K: As I understand it, the arahants who attained jhana mastery either > before or after their enlightenment had psychic powers. pt: My understanding was that there cannot be any further development after attaining arahatship. I.e. if no jhanas (and psychic powers) were developed before it, then they cannot be developed afterwards. I'm not sure why is this, I guess it has something to do with cetana. I think it is also one of the reasons why a bodhisatta must cultivate paramis for a lot longer before becoming an arahat. I.e. if I remember correctly, Sumedha was on the verge of becoming an arahat in the time of Dipankara Buddha, and he realized that it was about to happen, and then resolved instead to become a bodhisatta, and that was the start of all his future bodhisatta endevours before becoming Gotama Buddha long long after. Look forward to any corrections, comments. Best wishes pt > > "Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares > the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of > one or another of four paths. Which four? > > > > insight preceded by tranquillity > > tranquillity preceded by insight > > tranquillity in tandem with insight > > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under > control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles > down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path is born. He > follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, > developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his > obsessions destroyed. > > > > "Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of > arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of > these four paths." #102157 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 2:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo Uploaded upasaka_howard Hi, James - In a message dated 11/9/2009 7:41:12 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, buddhatrue@... writes: Hi All, I just uploaded a photo of Lodewijk's book presentation where he presents the first book to Nina. Check it out. They make an adorable couple. :-) ---------------------------------------------- Yes, they do - two lovely people making a wonderful couple! I'm crazy about them. :-) ---------------------------------------------- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/photos/album/2012842897/pic/1 839369566/view?picmode=&mode=tn&order=ordinal&start=101&count=20&dir=asc Metta, James ======================================== With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102158 From: han tun Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 8. hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for giving the definitions and explanations of anusaya. (Pali: anusayaati kena.t.thena anusayaa? anusayana.t.thena. ko esa anusayana.t.tho naamaati? appahiina.t.tho. ete hi appahiina.t.thena tassa tassa santaane anusenti naama, tasmaa anusayaati vuccanti.) From the above Pali text, I think there are two components why anusaya is called anusaya. (1) appahiina.t.tho. ete hi appahiina.t.thena = because it is unabandoned (appahiina) (2) santaane anusenti = because they lie dormant in the succession of cittas of living beings. [santaaneti: continues in succession.] [senta : pr.p. of seti: lying, sleeping.] Please correct me if I am wrong. ------------------------------ Sayadaw Ashin Janakaabhivamsa also gave the definition of anusaya the same as the second component of your quote. "anu anu santaane sentiiti anusayaaa" anu: again and again, persistingly or continuously santaane: continues in succession senta : [pr.p. of seti] lying, sleeping. ------------------------------ Sayadaw Ashin Janakaabhivamsa also gave an alternate definition of anusaya, in connection with the three levels of kilesas. "anuruupa.m kaara.na.m labhitvaa senti uppajjantii ti anusayaa". anuruupa: [adj.] suitable; conform with. anuruupa.m kaara.na.m = suitable condition labhitvaa: [abs. of labhati] having got; having obtained; having attained. senti uppajjanti = arising from sleeping or from lying dormant. Sayadaw explained that the last definition was given in "viggaha" method. [viggaha = resolution of words into their elements.] Respectfully, Han #102159 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:45 pm Subject: Re: Reply to Ken O /with a new subject heading kenhowardau Hi pt, Thanks for helping out. I am way out of my depth, and looking forward to further comments. (DSG has discussed this sutta before, it's sure to be in Useful Posts - somewhere!) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > <. . .> > The main consequence of this again has nothing to do with psychic powers but with the ability to re-experienece the phala citta (nibbana) afterwards - dry insighter cannot do it because he has no mastery of jhana, while those who do (the other 3 paths), can re-experience it. #102160 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Nov 9, 2009 4:55 pm Subject: Immaculate Integrity! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Purification by Knowledge & Vision of the Way! As one repeats, develops and cultivates that equanimity about constructions, faith becomes more resolute, energy better exerted, awareness much better established, and mind better and deeper concentrated, as a consequence of, that this equanimity around all phenomena & formations grows more refined! This insight, leading to emergence, is called aloofness, which itself can eclipse even the delicate unified equanimity gained from a subtle mental unification... Experiencing disgust makes greed gradually fade away. With the fading away of greed, clinging evaporates. One is thereby liberated by this mental release. Purification by knowledge & vision of this way is the principal factor of purity! It is conforming to what is mentally utterly unpolluted... It is for this precious immaculate integrity, that this Noble life is lived under the Blessed Buddha! DN III 288, MN I 139, 147, III 220 The Greatest Sage did thus proclaim: This insight stilled, refined and purified! This round of rebirth's abysmal pit of pain, Is vast, entangling, deceptive and terrible! Any wise man should strive all the best he can, When hoping emergence from suffering to gain. Vism 671 <...> Have a nice day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #102161 From: Herman Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Inseparability of Knowing and Known egberdina Hi Ken O, 2009/11/7 Ken O > Dear Herman > > KO: I am saying rupas can arise without cittas. A citta must arise with > an object as what you describe as experience. Unexperience is not the > correct term I would say, rupas that are not arise in cittas do not mean > they do not arise as one of their cause is temperature. > I agree with you. But why use the same word rupa to describe both what is experienced, and what is not experienced? Cheers Herman #102162 From: Herman Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: (dsg) charactoristic of citta egberdina Hello Sarah, 2009/11/7 sarah abbott > Hi Herman, > > >A characteristic is something that is known or experienced, right? > ... > S: Not necessarily. A sound has a characteristic regardless of whether it's > experienced or not. > I'm afraid I do not understand this. Is unheard blue a smell :-) ? > ... > >But you > have introduced a negative here as being characteristic of something real, > and I think that will be very important in coming to understand the > differences in what we are saying to each other. The negative you have > introduced is not-experiencing, or non-experience. Visible object, you say > for example, has the characteristic of not knowing [anything]. I do not > want to put words in your mouth, but you appear to be saying that > not-knowing canbe known as a characteristic. > > >Have I got that right? > ... > S: In a way, yes. Any rupa has the characteristic of not knowing, not > experiencing anything. This is what differentiates it from nama, which can > experience. > > For example, the sound (of the watefall, say) does not know it can be > heard. It doesn't experience anything at all. It is just a physical element > which arises and falls away and which may or may not ever be experienced. It > doesn't care! > Yes, this is good. But of course there has to be a but :-) When I meet a person, I sense no more than what I would if I was near a waterfall, there are only sights and sounds and smells etc, yet I ascribe the capacity of knowing to the person, and not to the waterfall. And I behave accordingly. There are clearly, if all of our behaviour is a guide, rupas that know, and rupas that don't know. What do you think? Cheers Herman #102163 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo Uploaded nilovg Dear James, Thank you for the trouble. It was a roaring party at the ministry of foreign affairs. Nina. Op 10-nov-2009, om 1:41 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > I just uploaded a photo of Lodewijk's book presentation #102164 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Reply to Ken O /with a new subject heading nilovg Dear Alex, Op 10-nov-2009, om 1:56 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under > control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, > settles down, and becomes unified & concentrated. In him the path > is born. He follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he > follows the path, developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are > abandoned, his obsessions destroyed. > > "Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of arahantship in > my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of these > four paths." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.170.than.html > > Note all 4 paths have samatho/samadhi. > Only 3 have insight (vipassana) ------- The last case regards the upakilesa, imperfections of insight. This is in the course of the development of insight. He is attached to the calm and assurance due to insight, and he has to overcome this so that the development of insight can continue on, until he reaches enlightenment. -------- Nina. #102165 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:19 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 4, no 3. nilovg Dear friends, The citta which sees, seeing-consciousness, is a mental phenomenon, it experiences an object. It is dependent on eye-sense, which is a physical phenomenon. Eye-sense does not see but it has the quality of receiving colour, so that seeing-consciousness can experience that colour. Colour or visible object is also a physical phenomenon, it cannot experience anything. Seeing, hearing and the experiences through the other senses are dependent on conditions. If there were no doorways the different sense objects could not be experienced, and consequently what we call “the world outside” could not appear. When we are fast asleep, without dreaming, the world does not appear. We do not know who our parents or friends are, we do not know the place where we are living. When we wake up the world around us appears again. We can verify that there is impingement of the sense objects on the appropriate senses and this is the condition for the experience of the world around us. There are cittas which see, hear and experience the other sense objects, and these experiences condition thinking about the world of people and things. We are usually absorbed in our thoughts concerning the people and things around us and we do not realize that it is citta which thinks. We could not think of “self”, person or possessions, which are conventional realities, if there were not the ultimate realities of colour, sound and the other sense objects and the cittas which experience them through the appropriate doorways. ****** Nina. #102166 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Latent Tendencies, anusaya. no 8. nilovg Dear Han, Op 10-nov-2009, om 5:15 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Sayadaw Ashin Janakaabhivamsa also gave an alternate definition of > anusaya, in connection with the three levels of kilesas. > > "anuruupa.m kaara.na.m labhitvaa senti uppajjantii ti anusayaa". > > anuruupa: [adj.] suitable; conform with. > anuruupa.m kaara.na.m = suitable condition > labhitvaa: [abs. of labhati] having got; having obtained; having > attained. > senti uppajjanti = arising from sleeping or from lying dormant. > > Sayadaw explained that the last definition was given in "viggaha" > method. [viggaha = resolution of words into their elements.] ------- N: Thank you, that is interesting. Uppajjanti is then in the sense of having obtained a soil so that they can condition the arising of pariyutthaana kilesa, the akusala cittas. ------ Nina. #102167 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Photo Uploaded glenjohnann Dear Nina A lovely picture of you and Lodewijk! Thanks, James, for uploading it. Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear James, > Thank you for the trouble. It was a roaring party at the ministry of > foreign affairs. > Nina. > Op 10-nov-2009, om 1:41 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > > > I just uploaded a photo of Lodewijk's book presentation > > #102168 From: "freawaru80" Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 12:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! freawaru80 Dear Ken, > OK there may be control of a different sort. The conditioning effect of > one dhamma on another dhamma may quite reasonably be given the name > "control." But we are not talking about that, we are talking here about > anatta and the ramifications of anatta. Exactly. And to understand an-atta one needs to know the definition of atta. How is atta defined? I think one can nicely see it in this quote of the Visuddhimagga Nina quoted here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/102103 "Furthermore, nåma has no efficient power, it cannot occur by its own efficient power... " Atta refers to something that stands alone, not dependent on anything else but itself. Occuring by it's own power. It is a very different definition of self than we have: this idea of something that stands alone, that has no origin but itself, only exists as GOD. Only for God - in the Abrahamic sense - it is said "I am what I am". The idea that there is something like God, something within us that only depends on itself, is not existing here. Even the soul depends on God, origins in God, is not standing alone, does not occur by it's own efficient power. For the Buddha and his disciples the search for God was just as important as for any other mystics. The Buddha tried to find God/atta in dhamma and didn't. That is the ultimate meaning of an-atta and it has nothing to do with that you and I don't exist or that we can't influence anything. > When we know that all dhammas are anatta, we know that there is no > "control" over them. They are conditioned 100% by other dhammas. There > is no self - no you or me - to influence them in any way whatsoever. Of course I can influence dhammas. I can control whether I walk or stand, I can control what I say, I can influence any dhamma I wish (in principle I mean, takes iddhis to influence some of them). > I am not sure what you mean by that. Do you think there may be a > surprise in store? Does the Buddha smile? Of course there is a surprise in store. Several of them. :-) > I don't. The path has weak right understanding at the > beginning, stronger right understanding in the middle, and full right > understanding at the end. But it is the same right understanding all the > way. You use a very different definition of right understanding that the rest of Theravadans (and also other Buddhist traditions). >There are no surprises. The Buddha did not keep anything back. It > is not a "closed fist" teaching. Dhamma can not be taught theoretically. It is a Path. It has to be walked. It is not enough to learn the map by heart - one has to stand up and go out of the house and walk it. > F: > Yes. It is either Ignorance that controls or Wisdom. They are both > controllers. > -------------------------------------------- > > OK. In that sense there is control. :-) Yes. And when I am absorbed in this dhamma called wisdom I am Manjushri (it is actually a tantric technique but I am sure the experience is known in Theravada, too). When I am Manjushri I can wield the sword. Wisdom's discernment is my discernment, wisdom's control is my control - and it is still an-atta. And even this is not Liberation. Do you see why I say there are surprises in store? :-) > --------------------- > KH: > > The appropriate right > > effort occurs instantly with the arising of panna . There is no > control > > over it and no need for control. There is control. But wisdom does not control itself, just other dhamma. Thus wisdom is not God, wisdom is not atta, it arises based on conditions. On conditions the practitioner sets. > But you have just said there were two possible controllers; either > ignorance or wisdom. Now you are saying "you" can take control. What do > you mean by that? Just like anything else wisdom can be learned. By practice. Like when learning how to bike. One can learn a bit of the theory but in the end one needs to actually sit on it and roll, stir and pedal. And only while on the Path most of the instructions will make sense. > KH: > > whenever we find ourselves wanting to do something - to take > some > > controlling action - in order to follow the Buddha's teaching we are > > misunderstanding that teaching. Who says this? Not the Buddha. After all to Liberate himself he controlled his actions perfectly. It would be illogical to assume that the same, namely Liberation, can be attained without taking some controlling action. When reading the sutta in which the Buddha describes his own Awakening and how he reached it, seriously, controlling himself, his body and mind and the state they are in are the prerequisites for mindfullness. >There is only the present moment! There is wanting at the present moment! > You could also say I walk, I talk, I turn to the left or turn to the > right (etc) and these are my decisions - under my control. But that is > just how the world seems. In ultimate reality there is no control - > every reality is conditioned 100% by other conditioned realities. Sure. I still don't see your point of being powerless. > So I should find out > exactly what the Satipatthana Sutta is referring to when it mentions a > "long breath" and a "short breath". I agree here :-) > My current understanding of the sutta is that a Buddha, a Buddha's chief > disciple, or a similar incomparable being, can practise satipatthana *in > conjunction with jhana.* (These people take breath as their meditation > object.) And so the sutta is describing such a moment of satipatthana. > Later, the sutta describes moments of satipathana that occur in the > daily lives of all monks, not just Buddhas etc. Not quite. The sati-patthana sutta is both an instruction and a map of what what happens when one follows those instructions. Just follow the instruction: go to a secluded place (a room without other persons and a telephone is sufficient and slow your breathing down to a minute per breath circle. Then some changes will appear, some surprises, new dhamma can be discerned and the sati-patthana sutta instructs which dhamma to single out and be mindfull of. "This is the only way...for reaching the right path, namely, the four foundations of mindfulness." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.nysa.html This is the only way. He didn't say: learn the theory of Abhidhamma by heart. He said: do what I tell you to practice, namely the four foundations of mindfullness. "Ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. Breathing in a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a long breath"; breathing out a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a long breath";" This is the very beginning. The long breath. Without it nothing of the sutta can be understood. And without the four foundations of mindfullness the right path cannot be reached. Freawaru #102169 From: "freawaru80" Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 1:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! freawaru80 Dear Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > >> KO:  Aggregates by itself has no self, we could not control it. If we could, we would have been able to stop from growing old. One would have said, let my form be thus, let my form not be thus.   This is stated very clearly in the Not Self Sutta,  > > > >All you need to alter your form is the vikubbana iddhi (the power of transconstruction) > > > >http://what- buddha-said. net/library/ DPPN/wtb/ g_m/iddhi. htm > > > >KO:   Sorry, why do you need to alter your form. Why do one want to change a self into another self? That is not my point. You said that an-atta means that one cannot alter one's form and I said this cannot be because with the vikubbana iddhi one can indeed alter one's form. Your definition of an-atta leads to an inconsistency with other suttas and thus the definition has to be incorrect. An-atta has nothing to do with not being able to control form or feeling or anything else. >  This is just a spiritual power which even jhanas practitioner >who are not Buddhists could have. Exactly. Does not even take a Buddha to be able to control one's form. >They still do not gain enlightment. Buddha in many of his earlier >lives before become enlighted had these powers, still did not get >enlightment until his final enlightment. That is the reason to >understand Abhidhamma. It helps us to see things in perspective and >holisticly. But how can one understand Abhidhamma correctly if one's conclusions stand in discrepancy with Dhamma? If one comes to conclusions such as form cannot be controled? > Yes right understanding comes from experience. Ain't reading >suttas and discussing them require experiences and help to growth >experiences. Sure. But if a sutta says for example "long breath" and one does not experience a long breath it is useless. >If not, why did the students of the old ask questions from their wise teachers or Buddha. I think it is safe to say they were all masters of pranajama. >  Why Buddha in certain suttas urge them to listen to the >dhamma. These help to growth their learning of the dhamma.  > A Listener is a special kind of Buddha. Not a full Buddha. For these saints Listening to Dhamma leads to Perfect Buddhahood. Freawaru #102170 From: Herman Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 2:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Defecating Formally --- Enter The Abhidhammika 4! egberdina Hi freawaru and KenO, 2009/11/11 freawaru80 > > >There is only the present moment! > > There is wanting at the present moment! > > Exactly. And putting it another way, this present moment is this or that wanting. Cheers Herman #102171 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:14 pm Subject: Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? truth_aerator Dear Nina, Sarah, Jon, KenH, I recently skimmed through Nina's site. Unfortunately I stumbled about something that made me stop reading. It was a passage by KS(?) compiled by Sarah about TV. Question: Does one practice kaya-viveka? citta-viveka? upadhi-viveka while watching TV, cooking in a busy kitchen, shopping at the strip mall or visiting strip-club? Isn't there kama involved in desire to watch TV, shopping for things you do not really need, chatting at a busy restaurant (thats not required for living)? "Some people are afraid to watch TV, but now we are lost in the concepts with no awareness." http://www.zolag.co.uk/phras.html I like the quote by Phil: "And as always I say that I think it seems somewhat contradictory for people to say that in this day and age people don't have enough wisdom to understand suttas on their own and yet can consider those arahant-while-cooking sort of anecdotes relevant.)" - Phil I find it strange to insist that we can gain real insight, without hard practice in the comfort of our own homes, unlike monks of old striving for Arhatship and putting their life on the line for attainments. With metta, Alex #102172 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 5:34 pm Subject: another understanding / to Freawaru kenhowardau Hi Freawaru, -------- <. . .> F: > Atta refers to something that stands alone, not dependent on anything else but itself. Occuring by it's own power. It is a very different definition of self than we have: this idea of something that stands alone, that has no origin but itself, only exists as GOD. -------- As I understand it, anatta means there is nothing other than nama and rupa. Therefore, it is not only the existence of Almighty God that is denied. Anatta is the ultimate absence of anything and everything - other than nama or rupa. So that would include me, you, God, a grasshopper, a leaf, a motor car - anything. ---------------- F: > Only for God - in the Abrahamic sense - it is said"I am what I am". The idea that there is something like God, something within us that only depends on itself, is not existing here. Even the soul depends on God, origins in God, is not standing alone, does not occur by it's own efficient power. For the Buddha and his disciples the search for God was just as important as for any other mystics. The Buddha tried to find God/atta in dhamma and didn't. That is the ultimate meaning of an-atta and it has nothing to do with that you and I don't exist or that we can't influence anything. ---------------- The only reason it has nothing to do with you and I existing is because you and I never existed in the first place. You and I are nothing more than concepts thought up by namas. When there is satipatthana there is the knowledge, "There is only this conditioned dhamma here!" Or, to put it another way; when panna directly experiences the anatta characteristic of a dhamma it sees a void in the place where atta (anything more than that dhamma) might have been. -------------------------- KH: > > When we know that all dhammas are anatta, we know that there is no "control" over them. They are conditioned 100% by other dhammas. There is no self - no you or me - to influence them in any way whatsoever. F: > Of course I can influence dhammas. I can control whether I walk or stand, I can control what I say, I can influence any dhamma I wish (in principle I mean, takes iddhis to influence some of them). --------------------------- No, you have misunderstood. Satipatthana (right understanding of ultimate reality) is the knowledge that there are *only dhammas.