#105400 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 1:51 pm Subject: Re: Musings13 - Prior Attainments of the Bodhisatta sarahprocter... Dear pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > pt: Thanks, there's no need to discuss this. I just thought you might find the references interesting, and if you do, then I'd be interested to know in what way. If you don't find anything interesting in them, no need to discuss. .... S: I had a couple of thoughts (without opening the books): 1. The quote you gave about the dhammanusarin and saddhanusarin seemed to be referring to sotapannas, not cula sotapannas to me. 2. Picking up on some of Ken O's good points/quotes - the example he gave of the bodhisatta who committed sexual misconduct with the King's wife, (Harika Jataka, I believe) - I think this (and others) are good examples of how the bodhisatta couldn't have reached the stage of cula-sotapanna in the life when he made the aspiration to the previous Buddha. 3. When I referred to the great wisdom (which you asked about) to be developed by the bodhisatta, I was referring particularly to the great attainments of the samma-sambuddha at the time of enlightenment. pt, if you have time and feel inclined to share part of the Kvu quotes you mentioned, I'll be happy to look at them. Also, if you have any particular qus on this or any other topic you'd like me to try and raise with KS, pls let me know. (I have one or two others of yours noted). Metta Sarah ======== #105401 From: Lukas Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 2:24 pm Subject: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) szmicio Dear Sarah, very helpful! "just thinking" I like this. She mentioned this perfectly "We are taking refuge only in 3 gems" when Nina told about her brother. I am suffering from bad deeds you can tell her, I could not change my akusalas, so I am suffering. Maybe you can stay more with this thininkg now? Is there any particular way to stop thinking? Best wishes Lukas #105402 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 5:05 pm Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" scottduncan2 Dear Jon, Regarding: J: "Yes, I think he did. The gradual discourse is a discourse that was taught to persons who were completely new to the teachings (in that lifetime). It obviously encompasses the teaching on not-self." Scott: Peripherally related, from The Discourse on the Root of Existence, The Muulapariyaaya Sutta and its Commentaries (pp. 37-38, trans. Bh. Bodhi). Here the Commentator is discussing why the Buddha described 'the worldling' prior to 'teaching the exposition of the root': "...For the teaching of the Buddha is of four kinds: (1) a teaching that has dhammas as subject and dhammas as terms of expression (dhammaadi.t.thaanaa dhammadesanaa); (2) a teaching that has individuals as subject and dhammas as terms of expression (dhammaadi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa); (3) a teaching that has individuals as subject and individuals as terms of expression (puggalaadi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa); and (4) a teaching that has dhammas as subject and individuals as terms of expression (dhammaadi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa). "Therein, (1) 'There are, bhikkhus, these three feelings. What are the three? Pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling' (S.36:11/iv,216) - this is a teaching that has dhammas as subject and dhammas as terms of expression. (2) 'This person consists of six elements, six bases of contact, eighteen mental rangings, and four foundations' (M.140,iii,239) - this is a teaching that has individuals as subject and dhammas as terms of expression. (3) "There are, bhikkhus, three kinds of individuals existing in the world. What are the three? The blind, the one-eyed, and the two-eyed' (A.3:29/i,128) - this is a teaching that has individuals as subject and individuals as terms of expression. And (4) 'What, bhikkhus, is the fear of a bad destination? Herein, bhikkhus, someone reflects: The result of bodily misconduct in the life to come is evil' (A4:121/ii,123) - this is a teaching that has dhammas as subject and individuals as terms of expression..." Scott: Without a grounding in basic Abhidhamma clarification, it is easy to misunderstand the difference between teachings with individuals as terms of expression versus teachings with dhammas as terms of expression. This leads to a chronic misreading of the suttas. We know, from an understanding of the meaning of 'dhamma,' that dhammas are anatta and that these are all there are - there is no individual. This is not at all to say that there are individuals as realities up until one understands this not to be the case. This is to say that there are only dhammas and never individuals. A 'term of expression' is a concept. This is why I think that Abhidhamma has to be considered first and all along and that Abhidhamma is all about anatta. All discussion here about anatta founders because some simply do not understand that it is the bottom line. Sincerely, Scott. #105403 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 5:20 pm Subject: "this requires wisdom" isn't a license for unrestrained action and heedlessness. truth_aerator Dear KenO, all, >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Dear Alex > > >There is a difference between what is mastered first and what one learns first. > > > >Of course *all* steps of the way, be it dana, sila, dhutanga need to be done with right that one has at that time. Of course one must not forget anicca, dukkha, anatta, sunnata, DO, 4NT, etc. > > > >IMHO wisdom is not a body of knowledge, the one that you can talk about at a coffee table. Wisdom goes together with action. > ? > KO: In Visud, There are four aspect of virtue,? > a.??? Virtue as volition is the volition present in one who abstains from killing living things etc,, or in one who fulfils the practise of the duties.? > b.??? Virtue as consciousness-concomitant is the [three remaining] states consiting of non-covetuous, non iill-will and right view, > c.??? Virtue as restraint should be understood here as restraint in five ways:? restraint by rules of the community (patimokkha), restraint by mindfulness, restraint by knowledge, restraint by patient and restraint by energy. > d.??? Virtue as non-trangression is the non-trangression, by body or speech of percepts of virtue that have been undertaken. > ? > According to your points is that sila should be mastered first.? >Now if we look at the description by Visud, > for a,? for one to be abstain perfectly from the five precepts, one >must be a sotapanna? True. But even prior to stream entry one can, and dare I say, should abstain from unskilful acts. I hope that no one here implies "do what thou wilt. Eat, drink and be merry. Don't try to control your immoral urges, thats akusala. Just wait until stream entry and then you morality will be set." > for b. in order to have non-covetuous and non ill-will, one must be >at least an anagami > for c,? restraint by knowledge etc?that indicates the arisen of >panna with sila > for d.? For non-transgression,?the mastery only happen in Arahant, > ? > If we observe the four points, it requires wisdom.? 4 points do require certain level of wisdom, but IMHO it is more than theoretical wisdom. But "this all requires wisdom..." is NOT a license or an excuse to indulge in wrong behaviour. IMHO. >It is not sila-samadhi-panna.? Rather it should be panna, with?the >arisen of panna,?sila and samadhi will be kusala.? While there is panna at the stage of sila, it is not fulfilled to the same degree as on the panna stage. "this all requires wisdom..." should NOT be an excuse to avoid sila or samadhi. In Anguttara Nikaya PTS 1.231 It does say that stream enterer has fulfilled sila but not fulfilled Samadhi and Panna Anagami has fulfilled both sila and samadhi but not panna Arahat has fulfilled all 3. BTW, even an Arahant can break minor rules. "Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu becomes complete, observing the virtues and complete in concentration and wisdom. He transgresses certain minor precepts and eventually emerges from them. What is the reason? Bhikkhus, saying it correctly it would happen. Of the main precepts dealing with the holy life and conducive to the holy life he is fixed and firm. He will destroy desires, release the mind, and released through wisdom here and now realize and abide." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara1/3-tikanipata\ /009-samanavaggo-e.html In DN16 "Great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of concentration when it is fully developed by virtuous conduct; great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of wisdom when it is fully developed by concentration; utterly freed from the taints 10 of lust, becoming, and ignorance is the mind that is fully developed in wisdom." In other words sila support samadhi, samadhi supports panna. In many other suttas it talks about sila first. "Thus in this way, Ananda, skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose, joy as its reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as its reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose, concentration as its reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as its reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose, knowledge & vision of release as its reward. "In this way, Ananda, skillful virtues lead step-by-step to the consummation of arahantship." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an11/an11.001.than.html Note: Virtues precede "knowledge & vision of things as they actually are". With metta, Alex #105404 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 5:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Lukas If you keep thinking you are suffering, you will definitely suffer because you are still attached to I. If you keep thinking, I can change aksualas, it would not change as I is miccha ditthi. Miccha ditthi is to be understood as dhamma, suffering is to be understood as dhamma, akusala is to be understod as dhammas. When you understand they are dhammas, then panna will arise. When panna arise, suffering will reduce, aksuala will reduce. from the way you wrote emails, I felt your understanding is fluctuating, at times your emails on dhammas are delightful and at times you are full of worries and concerns. My personal view, you have yet change the way you think of the world. Even when somone understand anatta at conceptual level, they still have to live in paramatha dhamma for this understanding to grow. You are experincing the world as conceptual and not paramatha dhammas. i.e. For eg when you listen to a song, you think of the song, you did not think in terms of paramatha dhammas like hearing. Song (in terms of different music and singing by singers) is concept, hearing at that moment is paramatha dhamma. Even though this hearing is yet the direct hearing, the understanding of the hearing should start at conceptual understanding of paramatha dhamma. The day you do not live in paramatha dhammas and live in the world, you will find yourself in these situations again and again just my honest and humble view. with metta Ken O > >From: Lukas >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Saturday, 20 February 2010 10:24:14 >Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) > > >Dear Sarah, >very helpful! > >"just thinking" I like this. > >She mentioned this perfectly "We are taking refuge only in 3 gems" when Nina told about her brother. > >I am suffering from bad deeds you can tell her, I could not change my akusalas, so I am suffering. > >Maybe you can stay more with this thininkg now? >Is there any particular way to stop thinking? > >Best wishes >Lukas > > > #105405 From: Vince Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 7:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Dear Sarah lot of thanks for transmitting our questions. If possible, please just one more question: What arises first? Nama&rupa or consciousness? thanks! #105406 From: "colette" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 7:54 pm Subject: Re: "this requires wisdom" isn't a license for unrestrained action and heedlessness. ksheri3 Hi Alex, I liked Ken O.'s post leading up to your response BUT: > True. But even prior to stream entry one can, and dare I say, should abstain from unskilful acts. I hope that no one here implies "do what thou wilt. Eat, drink and be merry. Don't try to control your immoral urges, thats akusala. Just wait until stream entry and then you morality will be set." > > colette: ah, wisdom, isn't that defined as IGNORANCE? For a person to be wise then what person is IGNORANT? Is the person that has wisdom lacking IGNORANCE? How so? In what way? <...> What you, Alex, and Ken O. are speaking of is nothing more than COGNITION, a lack of somnambulism.<...> ----------------- > > > for b. in order to have non-covetuous and non ill-will, one must be >at least an anagami > > for c,? restraint by knowledge etc?that indicates the arisen of >panna with sila > > for d.? For non-transgression,?the mastery only happen in Arahant, > > ? > > If we observe the four points, it requires wisdom.? > > 4 points do require certain level of wisdom, but IMHO it is more than theoretical wisdom. But "this all requires wisdom..." is NOT a license or an excuse to indulge in wrong behaviour. IMHO. > colette: WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG FOR YOU IS NOT WHAT IS RIGHT AND WRONG FOR ANOTHER PERSON. Simply because you scream that the sun orbit the earth and that monsters exist outside the castle walls does not mean that what you say is right is right!<...> I will acknowledge your specification of THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL WISDOM: one is found by people that sit on the arse for existance, they never leave a stag-nation, the world only exists inside the prison that they choose to exist in, and the other, the practical wisdom, is the wisdom that comes from living life and not reading about it in books or on computer screens, two dimensional reality. ------------------------------------------- gotta go. good to speak w/ both of you today. BTW, Hi Group, long time no see, huh? toodles, colette #105407 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 10:27 pm Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" kenhowardau Hi Mike, ------- <. . .