* Dhammas are coming and going right now, purely by themselves. There can be the illusion of a self that is doing things (walking, standing etc ) but that is just namas thinking. Ultimately, there no self, no walking, no standing - just dhammas arising and falling away. -------------- <. . .> F: You use a very different definition of right understanding that the rest of Theravadans (and also other Buddhist traditions). --------------- Maybe so, but let me assure you this 'other understanding' that is discussed here at DSG is not a new one; it definitely is taught in the ancient Pali texts. Over the years there have been people here who have doubted this way of understanding and who have demanded to see it in the texts. And so they have been shown where it is clearly expressed in various ancient commentaries. This has caused them to reject the ancient commentaries. And so they have then been shown that the Abhidhamma is saying the same thing as the commentaries. Then they have claimed that the Abhidhamma Pitaka was a "later addition" to the original Pali canon. And so they have been shown how Abhidhamma can be found in the Sutta Pitaka as well. Some people have then gone so far as to then reject certain suttas as "later additions." In any case, the fact remains that *all* suttas can be understood in a way that is consistent with all other parts of the Tipitaka and its ancient commentaries. Ken H #102173 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 7:36 pm Subject: Re: another understanding / to Freawaru truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > > Hi Freawaru, > In any case, the fact remains that *all* suttas can be understood in a > way that is consistent with all other parts of the Tipitaka and its > ancient commentaries. > > Ken H Hi KenH, all. And which suttas say that seclusion of body, seclusion of mind and seclusion from aquisitions is un-needed for ordinary people? What were the Buddhists monks doing when they were meditating in caves, under root of the trees, in dangerous places and putting their lives on the line for deathless? What about: Jhana is the path to awakening - MN36 ""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 "Udàyi, these are the five strands of sensual pleasures: What five? Pleasant agreeable forms cognizable by eye consciousness, arousing fondness and delight. Sound cognizable by ear consciousness. Smells cognizable by nose consciousness. Tastes cognizable by tongue consciousness and touches cognizable by body consciousness, arousing fondness and delight. Udàyi, these are the five strands of sensual pleasures. Whatever pleasure and pleasantness arises on account of these five strands of sensual pleasures, are said to be low pleasures, of the ordinary man, not the pleasures of the nobles ones. These should not be practised, developed and made much. I say this pleasantness should be feared. Udàyi, the bhikkhu, secluded from sensual desires and thoughts of demerit, with thoughts and thought processes, and with joy and pleasantness born from seclusion, abides in the first jhana. Overcoming thoughts and thought processes, and the mind appeased and in one point, without thoughts and thought processes and with joy and pleasant born from concentration abides in the second jhana-third jhana, -- abides in the fourth jhana. This is the pleasantness of giving up, the pleasantness of seclusion, pleasantness of appeasement, the pleasantness of enlightenment, which should be practised, developed, made much and I say this pleasantness should not be feared." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/066-latukikopa\ ma-e1.html "I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the first jhana... the second jhana... the third... the fourth... the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness. I tell you, the ending of the mental fermentations depends on the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html With metta, Alex #102174 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Wed, 11/11/09, truth_aerator wrote: >A: Unfortunately I stumbled about something that made me stop reading. It was a passage by KS(?) compiled by Sarah about TV. "Some people are afraid to watch TV, but now we are lost in the concepts with no awareness." http://www.zolag. co.uk/phras. html ... S: [Pls note that it's not "a passage', but a one-sentence quote by K.Sujin (Sri Lanka '77) from a series of quotes on Alan Weller's website.] Fortunately, unfortunately you stopped reading.....Perhaps it's fortunate because it gives us all an opportunity to reflect further. What is the reality now? Annoyance? Visible object? Seeing? This is the world appearing which can be known. Anything we see or hear can be a condition for satipatthana to arise and develop if there is sufficient understanding. Isn't the KS sentence true? Aren't we're lost in our dream or fantasy-world about what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted and touched? What is the difference? Anytime, anytime at all, there can be awareness of the reality appearing, such as visible object, seeing, thinking or aversion, such as when we read something we dislike. The more understanding there is of such realities, the less inclined to think in terms of special occasions, special situations for having/not-having awareness. There are only ever the presently conditioned namas and rupas after all - just one appearing at a time which can be known. Just as I quoted the Buddha's words with regard to monks: [Vinaya, Vol X, "Book of the Discipline", Part 1, "Formal Meeting", X 1, 1-2, Horner transl.]: "'Enough, Devadatta,' he said. 'Whoever wishes let him be a forest-dweller; whoever wishes, let him dwell in the neighbourhood of a village; whoever wishes, let him be a beggar for alms; whoever wishes, let him accept an invitation; whoever wishes, let him wear rags taken from the dust-heap; whoever wishes, let him accept a householder's robes. For eight months, Devadatta, lodging at the foot of a tree is permitted by me. [i.e. not in the four months of the rains.] Fish and flesh are pure in respect of three points: if they are not seen, heard or suspected (to have been killed for him).' " So we can say for us lay-people, 'Whoever wishes, let him/her sit in silence; whoever wishes, let him/her watch TV; whoever wishes, let him/her go shopping....go out for lunch.....pick up a dhamma book....sit in a forest...'. There can be awareness anytime, any place if we understand what awareness is, what the objects of awareness are, clearly understanding namas and rupas as conditioned, not belonging to anyone, not in anyone's control. Craving is not abandoned by turning off the TV and living in a forest. It is abandoned only through the development of right understanding: SN35:63. (Bodhi transl): " 'Migajala, even though a bhikkhu who dwells thus resorts to forests and groves, to remote lodgings where there are few sounds and little noise, desolate, hidden from people, appropriate for seclusion, he is still called one dwelling with a partner. For what reason? Because craving is his partner, and he has not abandoned it; therefore he is called one dwelling with a partner.... <...> 'Migajala, even though a bhikkhu who dwells thus lives in the vicinity of a village, associating with bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, with male and female lay followers, with kings and royal ministers, with sectarian teachers and their disciples, he is still called a lone dweller. For what reason? Because craving is his partner and he has abandoned it; therefore he is called a lone dweller.' " Metta Sarah ====== #102175 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] The Buddha's last word sarahprocter... Dear Colette, --- On Sat, 7/11/09, colette wrote: >Sarah, are you suggesting what the Buddha's first words when he immerged from the incubator? ... S: No! Metta Sarah ===== #102176 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] characteristic of citta sarahprocter... Hi Howard & all, A belated typo correction... obviously "firmly muddled" at the time... --- On Sat, 7/11/09, sarah abbott wrote: " 'Having seen a form with mindfulness muddled, Attending to the pleasing sign, One experiences it with infatuated mind And remains tightly holding to it.' "When, firmly muddled, one sees a form, ... S: This last line, clearly, should have read: "When, firmly mindful, one sees a form, One is not inflamed by lust for forms; One experiences it with dispassionate mind And does not remain holding it tightly." (SN 35:95, Maalunkyaputta Sutta, Bodhi transl.) Metta Sarah ======= #102177 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhikkhuni Ordination re-establishment of original lineage ~ Aja sarahprocter... Hi Dieter, --- On Sun, 8/11/09, Dieter Moeller wrote: >may I ask for a little dance ...? ;-) ... S: Of course ;-) As you know by now, I'm seldom in tune with the music, usually running a few steps behind everyone else.... but you're used to that... ... >there are 2 passages from your recent messages I like to talk about: >>S: ....there have certainly been many "suggesters" here over the years who've proclaimed that forest-dwelling is recommended by the Buddha for the development of samatha and vipassana.... .... >D: there is hardly any doubt that the Buddha recommended the forest /remote dwelling , finally that was the place of his enlightenment. .. and there is plenty of evidence in sutta sources, but of course this recommendation was for those ready for it so that 'the forest would not take over ..'. It is the idle place a monk may choose to develop 'samatha and vipassana'.. .and as such the tradition of forest monks is not without reason higly praised . ... S: Highly praised and recommended for those with little attachment to sense objects, who can live peacefully, contentedly, developing samatha and vipassana at such a time, in such a place. Like Maha-Kassapa and those who followed the dhutangas - He didn't recommend this for all monks or for any lay-people - this was the point of the comment. ... >Usually lay people don 't have such opportunity and therefore have not been addressed .. ... S: I think it's more a question of accumulations and attachments than of opportunities. Many monks who had such opportunities were advised against it, because such a way of living is not conducive to calm and insight for most of us. I'd be glad to hear your comments, Dieter. ... >D: from your exchange with Scott: >>S: "- the bhikkhuni ordination issue.... How does it help one's development of understanding? " >Scott: I don't worry about it. I think it is simply the decline of the Dhamma and how worldly notions are exchanged for Dhamma. Rather than accept that the lineage died out, people get caught up in thoughts about women and patriarchy, and rights, and politics and religion and authority. I think of all the women and their attainments as depicted in the series that connie offered and have no worries about women being exempted from anything real the Dhamma promises. The whole thing totally misses the point as far as I'm concerned. ... >D: I think the development of understanding includes as well taking care of the Sangha , in which each Buddhist has taken refuge as well. ... S: What is the Sangha we take refuge in? From: SN55:1 Wheel-Turning Monarch, Sotapattisamyutta (Connected Discourses on Stream-Entry). B.Bodhi translates the relevant lines as: “He possesses confirmed confidence in the Sangha thus: ‘The Sangha of the Blessed One’s disciples is practising the good way, practising the straight way, practising the true way, practising the proper way.......