> > Mike: Objects that can be vipassana objects, such as the elements, do not lead to jhana, but can lead to access concentration. ------- Yes, I think I have heard that about access concentration too, although I don't understand the significance of it. A person who develops vipassana without the aid of jhana still develops samma-samadhi, of course. At the moment he attains magga-citta his samadhi intensity (if that is the right term) will be at the level of the first jhana. And, for him, that's as high as it ever gets. Even when he attains final magga-citta (arahantship) his concentration does not go beyond first-jhana-level. The same applies even when a person does perfect jhana absorption but not as an aid to insight (when he does not follow the way of "jhana and insight in tandem"). So I can't see the attraction in concentration for its own sake. If a jhana master who has never even heard the Dhamma can have greater concentration than some arahants, then I have to wonder what is so great about it. Ken H > > Mike: I believe it is a common observation that sila and samadhi tend to involve concepts. But vipassana isn't vipassana unless it deals with ultimate dhammas. > > Metta > Mike > #105408 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:33 pm Subject: "A person who develops vipassana..." truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, >KenH: > A person who develops vipassana without the aid of jhana ... Can you please describe the above in detail? Exactly what needs to happen for vipassana to occur (all on its own, due to impersonal namarupas or course)? With metta, Alex #105409 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) szmicio Dear Ken O > from the way you wrote emails, I felt your understanding is fluctuating, at times your emails on dhammas are delightful and at times you are full of worries and concerns. L: This is how it is. One moment yoniso manasikara another one ayoniso. when there are conditions for worries the will arise. I cannot choose. Best wishes Lukas #105410 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:24 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----------------- H: > Yes, thinking is conditioned, not self-caused, but episodes of particular thinking can themselves help change the propensity to think in a certain way, for good or ill. Present thinking conditions future thinking. Patterns of thinking can change, and volitional activities, including intentional mental acts, themselves of course conditioned by many factors including thinking itself and by study of good teachings, can lead to such change. But it is all just conditions having their effect. What else? ------------------ My thoughts exactly. What else? Nothing else! It is all just conditions performing their functions. So why do you concern yourself with the bigger, illusory, picture? --------------------------- H: > Your statement that "right thinking can't be made to occur, and wrong thinking can't be made not to occur," however, is false. There is no agent or director in charge, certainly! But changing the pattern of thinking for good or ill is exactly what conditioning does! --------------------------- If there is right thinking now, then the dhammas that think rightly are available to be known by satipatthana. If there is wrong thinking now, then the dhammas that think wrongly are available in the same way. The present reality is all that satipatthana needs - there is no need to change it. Furthermore, since the present reality is the "all" there is no possibility of change. Change would have to be outside the all. ------------------ H: > Awareness, due to study and observation, that certain ways of thinking lead to suffering and others to peace, conditions intention and enables intentional actions, including mindful attention to the nature of what is happening in the moment, that ease suffering and strengthen equanimity. ------------------- That sort of study (the study of concepts) if done with kusala intention, will lead to more kusala, but it won't lead out of samsara. Ken H #105411 From: "Mike" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:29 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" mikenz66 Hi KenH, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > ------- > <. . .> > > Mike: Objects that can be vipassana objects, such as the elements, do not lead to jhana, but can lead to access concentration. > ------- > > KH: Yes, I think I have heard that about access concentration too, although I don't understand the significance of it. > > KH: A person who develops vipassana without the aid of jhana still develops samma-samadhi, of course. At the moment he attains magga-citta his samadhi intensity (if that is the right term) will be at the level of the first jhana. And, for him, that's as high as it ever gets. Even when he attains final magga-citta (arahantship) his concentration does not go beyond first-jhana-level. Mike: Yes, that's what the texts say. > > KH: The same applies even when a person does perfect jhana absorption but not as an aid to insight (when he does not follow the way of "jhana and insight in tandem"). > > KH: So I can't see the attraction in concentration for its own sake. If a jhana master who has never even heard the Dhamma can have greater concentration than some arahants, then I have to wonder what is so great about it. Mike: My aim was not to start yet another discussion about the benfits of jhana+vipassana vs. dry insight. It was merely to discuss whether I have the correct understanding of the technical point that the objects that lead to jhana are concepts. Metta Mike #105412 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:04 pm Subject: Chained! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Like a simple Dog chained to a strong Post! The Blessed Buddha once explained mental imprisonment like this: Imagine, friends, a dog tied with a strap bound to a strong post: It would remain running and circling around that very same post... So indeed too, the unlearned ordinary person, who regards form as self, who regards feeling as self, who regards perception as self, who regards constructions as self, who regards consciousness as self... He keeps whirling and spinning around those 5 clusters of clinging!!! Furthermore: If that dog walks, or stands, or sits down, or lies down, it does all that always quite close to that very same post... Exactly so too does an untrained ordinary person, who regards form thus: "This is mine, this I am, this is my self". And who regards feeling, perception, constructions, and consciousness thus: "This is mine, this I am, this is my self." If he walks, he walks quite close to those very same five clusters of clinging! If he stands, or if he sits down, or lies down, he always does that, as if locked and chained to those same five clusters of clinging! As bound, he keeps running and circling around form, around feeling, and around perception, around constructions, and around consciousness... Since he keeps on rotating and spiralling around them, he is neither freed from form, nor from feeling, nor from perception, nor from constructions, nor is he freed from consciousness. I tell you, it is therefore, that neither is he freed from birth, aging, decay, nor death! Neither is he freed from sorrow, pain, lamentation, frustration, not all forms of desperate despair! Neither is he freed from this entire mass of Suffering ...!!! Mental chains - invisible - are much stronger than steel! Commentary: The foolish ordinary person is like the dog, his view is like the leash, his artificial and imagined "I"-dentity (egoism) is like the post. Like the dog's running around the post, is the ordinary person's running around his dearly yet assumed personal identity, bound to it by craving, clinging and views! More on Narcissism, Egoism, and Personality View (Sakk aya Ditthi): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/I-dentification.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Input_ "I"-dentification.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/First_I-dentification_then_Enmity.htm The prison is not "out there", but "in here" within mind! More on these 5 Clusters of Clinging (Khandha): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Any_Kind.htm <. . .> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Chained! #105413 From: "ken_aitch" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:45 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" ken_aitch Hi Mike, ---- > Mike: My aim was not to start yet another discussion about the benfits of jhana+vipassana vs. dry insight. It was merely to discuss whether I have the correct understanding of the technical point that the objects that lead to jhana are concepts. ----- Yes, I did mean to steer clear of that subject for a while. :-) Actually, no one at DSG is ever critical of jhana. It's just that some of us like to warn people against a wrong understanding of jhana. Ken H #105414 From: "Mike" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:54 am Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Sarah, thanks for the notes. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > 3. Anatta and why people react strongly. "It's not what they like." >People are more interested in other aspects, but then it's > developing kusala for oneself, not for the sake of understanding > dhammas. Without an understanding of anatta, it can never be the > development just for the sake of understanding dhammas. Listening > for the sake of understanding - that is the result of understanding. Mike: Since anatta is a central concept of the Dhamma, and I haven't seen anyone denying it, presumably the above is actually a short-hand to refer to the reaction of "those who deny that anatta necessarily implies interpretation XXX". >5. Dieter's question about KS's opinion about Ajahn Chah. She said >she didn't >know him. What about his views? She asked for an example. Someone >mentioned >sitting still, going to the forest. "No understanding", she replied. Mike: I'm not a follower of Ajahn Chah, but "Sitting still" is hardly a helpful description of anyone's approach, any more than "just read and think a bit" would be a useful description of AS's approach (and would get a similarly, deserved, curt dismissal). > 10. Sila, samadhi, panna. > Can be sila without samadhi and panna, but when there's panna, must > be sila and samadhi. > Sila as foundation - sila can arise on its own. > Sila visuddhi - with understanding as foundation. > > Sila as referring to the citta that conditions rupas (speech and >deeds), cetana (intention), and sati (as in indriyasamvara sila). > Many cetasikas with citta. All kusala cittas are sila. > Sila as restraint. Mike: That's a useful observation. Mike #105415 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Lukas When you said you cannot choose because we all know dhammas are anatta, that does not mean we just sit down and hopefully conditions will let panna to give you more wisdom while at the same time we could do akusala actions. Then if you think you cannot choose, then why are you asking how to have less suffering and akusala. The thing is people do not underrstand that choosing is a concept and got nothing to do with paramatha dhamma because paramatha dhammas do not choose. Why? Because the cetasika is not aware of the nama and the nama is not aware of the cetasikas, just like your hair is not aware of it being grow on top of the skin and the skin is not aware it has hair growing on it. Each of this dhamma play their role and functions. It is because of our tendecies, we think we could choose. Your questions should be how to understand dhamma to eradicate akusala and not I cannot choose. Our aspiration or chanda for enlighement is conditioned by panna. No matter what happen to us even if tomorrow is end of the world, we should continue to read and listen, to understand conditions, consider them and investigate dhamma. This would condition the growth of panna which understand dhamma and also at the same time becareful of wishing or expectation to have more panna or expect one to change this or that. I like to said again that you have to live in paramatha dhammas and not conceptual world. If you continue to live in the conceptual world, your understanding will not be firm. Sacca nana grows firmer with the understanding of paramatha dhammas. This sacca nana will then conditon the arising of satipatthana. My sincere apology if I am too severe in my words. With metta Ken O >Dear Ken O > >> from the way you wrote emails, I felt your understanding is fluctuating,  at times your emails on dhammas are delightful and at times you are full of worries and concerns. > >L: This is how it is. One moment yoniso manasikara another one ayoniso. >when there are conditions for worries the will arise. I cannot choose. > >Best wishes >Lukas > > > #105416 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] "this requires wisdom" isn't a license for unrestrained action and heedlessness. ashkenn2k Dear Alex >> >> >There is a difference between what is mastered first and what one learns first. >> > >> >Of course *all* steps of the way, be it dana, sila, dhutanga need to be done with right that one has at that time. Of course one must not forget anicca, dukkha, anatta, sunnata, DO, 4NT, etc. >> > >> >IMHO wisdom is not a body of knowledge, the one that you can talk about at a coffee table. Wisdom goes together with action. >> >> KO: In Visud, There are four aspect of virtue, >> a. Virtue as volition is the volition present in one who abstains from killing living things etc,, or in one who fulfils the practise of the duties. >> b. Virtue as consciousness- concomitant is the [three remaining] states consiting of non-covetuous, non iill-will and right view, >> c. Virtue as restraint should be understood here as restraint in five ways: restraint by rules of the community (patimokkha) , restraint by mindfulness, restraint by knowledge, restraint by patient and restraint by energy. >> d. Virtue as non-trangression is the non-trangression, by body or speech of percepts of virtue that have been undertaken. >> >> According to your points is that sila should be mastered first. >Now if we look at the description by Visud, >> for a, for one to be abstain perfectly from the five precepts, one >must be a sotapanna > >True. But even prior to stream entry one can, and dare I say, should abstain from unskilful acts. I hope that no one here implies "do what thou wilt. Eat, drink and be merry. Don't try to control your immoral urges, thats akusala. Just wait until stream entry and then you morality will be set." KO: definitely virtues as volition is the preventive paccaya against such akusala actions. Volition is nama, it conditions the verbal or physical intimation.. Verbal or physical initmation is rupa,. For cittta to perform kusala action, it have to be conditioned by ottapa and hiri and may not be panna. these are kusala actions that bring profitable results but not out of samasara. What we want is to be out of samasara which only be possible with panna. > >4 points do require certain level of wisdom, but IMHO it is more than theoretical wisdom. But "this all requires wisdom..." is NOT a license or an excuse to indulge in wrong behaviour. IMHO. KO: Indeed all i know now is theoretical wisdom and not direct wisdom. When wisdom arise even