†Here, ‘practising the true way’ (‘practiced methodically’/ ‘practiced insightfully’ above) are translations of “~Naaya-pa.tipannoâ€. The PTS Pali dict gives: ‘~nayapa.tipanna’ - ‘walking in the right path’ ‘pa.tipanna’ means ‘entered upon the path’, a ‘pa.tipannaka’ is path-attainer is one ‘who had reached one of the 4 supramundane paths of holinesss (ariya-puggala)’ (Nyantiloka). ‘~naya’ means ‘right or true’. S: In other words, in the highest sense, it refers to the wisdom of the ariyan disciples who've followed the Buddha's path. The bhikkhus and Sangha we respect are those who follow the Teachings as found in the entire Tipitaka. This is why we pay respect to the Sangha as a whole, not to individuals. ... >And one may question whether a general decline of the Dhamma is not also due to the way followers pay attention to signs of decay , e.g. closing ears and eyes to public disputes which disturbs the harmony of the Sangha .. ... S: An interesting comment. Plenty on the harmony of the Sangha in the Vinaya, Cullavagga, but for a shorter quote that may be relevant: AN 5s, (78) "Fear in the way (b) (PTS transl.): "Moreover, monks, the monk reflects thus: Now the Order lives in friendly fellowship together, finding comfort in one teaching; but the time will come when the Order will be rent: and when that happens, not easy is it to turn to the Buddhas' word, not easy things are the forest wilderness, the outland bed and seat, to seek. Ere that state come - unwelcome, undesired, unloved - lo! I will put forth energy against that time even to attain the unattained, to master the unmastered, to realize the unrealized, and of that state possessed I will dwell comforted even though the Order be rent. "Monks, this is the fifth fear in the way...." S: In other words, the harmony will always be disturbed, so this is a reminder to develop insight now. The first four "fears in the way" given in the sutta refer to: 1) when we lose our youth and are overcome by old age, 2) when we lose our health and are overcome by sickness, 3) when we lose our food supplies and have to move to dwell in crowds to cope with famine, 4) when we lose our lay friendly fellowship with others and live in fear of robbers and the like and again have to move to live in crowds for safety. ... >I am glad to be informed about such incidents in particular when a wellknown monk has been expelled from his group ( Ajahn Cha's forest tradition) due to his involvement of Bhikkhuni ordination and appreciate to discuss such issues . >DSG isn't limited to discuss Abhidhamma respectively Ajahn Sujin's Dhamma interpretation , is it? ... S: Of course not:-) I think we can also reflect on the Vinaya or any aspects of the teachings helpfully. As I said, there is plenty in the Cullavagga and other parts of the Vinaya about disruptions to harmony and the settling of disputes. There is nothing new about any of this - plenty too about bhikkhuni ordination. I think it's incredibly difficult for a bhikkhu to follow the Vinaya and full Patimokkha as intended today. Happy to discuss any of the above further with you, Dieter. You always give me food for reflection and it doesn't matter whether we agree or disagree on all details. Metta Sarah p.s so many points here - pls feel free to break up into different threads if you think it would be better... ====== #102178 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 11-nov-2009, om 2:14 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > I find it strange to insist that we can gain real insight, without > hard practice in the comfort of our own homes, unlike monks of old > striving for Arhatship and putting their life on the line for > attainments. --------- N: I have some trouble understanding context and remarks about it. What is your difficulty? We do not think of arahatship yet and we are not monks but laypeople, cooking, shopping, etc. should we change our lifestyle and behave like monks? That is not the middle way. When we think of hard practice we may take this for self, doing something. But I do not deny the role of right effort, it arises because of conditions. What is the condition? More and more understanding that life is naama and ruupa. Right effort and the other factors of the eightfold Path accompany right understanding of the eightfold Path. They all arise together with the citta that develops the Path, just for a moment and then fall away. The Path is not some abstract theory in a book, it is actual, here and now. This is in the text of the Abhidhamma: Dhammasangani: 89: Sometimes the Path is sixfold, when the occasion arises for abstention from either wrong action, wrong speech or wrong livelihood. Only when the Path is lokuttara all eight factors arise together, since the bases of wrong action, wrong speech or wrong livelihood are eradicated by the magga-citta, depending on the stage of enlightenment that has been reached. Thus, I think that right effort becomes stronger as right understanding develops and sees more and more clearly that life, person, all phenomena that appear are only dhammas, naama and ruupa. -------- Nina. #102179 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] characteristic of citta sarahprocter... HI Howard & all, --- On Sat, 7/11/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: What I understand is that the passage is pointing to how the Buddha does not proliferate with lobha (of any kind) about what is experienced. This is in contrast to worldlings who cling to the signs and details of what is experienced. ============ ========= ========= == >Yes, but the passage is explicit as to what is not "proliferated" . Had his passage been said by Nagarjuna, many would call it "Mahayana nonsense"! ;-) ... S: :-) As I recall, the word used in the text was "ma~n~nanaa". As B.Bodhi explains in his introduction to his translation of the Muulapariyaaya Sutta where it's also used, ma~n~nanaa always refers to unwholesome thinking involving a wrong grasp of the object, such as the visible object seen, the sound heard or any other sense object experienced. He writes: "Ma~n~nanaa is distortional thinking - thinking which, under the domination of defiled predilection, imputes to its object properties or relational implications grounded not in the thing itself but in the constructive activity of subjective imagination. It is the tendency of thought to misconstrue its object, building upon the preceding perceptual perversion to apprehend the object in a mode contrary to its actual nature." S: In other words, we're talking about wrong view and the perversions of perception here. For the Buddha and the arahats, there are no more perversions of perception about what is seen, heard and so on. As we read in the beginning of the Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the worldling "conceives (himself as) earth (pathavii); he conceives (himself) in earth; he conceives (himself apart) from earth; he conceives 'earth as mine'; he delights in earth. What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him, I declare." Isn't this like now - taking the visible object or hardness for being 'my arm' or 'a computer', or 'my ache' or 'a noise outside that lasts'.....Lots of perversions and proliferations, lots of distorted thinking throughout the day, regardless of whether we think of ourselves as "Theravada", "Mahayana" or any other labels, wouldn't you say? Metta Sarah ====== #102180 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: present moment, to Ken H. sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- On Sat, 7/11/09, kenhowardau wrote: >....When we understand them all we will have a firm understanding of the conditioned dhamma that is actually appearing now at one of the six door-ways. It will be seen as anicca, dukkha and anatta - not worth a tinker's cuss. :-) ... S: :-) Good to be reading some more of your 'delicate' sign-offs again:-) Metta Sarah ======= #102181 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 12:53 am Subject: [dsg] The Buddha's Path, Ch 4, no 4. nilovg Dear friends, There can be merely one citta at a time, experiencing one object. It seems that several cittas can occur at the same time, but in reality this is not so. Different cittas, such as seeing and hearing, experience different objects and are dependent on different doorways. Seeing, hearing and thinking are different cittas arising at different moments. We can notice that seeing is not hearing, that they are different experiences. If they would occur at the same time we would not be able to know that they are different. Cittas arise and fall away very rapidly; the citta which has fallen away is immediately succeeded by the next citta. It seems that seeing, hearing or thinking can last for a while, but in reality they exist merely for an extremely short moment. There is a great variety of cittas which arise because of their appropriate conditions. There are cittas which see, hear, experience objects through the other senses and think about these objects. The cittas which see, hear, smell, taste or experience an object through the bodysense neither like nor dislike the object, they do not react to the object in an unwholesome or a wholesome way. These types of citta are neither kusala, wholesome, nor akusala, unwholesome. However, shortly after they have fallen away there are cittas which react to the objects experienced through the senses either in an unwholesome way or in a wholesome way. Thus, there are kusala cittas, there are akusala cittas, and there are cittas which are neither kusala nor akusala. Time and again there is seeing or hearing and on account of the object which is experienced there are cittas which are either kusala or akusala. When there is thinking, there is either kusala citta or akusala citta. There are also cittas which motivate good or bad actions and speech. When we give a present there are wholesome cittas, kusala cittas with generosity which motivate our giving. When we speak harsh words, there are unwholesome cittas, akusala cittas with anger which motivate our speech. ******* Nina. #102182 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 10:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] characteristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/11/2009 2:29:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard & all, A belated typo correction... obviously "firmly muddled" at the time... ---------------------------------------- ;-)) ---------------------------------------- --- On Sat, 7/11/09, sarah abbott wrote: " 'Having seen a form with mindfulness muddled, Attending to the pleasing sign, One experiences it with infatuated mind And remains tightly holding to it.' "When, firmly muddled, one sees a form, ... S: This last line, clearly, should have read: "When, firmly mindful, one sees a form, One is not inflamed by lust for forms; One experiences it with dispassionate mind And does not remain holding it tightly." (SN 35:95, Maalunkyaputta Sutta, Bodhi transl.) Metta Sarah ========================= Meanwhile, missing muddled metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102183 From: "Lukas" Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 4:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? szmicio Dear Nina, Alex > But I do not deny the role of right effort, it arises because of > conditions. What is the condition? More and more understanding that > life is naama and ruupa. L: right effort is nama, and without right understanding that is never samma vayamo. > Right effort and the other factors of the eightfold Path accompany > right understanding of the eightfold Path. They all arise together > with the citta that develops the Path, just for a moment and then > fall away. The Path is not some abstract theory in a book, it is > actual, here and now. > > This is in the text of the Abhidhamma: Dhammasangani: 89: > Right view, right thinking, right endeavour, right mindfulness, right > concentration.> L: pa~ncagiko maggo is another distinction we used to forget. viratti dhammas can arise with panna or not. Just different conditions. Siila is the only thing that is not needed to pa~n~na. In life a lot of people is very aggitated due to right siila. But they think it's right siila and it cannot be right without panna first. if it would be right, then no poeple and things in such siila moments. Without panna there can be only siila of samatha level. this is viratii dhamma that is conditioned. It arises with ti or dvihetuka kusala citta. distinction on 5-fold and 8-fold path is vibhanga on panna with viratti dhammas and panna associated with avirati dhammas. No need to take this fleeting (viparinamam) refrainings(viratti dhammas) for our own. It's all conditioned. Not ours. They just arise and fall away. > Sometimes the Path is sixfold, when the occasion arises for > abstention from either wrong action, wrong speech or wrong > livelihood. L: you mean eightfold path. No sixfold as far as I know. > Thus, I think that right effort becomes stronger as right > understanding develops and sees more and more clearly that life, > person, all phenomena that appear are only dhammas, naama and ruupa. L: Without panna that distincts chatacteristic of nama and ruupa, there cannot be right effort. How it can be right, without panna? right effort has its object nama or ruupa. Best wishes Lukas #102184 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] characteristic of citta upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/11/2009 3:39:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: HI Howard & all, --- On Sat, 7/11/09, upasaka@... wrote: >>S: What I understand is that the passage is pointing to how the Buddha does not proliferate with lobha (of any kind) about what is experienced. This is in contrast to worldlings who cling to the signs and details of what is experienced. ============ ========= ========= == >Yes, but the passage is explicit as to what is not "proliferated" . Had his passage been said by Nagarjuna, many would call it "Mahayana nonsense"! ;-) ... S: :-) As I recall, the word used in the text was "ma~n~nanaa". As B.Bodhi explains in his introduction to his translation of the Muulapariyaaya Sutta where it's also used, ma~n~nanaa always refers to unwholesome thinking involving a wrong grasp of the object, such as the visible object seen, the sound heard or any other sense object experienced. He writes: "Ma~n~nanaa is distortional thinking - thinking which, under the domination of defiled predilection, imputes to its object properties or relational implications grounded not in the thing itself but in the constructive activity of subjective imagination. It is the tendency of thought to misconstrue its object, building upon the preceding perceptual perversion to apprehend the object in a mode contrary to its actual nature." S: In other words, we're talking about wrong view and the perversions of perception here. For the Buddha and the arahats, there are no more perversions of perception about what is seen, heard and so on. -------------------------------------------------- I've always understood ma~n~nanaa to refer to atta-defiled mentality, beset by reification of subject and object. -------------------------------------------------- As we read in the beginning of the Muulapariyaaya Sutta, the worldling "conceives (himself as) earth (pathavii); he conceives (himself) in earth; he conceives (himself apart) from earth; he conceives 'earth as mine'; he delights in earth. What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him, I declare." Isn't this like now - taking the visible object or hardness for being 'my arm' or 'a computer', or 'my ache' or 'a noise outside that lasts'.... -------------------------------------------------- It's more than that. For there not to be conceived of a seen, an unseen, a to-be-seen, or a seer is to thoroughly reject reification. ---------------------------------------------------- .Lots of perversions and proliferations, lots of distorted thinking throughout the day, regardless of whether we think of ourselves as "Theravada", "Mahayana" or any other labels, wouldn't you say? --------------------------------------------------- Yes. -------------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah ============================== With metta, Howard The Aggregates are Void /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) #102185 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 4:59 am Subject: Re: another understanding / to Freawaru freawaru80 Dear Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > > As I understand it, anatta means there is nothing other than nama and > rupa. How does this agree with DO? DO describes nama and rupa being conditioned by consciousness and consciousness being conditioned by Mental Concocting and Mental Concocting conditioned by Ignorance. So neither consciousness nor Mental Concocting nor Ignorance and Wisdom are nama or rupa. Nama and rupa condition sense bases, but I never saw a sutta saying that namarupa conditions Ignorance. > Therefore, it is not only the existence of Almighty God that is > denied. Anatta is the ultimate absence of anything and everything - > other than nama or rupa. So that would include me, you, God, a > grasshopper, a leaf, a motor car - anything. Nama rupa constructs me, you, grasshopper etc. As long as there is namarupa those things (me, you, grasshopper) exist. Just because one sees only electrons and protons when using a really good microscope does not mean that there is no car. > The only reason it has nothing to do with you and I existing is because > you and I never existed in the first place. You and I are nothing more > than concepts thought up by namas. Here you probably define self=personality? You see, in meditation one can really go down to the level where the conceptualisation happens. I have seen this so I know it exists. How can I define myself as those concepts I saw construed? It just makes no sense to me. Also, the personality changes moment for moment, it is not stable, I would be born many times a second. What would be the point of defining myself in this way? > When there is satipatthana there is the knowledge, "There is only this > conditioned dhamma here!" Or, to put it another way; when panna directly > experiences the anatta characteristic of a dhamma it sees a void in the > place where atta (anything more than that dhamma) might have been. What else should there be but dhamma? Except sunnata of course. Sunnata is no dhamma. Sunnata is defined as the space in which dhamma arises and falls. From just a theoretical point of view: what kind of "anything more" might there be? > -------------------------- > KH: > > When we know that all dhammas are anatta, we know that there is > no "control" over them. They are conditioned 100% by other dhammas. > There is no self - no you or me - to influence them in any way > whatsoever. > > F: > Of course I can influence dhammas. I can control whether I walk or > stand, I can control what I say, I can influence any dhamma I wish (in > principle I mean, takes iddhis to influence some of them). > --------------------------- > > No, you have misunderstood. Satipatthana (right understanding of > ultimate reality) is the knowledge that there are *only dhammas.* Dhammas I can control! Dhamma I can influence - for better rebirth, for worse rebirth, for Iddhis, for Wisdom, for Buddhahood. Sati-sampajanna includes control over what one understands. > Dhammas are coming and going right now, purely by themselves. There can > be the illusion of a self that is doing things (walking, standing etc ) > but that is just namas thinking. Ultimately, there no self, no walking, > no standing - just dhammas arising and falling away. This I agree with. But it is not that much of an insight. Some months ago my eight year old daughter said (while we walked next to each other): "Mommy, isn't is odd that my body walks all on it's own. I don't need to do anything." If that is an-atta it does not require eons of practice to understand it. > Maybe so, but let me assure you this 'other understanding' that is > discussed here at DSG is not a new one; it definitely is taught in the > ancient Pali texts. Definitely? That an-atta means one cannot control one's form (no vikubbana iddhi), no ariya-iddhi (the power of controlling one's ideas in such a way that one may consider something not repulsive as repulsive and something repulsive as not repulsive). That there is no knower? That nama and rupa condition Ignorance and Wisdom? Or worse, that Ignorance and Wisdom are either nama or rupa? That one does not need to do kasina practice to reach samadhi with the elements and gain the iddhis, those accomplishments that show one is on the right path? Can you give an example of such a text, please? > Over the years there have been people here who have doubted this way of > understanding and who have demanded to see it in the texts. And so they > have been shown where it is clearly expressed in various ancient > commentaries. This has caused them to reject the ancient commentaries. > And so they have then been shown that the Abhidhamma is saying the same > thing as the commentaries. Then they have claimed that the Abhidhamma > Pitaka was a "later addition" to the original Pali canon. And so they > have been shown how Abhidhamma can be found in the Sutta Pitaka as well. > Some people have then gone so far as to then reject certain suttas as > "later additions." I see. But as we both know there are always several interpretations possible for EVERY term one reads, even more so in a text written in a language centuries ago, using terms from a culture long gone, set in a thinking pattern of people no more. It is not as if those commentaries are written in modern English using the mind set of people born and grown in a mixture of Christian lore and scientific reasoning. For example one has to know that in those times atta (Self) was used as a synonym for God. To use the term self as we use it today is misleading and not how the author of those texts intended it to be meant. > In any case, the fact remains that *all* suttas can be understood in a > way that is consistent with all other parts of the Tipitaka and its > ancient commentaries. I do not know all suttas and all commentaries so I cannot comment here. Freawaru #102186 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhamma Diaries sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- On Sat, 7/11/09, Lukas wrote: > As Lukas suggested, we don't wish to condition dosa, but would also like t>S:o give helpful pointers if we can. Again the problem lies in the expectations and lack of detachment to and understanding of what is conditioned at this moment, I find. >L: The problem is that we consider everything as 'we'. Even doing kusala/akusala all the time we think about us. This is the true misery. ... S: Very true! ... >I like to be reminded about sotapanna. I said once I cant develop kusala with such great assistance of Self. But when I am reminded on no Self, then kusala appears. For sure that is my way. I dont need to belive anyone here on the group. I know that from my experience. I can never give Ajahn more attention to some other teacher. But what she was saying was so according to my daily life experience. ... S: Yes, same, same... ... >No world of people and things. Just different conditioned dhatus. Even there is no time to appreciate it in life. The right understandig is developed very gradualy. First then needs to be right view. Hearing right dhamma with yoniso manasikara. ... S: Yes, and then as I was saying to Alex, right understanding can slip in anytime at all....unexpectedly. At such moments the citta is calm with no thought of Self doing/not doing anything.. I'm glad to read all your very helpful reminders to everyone, Lukas... Metta Sarah ====== #102187 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:34 am Subject: Re: Reply to Ken O /with a new subject heading freawaru80 Dear Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Ken, Alex (and all), > > It's interesting that your different interpretations of this sutta passage are also different from my interpreation :) I wonder what's the classical interpretation. > > My understanding was that the first 3 paths have both jhana and insight development in whatever combination (psychic powers being just an occasional by-product of jhana, and so, not the point of the sutta) long before the first lokuttara citta. > > While the fourth path is what is usually referred to as "dry insight path", the main difference being that there is no development of jhana prior to the first lokuttara citta, but jhana does occur "spontaneously" with the lokuttara citta, but not afterwards. I think so, too. The describtion is that the practitioner has the mind well under control, this means that stable concentration is present to a certain degree. This is a typical requirement for sati-sampajanna, a stable concentration. To guard. > The main consequence of this again has nothing to do with psychic powers but with the ability to re-experienece the phala citta (nibbana) afterwards - dry insighter cannot do it because he has no mastery of jhana, while those who do (the other 3 paths), can re-experience it. > > Also, > > K: As I understand it, the arahants who attained jhana mastery either > > before or after their enlightenment had psychic powers. According to the instruction of the Visuddhimagga the iddhis do not arise from just jhana. It is a bit more complicated. One has to use the fourth jhana to absorb into the elements, repeatedly until mastery, to gain control. This control over the elements is the iddhi. > > > > "Ven. Ananda said: "Friends, whoever — monk or nun — declares > > the attainment of arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of > > one or another of four paths. Which four? > > > > > > insight preceded by tranquillity > > > tranquillity preceded by insight > > > tranquillity in tandem with insight > > > "Then there is the case where a monk's mind has its restlessness > > concerning the Dhamma [Comm: the corruptions of insight] well under > > control. There comes a time when his mind grows steady inwardly, settles > > down, and becomes unified & concentrated. This is identical to the instructions of Mahasi Sayadaw. Sati-sampajanna grows, steady inwardly. One has sown and waits for the fruit to be ready. > In him the path is born. He > > follows that path, develops it, pursues it. As he follows the path, > > developing it & pursuing it — his fetters are abandoned, his > > obsessions destroyed. > > > > > > "Whoever — monk or nun — declares the attainment of > > arahantship in my presence, they all do it by means of one or another of > > these four paths." > Freawaru #102188 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? nilovg Dear Lukas (and Alex), Op 11-nov-2009, om 13:05 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > N: Sometimes the Path is sixfold, when the occasion arises for > > abstention from either wrong action, wrong speech or wrong > > livelihood. > > L: you mean eightfold path. No sixfold as far as I know. -------- N: The five factors plus one of the three abstentions makes six. When the path is not lokuttara it is fivefold or sixfold. Only when it is lokuttara all three abstentions arise togethet and it is eightfold. All this makes a great deal of sense to me. The Path is not seen as something that exists in a text. No, it arises from moment to moment and all sobhana cetasikas that are part of it are in this way accumulated. The object of the Path factors are naama and ruupa appearing at this moment. The Dhammasangani text repeats : at that time, tasmi.m samaye, thus at a certain moment when the Path factors arise. Very actual. I repeat the text with the Pali: Dhammasangani 89 about the fivefold Path: Pali: Further on we read about sammaavaayaamo, Dhsg 92:< The mental inception of energy which there is on that occasion [N: note: at that time, tasmi.m samaye, a moment!] the striving and onward effort, the exertion and endeavour, the zeal and ardour the vigour and fortitude, the state of unfaltering effort, the state of sustained desire, the state of unflinching endurance and solid grip of the burden, energy, energy as faculty and as power, right endeavour-this is the energy that there then is.> -------- > > > Thus, I think that right effort becomes stronger as right > > understanding develops and sees more and more clearly that life, > > person, all phenomena that appear are only dhammas, naama and ruupa. > > L: Without panna that distincts chatacteristic of nama and ruupa, > there cannot be right effort. How it can be right, without panna? > right effort has its object nama or ruupa. ------- N: quite right. Naama or ruupa are its object, just for a moment. Same for right concentration. Naama or ruupa are its object. Citta and all cetasikas arising together, the Pathfactors included, experience the same object, naama or ruupa. ******* Nina. #102189 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 9:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > --- On Wed, 11/11/09, truth_aerator wrote: > >A: Unfortunately I stumbled about something that made me stop reading. It was a passage by KS(?) compiled by Sarah about TV. > > "Some people are afraid to watch TV, but now we are lost in the concepts with no awareness." > http://www.zolag. co.uk/phras. html > ... > S: [Pls note that it's not "a passage', but a one-sentence quote by >K.Sujin (Sri Lanka '77) from a series of quotes on Alan Weller's >website.] I disagree with that one-sentence quote and similar sentences found on this site. > > Fortunately, unfortunately you stopped reading.....Perhaps it's >fortunate because it gives us all an opportunity to reflect further. >What is the reality now? Annoyance? Visible object? Seeing? This is >the world appearing which can be known. Anything we see or hear can >be a condition for satipatthana to arise and develop if there is >sufficient understanding. Again, some situations are better for development of insight and some are not suitable. Hell beings cannot develop insight, even though they have namarupa appearing "now" and are very aware of the painful present moment. > Isn't the KS sentence true? Aren't we're lost in our dream or >fantasy-world about what is seen, heard, smelt, tasted and touched? >What is the difference? IMHO whenever one does not develop letting go, one is under the power of avijja. > Anytime, anytime at all, there can be awareness of the reality >appearing, such as visible object, seeing, thinking or aversion, >such as when we read something we dislike. Even in hell realms? > > SN35:63. (Bodhi transl): > > " 'Migajala, even though a bhikkhu who dwells thus resorts to forests and > groves, to remote lodgings where there are few sounds and little noise, > desolate, hidden from people, appropriate for seclusion, he is still > called one dwelling with a partner. For what reason? Because craving is > his partner, and he has not abandoned it; therefore he is called one > dwelling with a partner.... > > <...> > 'Migajala, even though a bhikkhu who dwells thus lives in the vicinity of > a village, associating with bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, with male and female > lay followers, with kings and royal ministers, with sectarian teachers and > their disciples, he is still called a lone dweller. For what reason? > Because craving is his partner and he has abandoned it; therefore he is > called a lone dweller.' " > > Metta > > Sarah > ====== > That bhikkhu is an Arahant or Anagamin!, not a worldling! "craving is his partner and he has abandoned it" That means one is either Anagami or Arhat. What were those forest dwelling monks thinking? Why let go of comfortable household and live in wild forests full of hardship and danger? With metta, Alex #102190 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 9:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Nina, all "There's no way that one delighting in company can touch even momentary release." Heeding the Solar Kinsman's words, wander alone like a rhinoceros... Abandoning offspring, spouse, father, mother, riches, grain, relatives, & sensual pleasures altogether, wander alone like a rhinoceros. "This is a bondage, a baited hook. There's little happiness here, next to no satisfaction, all the more suffering & pain." Knowing this, circumspect, wander alone like a rhinoceros. " - Snp 1.3 Can you please explain how you accomplish kaya, citta, upadhi seclusion? How can one have kaya or citta viveka while watching tv for example? Is it even possible or desirable to do so? See MN66 "All of you have given up singing and dancing, the playing of musical instruments and the watching of entertainments, which are stumbling blocks to that which is wholesome. You do not bedeck yourselves with ornaments, flowers or perfume. For all of this day and night, in this manner, you will be known as having followed the arahants" "All of you have given up lying on large or high beds. You are content with low beds or beds made of grass. For all of this day and night, in this manner, you will be known as having followed the arahants, " Pleasure of the 5 senses: "Whatever pleasure and pleasantness arises on account of these five strands of sensual pleasures, are said to be low pleasures, of the ordinary man, not the pleasures of the nobles ones. These should not be practised, developed and made much. I say this pleasantness should be feared." Pleasantness of 1-4 Jhana: "abides in the fourth jhana. This is the pleasantness of giving up, the pleasantness of seclusion, pleasantness of appeasement, the pleasantness of enlightenment, which should be practised, developed, made much and I say this pleasantness should not be feared." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/066-latukikopa\ ma-e1.html The lone dweller quote "SN35:63" applies to That bhikkhu is an Arahant or Anagamin!, not a worldling! "craving is his partner and he has abandoned it" That means one is either Anagami or Arhat. The Buddha did teach: ""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 "For a sociable person there are allurements; on the heels of allurement, this pain. Seeing allurement's drawback, wander alone like a rhinoceros. One whose mind is enmeshed in sympathy for friends & companions, neglects the true goal. Seeing this danger in intimacy, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Like spreading bamboo, entwined, is concern for offspring & spouses. Like a bamboo sprout, unentangling, wander alone like a rhinoceros. As a deer in the wilds, unfettered, goes for forage wherever it wants: the wise person, valuing freedom, wanders alone like a rhinoceros. In the midst of companions — when staying at home, when going out wandering — you are prey to requests. Valuing the freedom wander alone like a rhinoceros. There is sporting & love in the midst of companions, & abundant fondness for offspring. Feeling disgust at the prospect of parting from those who'd be dear, wander alone like a rhinoceros. " "Calamity, tumor, misfortune, disease, an arrow, a danger for me." Seeing this danger in sensual strands, wander alone like a rhinoceros. Cold & heat, hunger & thirst, wind & sun, horseflies & snakes: enduring all these, without exception, wander alone like a rhinoceros. "There's no way that one delighting in company can touch even momentary release." Heeding the Solar Kinsman's words, wander alone like a rhinoceros. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.03.than.html With metta, Alex #102191 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 5:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: another understanding / to Freawaru upasaka_howard Hi, Freawaru (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/11/2009 8:01:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, freawaru80@... writes: Dear Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > > As I understand it, anatta means there is nothing other than nama and > rupa. How does this agree with DO? DO describes nama and rupa being conditioned by consciousness and consciousness being conditioned by Mental Concocting and Mental Concocting conditioned by Ignorance. So neither consciousness nor Mental Concocting nor Ignorance and Wisdom are nama or rupa. -------------------------------------------------- That does not follow, Freawaru. The fact that consciousness, intention, mental proliferation, and ignorance are singled out for special mention as phenomena which condition nama and rupa doesn't imply that they are not themselves nama. The ARE, in fact, nama. Analogical Note: Consciousness is conditioned by consciousness. Surely that doesn't imply that consciousness is not consciousness! ------------------------------------------------- Nama and rupa condition sense bases, but I never saw a sutta saying that namarupa conditions Ignorance. ------------------------------------------------ Craving and attachment are nama, and they certainly condition ignorance. The 12-link "chain" of D.O. is, in fact, a cycle. ----------------------------------------------- > Therefore, it is not only the existence of Almighty God that is > denied. Anatta is the ultimate absence of anything and everything - > other than nama or rupa. So that would include me, you, God, a > grasshopper, a leaf, a motor car - anything. Nama rupa constructs me, you, grasshopper etc. As long as there is namarupa those things (me, you, grasshopper) exist. Just because one sees only electrons and protons when using a really good microscope does not mean that there is no car. ----------------------------------------------- There are cars. But what is the nature of a car? Any car is just a changing, conceptually- assembled collection of mutually interacting phenomena that function together in a certain (well known) fashion - a mind-made assemblage mistakenly thought of as a single, mind-independent, persisting "thing." -------------------------------------------------------- > The only reason it has nothing to do with you and I existing is because > you and I never existed in the first place. You and I are nothing more > than concepts thought up by namas. Here you probably define self=personality? You see, in meditation one can really go down to the level where the conceptualisation happens. I have seen this so I know it exists. How can I define myself as those concepts I saw construed? ------------------------------------------------------ "You" didn't see the construing. The construing occurred and the awareness of the construing also occurred, and these were and are all entirely impersonal. There simply is no construer and no observer. It is a convention to refer to a certain coherent stream of interconnected mental and physical phenomena as Freawaru, but it is only a convention. There is no identity there - no self. --------------------------------------------------- It just makes no sense to me. Also, the personality changes moment for moment, it is not stable, I would be born many times a second. What would be the point of defining myself in this way? ------------------------------------------------ Don't do the defining at all. Indeed, the change is constant, with everything instantaneously falling away and entirely ungraspable. Don't try to define or delimit what is ungraspable. ----------------------------------------------- > When there is satipatthana there is the knowledge, "There is only this > conditioned dhamma here!" Or, to put it another way; when panna directly > experiences the anatta characteristic of a dhamma it sees a void in the > place where atta (anything more than that dhamma) might have been. What else should there be but dhamma? Except sunnata of course. Sunnata is no dhamma. Sunnata is defined as the space in which dhamma arises and falls. From just a theoretical point of view: what kind of "anything more" might there be? ------------------------------------------------------ There is no "thing" called "su~n~nata." There is no emptiness-thing. There is just the fact that nothing whatsoever has/is "self". You are looking to reify the very quality shared by all phenomena of being empty of self. ---------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------- > KH: > > When we know that all dhammas are anatta, we know that there is > no "control" over them. They are conditioned 100% by other dhammas. > There is no self - no you or me - to influence them in any way > whatsoever. > > F: > Of course I can influence dhammas. I can control whether I walk or > stand, I can control what I say, I can influence any dhamma I wish (in > principle I mean, takes iddhis to influence some of them). > --------------------------- > > No, you have misunderstood. Satipatthana (right understanding of > ultimate reality) is the knowledge that there are *only dhammas.* Dhammas I can control! Dhamma I can influence - for better rebirth, for worse rebirth, for Iddhis, for Wisdom, for Buddhahood. Sati-sampajanna includes control over what one understands. --------------------------------------------------- It is just conventional speech to say that "you" can influence things. It's okay to say it, but only if you don't take it seriously, only if you fully realize that it should not be understood literally. What is literally true is that various mental factors, most especially intention, do serve as influencing conditions. ------------------------------------------------ > Dhammas are coming and going right now, purely by themselves. There can > be the illusion of a self that is doing things (walking, standing etc ) > but that is just namas thinking. Ultimately, there no self, no walking, > no standing - just dhammas arising and falling away. This I agree with. But it is not that much of an insight. Some months ago my eight year old daughter said (while we walked next to each other): "Mommy, isn't is odd that my body walks all on it's own. I don't need to do anything." If that is an-atta it does not require eons of practice to understand it. ------------------------------------------------------ Actually, it was a profound and amazing insight on your daughter's part!! ---------------------------------------------------- > Maybe so, but let me assure you this 'other understanding' that is > discussed here at DSG is not a new one; it definitely is taught in the > ancient Pali texts. Definitely? That an-atta means one cannot control one's form (no vikubbana iddhi), no ariya-iddhi (the power of controlling one's ideas in such a way that one may consider something not repulsive as repulsive and something repulsive as not repulsive). That there is no knower? ------------------------------------------------- INDEED there is no knower! -------------------------------------------------- That nama and rupa condition Ignorance and Wisdom? Or worse, that Ignorance and Wisdom are either nama or rupa? That one does not need to do kasina practice to reach samadhi with the elements and gain the iddhis, those accomplishments that show one is on the right path? ------------------------------------------- Some namas condition ignorance, and others condition wisdom! And ignorance and wisdom are certainly namas. What else? Gods? ------------------------------------------- Can you give an example of such a text, please? > Over the years there have been people here who have doubted this way of > understanding and who have demanded to see it in the texts. And so they > have been shown where it is clearly expressed in various ancient > commentaries. This has caused them to reject the ancient commentaries. > And so they have then been shown that the Abhidhamma is saying the same > thing as the commentaries. Then they have claimed that the Abhidhamma > Pitaka was a "later addition" to the original Pali canon. And so they > have been shown how Abhidhamma can be found in the Sutta Pitaka as well. > Some people have then gone so far as to then reject certain suttas as > "later additions." I see. But as we both know there are always several interpretations possible for EVERY term one reads, even more so in a text written in a language centuries ago, using terms from a culture long gone, set in a thinking pattern of people no more. It is not as if those commentaries are written in modern English using the mind set of people born and grown in a mixture of Christian lore and scientific reasoning. For example one has to know that in those times atta (Self) was used as a synonym for God. -------------------------------------------------- No, that's not quite so. 'Atman' (= Pali 'atta') and 'Brahman' were not synonyms. The first referred to the alleged personal self, and the second to the alleged Cosmic Self (or God). The core of Brahmanism was the claimed *discovery* that Atman = Brahman, or "Tat tvam asi" ("Thou art That"). ------------------------------------------------ To use the term self as we use it today is misleading and not how the author of those texts intended it to be meant. > In any case, the fact remains that *all* suttas can be understood in a > way that is consistent with all other parts of the Tipitaka and its > ancient commentaries. I do not know all suttas and all commentaries so I cannot comment here. Freawaru =================================== With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #102192 From: "freawaru80" Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 10:26 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? freawaru80 Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Nina, Sarah, Jon, KenH, > > I recently skimmed through Nina's site. > > > Unfortunately I stumbled about something that made me stop reading. It was a passage by KS(?) compiled by Sarah about TV. > > > > Question: Does one practice kaya-viveka? citta-viveka? upadhi-viveka while watching TV, cooking in a busy kitchen, shopping at the strip mall or visiting strip-club? > > Isn't there kama involved in desire to watch TV, shopping for things you do not really need, chatting at a busy restaurant (thats not required for living)? > > "Some people are afraid to watch TV, but now we are lost in the concepts with no awareness." > http://www.zolag.co.uk/phras.html > > > I like the quote by Phil: > "And as always I say that I think it seems somewhat contradictory for people to say that in this day and age people don't have enough wisdom to understand suttas on their own and yet can consider those arahant-while-cooking sort of anecdotes relevant.)" - Phil > > > I find it strange to insist that we can gain real insight, without hard practice in the comfort of our own homes, unlike monks of old striving for Arhatship and putting their life on the line for attainments. > > > With metta, > > > Alex > It is actually both. Insight just while sitting is not enough - it needs to be made stable. Accessible during all situations. That is mastery. You can see it in the Satipatthana sutta. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.nysa.html It starts with sitting (your hard practice in your room): "And how does a monk live contemplating the body in the body? Herein, monks, a monk, having gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree or to an empty place, sits down with his legs crossed, keeps his body erect and his mindfulness alert. Ever mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out. Breathing in a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a long breath"; breathing out a long breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a long breath"; breathing in a short breath, he knows, "I am breathing in a short breath"; breathing out a short breath, he knows, "I am breathing out a short breath."" But then there is a change, an intention, a program set for the future: ""Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe in," thus he trains himself. "Experiencing the whole body, I shall breathe out," thus he trains himself." I SHALL breath in (and out) - the focus of mindfullness has been changed to the whole body. Even while the focus, the object of mindfullness has been changed the awareness of the in- and out-breath stays. It is meant to stay also when changing to any other object, wether cooking or being in a strip club. "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body externally, or he lives contemplating the body in the body internally and externally.4 He lives contemplating origination factors5 in the body, or he lives contemplating dissolution factors6 in the body, or he lives contemplating origination-and-dissolution factors7 in the body." Insight requires a stable object, in this case it is the in- and out-breath. The practitioner keep this object of concentration the whole time. And eventually it will not leave when standing up from the session. It stays. When this happens concentration is stable enough for develloping insight during other activities, such as cooking. The monk actually *lives* in this way. Day and night, dreaming and dying. The concentration is stable, the object in- and out-breath being known the whole time. It does not break. Unbreakable. When it is stable one can go on to the postures. Freawaru #102193 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 11:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 11-nov-2009, om 18:39 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Heeding the Solar Kinsman's words, wander alone like a rhinoceros. ------- N: When it is one's natural inclination, it is good. But laypeople who play musical instruments (I do) need not give up what they are used to doing. There can be a beginning of awareness and understanding (I am careful here, we are beginners) of sound, or lobha, or hearing, or thinking (of the melody). Nina. #102194 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 11:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Who says what? was: another understanding nilovg Dear Freawaru, Ken, Howard, and all, I get so confused with 'who' is saying 'what'. Suggestion: use your first letter, and after your words finish with: ----- That is, if you like this. Nina. Op 11-nov-2009, om 19:00 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Hi, Freawaru (and Ken) - > > In a message dated 11/11/2009 8:01:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > freawaru80@... writes: > > Dear Ken H, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > > > > As I understand it, anatta means there is nothing other than nama > and > > rupa. > > How does this agree with DO? DO describes nama and rupa being > conditioned > by consciousness and consciousness being conditioned by Mental > Concocting > and Mental Concocting conditioned by Ignorance. So neither > consciousness nor > Mental Concocting nor Ignorance and Wisdom are nama or rupa. #102195 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Who says what? was: another understanding upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/11/2009 2:38:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Dear Freawaru, Ken, Howard, and all, I get so confused with 'who' is saying 'what'. Suggestion: use your first letter, and after your words finish with: ----- That is, if you like this. Nina. ================================ I'll try to make it clearer. With metta, Howard Seamless /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #102196 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 7:50 am Subject: Labeling "Speakers" for Nina in Howard's 11/11 Post to Freawaru (and Ken) upasaka_howard Hi, Freawaru (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/11/2009 8:01:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, freawaru80@... writes: Dear Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > K: > As I understand it, anatta means there is nothing other than nama and > rupa. F: How does this agree with DO? DO describes nama and rupa being conditioned by consciousness and consciousness being conditioned by Mental Concocting and Mental Concocting conditioned by Ignorance. So neither consciousness nor Mental Concocting nor Ignorance and Wisdom are nama or rupa. -------------------------------------------------- H: That does not follow, Freawaru. The fact that consciousness, intention, mental proliferation, and ignorance are singled out for special mention as phenomena which condition nama and rupa doesn't imply that they are not themselves nama. The ARE, in fact, nama. Analogical Note: Consciousness is conditioned by consciousness. Surely that doesn't imply that consciousness is not consciousness! ------------------------------------------------- F: Nama and rupa condition sense bases, but I never saw a sutta saying that namarupa conditions Ignorance. ------------------------------------------------ H: Craving and attachment are nama, and they certainly condition ignorance. The 12-link "chain" of D.O. is, in fact, a cycle. ----------------------------------------------- K: > Therefore, it is not only the existence of Almighty God that is > denied. Anatta is the ultimate absence of anything and everything - > other than nama or rupa. So that would include me, you, God, a > grasshopper, a leaf, a motor car - anything. F: Nama rupa constructs me, you, grasshopper etc. As long as there is namarupa those things (me, you, grasshopper) exist. Just because one sees only electrons and protons when using a really good microscope does not mean that there is no car. ----------------------------------------------- H: There are cars. But what is the nature of a car? Any car is just a changing, conceptually- assembled collection of mutually interacting phenomena that function together in a certain (well known) fashion - a mind-made assemblage mistakenly thought of as a single, mind-independent, persisting "thing." -------------------------------------------------------- K: > The only reason it has nothing to do with you and I existing is because > you and I never existed in the first place. You and I are nothing more > than concepts thought up by namas. F: Here you probably define self=personality? You see, in meditation one can really go down to the level where the conceptualisation happens. I have seen this so I know it exists. How can I define myself as those concepts I saw construed? ------------------------------------------------------ H: You didn't see the construing. The construing occurred and the awareness of the construing also occurred, and these were and are all entirely impersonal. There simply is no construer and no observer. It is a convention to refer to a certain coherent stream of interconnected mental and physical phenomena as Freawaru, but it is only a convention. There is no identity there - no self. --------------------------------------------------- F: It just makes no sense to me. Also, the personality changes moment for moment, it is not stable, I would be born many times a second. What would be the point of defining myself in this way? ------------------------------------------------ H: Don't do the defining at all. Indeed, the change is constant, with everything instantaneously falling away and entirely ungraspable. Don't try to define or delimit what is ungraspable. ----------------------------------------------- K: > When there is satipatthana there is the knowledge, "There is only this > conditioned dhamma here!" Or, to put it another way; when panna directly > experiences the anatta characteristic of a dhamma it sees a void in the > place where atta (anything more than that dhamma) might have been. F: What else should there be but dhamma? Except sunnata of course. Sunnata is no dhamma. Sunnata is defined as the space in which dhamma arises and falls. From just a theoretical point of view: what kind of "anything more" might there be? ------------------------------------------------------ H: There is no "thing" called "su~n~nata." There is no emptiness-thing. There is just the fact that nothing whatsoever has/is "self". You are looking to reify the very quality shared by all phenomena of being empty of self. ---------------------------------------------------- > -------------------------- > KH: > > When we know that all dhammas are anatta, we know that there is > no "control" over them. They are conditioned 100% by other dhammas. > There is no self - no you or me - to influence them in any way > whatsoever. > > F: > Of course I can influence dhammas. I can control whether I walk or > stand, I can control what I say, I can influence any dhamma I wish (in > principle I mean, takes iddhis to influence some of them). > --------------------------- > K: > No, you have misunderstood. Satipatthana (right understanding of > ultimate reality) is the knowledge that there are *only dhammas.* F: Dhammas I can control! Dhamma I can influence - for better rebirth, for worse rebirth, for Iddhis, for Wisdom, for Buddhahood. Sati-sampajanna includes control over what one understands. --------------------------------------------------- H: It is just conventional speech to say that "you" can influence things. It's okay to say it, but only if you don't take it seriously, only if you fully realize that it should not be understood literally. What is literally true is that various mental factors, most especially intention, do serve as influencing conditions. ------------------------------------------------ K: > Dhammas are coming and going right now, purely by themselves. There can > be the illusion of a self that is doing things (walking, standing etc ) > but that is just namas thinking. Ultimately, there no self, no walking, > no standing - just dhammas arising and falling away. F: This I agree with. But it is not that much of an insight. Some months ago my eight year old daughter said (while we walked next to each other): "Mommy, isn't is odd that my body walks all on it's own. I don't need to do anything." If that is an-atta it does not require eons of practice to understand it. ------------------------------------------------------ H: Actually, it was a profound and amazing insight on your daughter's part!! ---------------------------------------------------- K: > Maybe so, but let me assure you this 'other understanding' that is > discussed here at DSG is not a new one; it definitely is taught in the > ancient Pali texts. F: Definitely? That an-atta means one cannot control one's form (no vikubbana iddhi), no ariya-iddhi (the power of controlling one's ideas in such a way that one may consider something not repulsive as repulsive and something repulsive as not repulsive). That there is no knower? ------------------------------------------------- H: INDEED there is no knower! -------------------------------------------------- F: That nama and rupa condition Ignorance and Wisdom? Or worse, that Ignorance and Wisdom are either nama or rupa? That one does not need to do kasina practice to reach samadhi with the elements and gain the iddhis, those accomplishments that show one is on the right path? ------------------------------------------- H: Some namas condition ignorance, and others condition wisdom! And ignorance and wisdom are certainly namas. What else? Gods? ------------------------------------------- F: Can you give an example of such a text, please? K: > Over the years there have been people here who have doubted this way of > understanding and who have demanded to see it in the texts. And so they > have been shown where it is clearly expressed in various ancient > commentaries. This has caused them to reject the ancient commentaries. > And so they have then been shown that the Abhidhamma is saying the same > thing as the commentaries. Then they have claimed that the Abhidhamma > Pitaka was a "later addition" to the original Pali canon. And so they > have been shown how Abhidhamma can be found in the Sutta Pitaka as well. > Some people have then gone so far as to then reject certain suttas as > "later additions." F: I see. But as we both know there are always several interpretations possible for EVERY term one reads, even more so in a text written in a language centuries ago, using terms from a culture long gone, set in a thinking pattern of people no more. It is not as if those commentaries are written in modern English using the mind set of people born and grown in a mixture of Christian lore and scientific reasoning. For example one has to know that in those times atta (Self) was used as a synonym for God. -------------------------------------------------- H: No, that's not quite so. 'Atman' (= Pali 'atta') and 'Brahman' were not synonyms. The first referred to the alleged personal self, and the second to the alleged Cosmic Self (or God). The core of Brahmanism was the claimed *discovery* that Atman = Brahman, or "Tat tvam asi" ("Thou art That"). ------------------------------------------------ F: To use the term self as we use it today is misleading and not how the author of those texts intended it to be meant. K: > In any case, the fact remains that *all* suttas can be understood in a > way that is consistent with all other parts of the Tipitaka and its > ancient commentaries. F: I do not know all suttas and all commentaries so I cannot comment here. Freawaru =================================== With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #102197 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Satipatthana - while watching TV & cooking? egberdina Hi Nina and all, 2009/11/11 Nina van Gorkom > --------- > N: I have some trouble understanding context and remarks about it. > What is your difficulty? > > We do not think of arahatship yet and we are not monks but laypeople, > cooking, shopping, etc. > should we change our lifestyle and behave like monks? That is not the > middle way. > When we think of hard practice we may take this for self, doing > something. > But I do not deny the role of right effort, it arises because of > conditions. What is the condition? More and more understanding that > life is naama and ruupa. > ........... > What I think is a little bit scary is for a person to acknowledge that they are a beginner only, and then to proceed to spell out in great detail what it is they will have discovered once the middle way has done its work towards progress. But in truth, the only thing a beginner can come to understand is that one doesn't know what one doesn't know. Cheers Herman #102198 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Relpy to Ken O /with a new subject heading egberdina Hi KenH, 2009/11/10 kenhowardau > > All Dhamma discussion must be based on the premise that there are only > namas and rupas. Any purported Dhamma discussion that is not based on > that premise is bound to go horribly wrong. > Like you, I am a fan of brevity, keeping things concise. The more one says, the more one is likely to be wrong. So, it is vitally important to get our concise statements right, right? Rather than namas and rupas, I believe Dhamma is premised on namas/rupas. This is a huge difference. There is also nibbana, which is not namas/rupas, and without which Dhamma would be trivial. Cheers Herman #102199 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 11, 2009 2:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: another understanding / to Freawaru egberdina Hi Howard, 2009/11/12 > Hi, Freawaru (and Ken) - > > In a message dated 11/11/2009 8:01:16 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > freawaru80@... writes: > > Dear Ken H, > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" > > > > As I understand it, anatta means there is nothing other than nama and > > rupa. > > How does this agree with DO? DO describes nama and rupa being conditioned > by consciousness and consciousness being conditioned by Mental Concocting > and Mental Concocting conditioned by Ignorance. So neither consciousness > nor > Mental Concocting nor Ignorance and Wisdom are nama or rupa. > -------------------------------------------------- > That does not follow, Freawaru. The fact that consciousness, > intention, mental proliferation, and ignorance are singled out for special > mention > as phenomena which condition nama and rupa doesn't imply that they are not > themselves nama. The ARE, in fact, nama. Analogical Note: > Consciousness is > conditioned by consciousness. This last line has enormous implications, and as a general statement I totally disagree with it. Firstly because nama is never apart from rupa, and secondly something as a condition for itself makes that something it's own cause, ie self, by another name: which would be a complete denial of DO. Cheers Herman