theoretical, immoral behaviour would not arise because when panna arise, it is kusala. When it is kusala, no way could one do a wrong. >BTW, even an Arahant can break minor rules. > >"Here, bhikkhus, the bhikkhu becomes complete, observing the virtues and complete in concentration and wisdom. He transgresses certain minor precepts and eventually emerges from them. What is the reason? Bhikkhus, saying it correctly it would happen. Of the main precepts dealing with the holy life and conducive to the holy life he is fixed and firm. He will destroy desires, release the mind, and released through wisdom here and now realize and abide." >http://metta. lk/tipitaka/ 2Sutta-Pitaka/ 4Anguttara- Nikaya/Anguttara 1/3-tikanipata/ 009-samanavaggo- e.html KO: Arahant cannot break the ten defilement because there are no roots for such defilments to arise. As for this portion of the sutta, we need to see the commentary notes on it and if someone could help to translate this the commentary, I am most appreciative. > >In DN16 >"Great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of concentration when it is fully developed by virtuous conduct; great becomes the fruit, great is the gain of wisdom when it is fully developed by concentration; utterly freed from the taints 10 of lust, becoming, and ignorance is the mind that is fully developed in wisdom." > >In other words sila support samadhi, samadhi supports panna. > KO: It depends how one see it. Also I could give you sutta quotes that right view is first but I dont because you could always look it up yourself if your accumulations believe what I always tell you, panna first. When Buddha said concentration in this aspects, we are talking about supradmundane jhana and not mundane jhanas. If it is mundane jhanas, as I told you a few times, Brahmas would have been enlighted. >In many other suttas it talks about sila first. >"Thus in this way, Ananda, skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose, freedom from remorse as their reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose, joy as its reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose, rapture as its reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose, serenity as its reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose, pleasure as its reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose, concentration as its reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose, knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose, disenchantment as its reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose, dispassion as its reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose, knowledge & vision of release as its reward. > >"In this way, Ananda, skillful virtues lead step-by-step to the consummation of arahantship. " >http://www.accessto insight.org/ tipitaka/ an/an11/an11. 001.than. html > >Note: Virtues precede "knowledge & vision of things as they actually are". KO: If there is no panna, there would be no freedom of remose, no joy, no serenity hence no concentration. Skill virtues could happen with kusala with or without panna. If skillful virtues in kusala sense only without panna, then those devas in the sensual worlds, rupa and arupa planes would have become enlighted. Cheers Ken O € #105417 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 7:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) szmicio Dear Ken O, > When you said you cannot choose because we all know dhammas are anatta, that does not mean we just sit down and hopefully conditions will let panna to give you more wisdom while at the same time we could do akusala actions. L: Not at the same time, but akusala can condition pa~n~na. In that moments kusala citta is conditioned by past akusala. >Then if you think you cannot choose, then why are you asking how to have less suffering and akusala. L: This is simple, not choosing, having less wrong idea of a Self, this made less suffering. Best wishes Lukas #105418 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 9:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Lukas, Dear Ken O, L: Not at the same time, but akusala can condition pa~n~na. In that moments kusala citta is conditioned by past akusala. Conditions is a double edge sword. Any dhammas can condition panna likewise any dhammas could condition akusala. If is not what condition what, it is the understanding of dhamma when it arise. Dont expect kusala behaviour to arise due to past kusala or aksuala behaviour that is determinism. Do not think just because it is all conditions, we let akusala behaviour continue to grow. When we said it is all conditions, it is not talking about indifference or inaction, it is about understanding dhamma when it arise. It is about considering reality at that moment and we realise dhammas arise due to conditions. Also we have to be careful when we said all are conditions, it could arise due to lobha to explain our akusala behaviour as an excuse and we become indifferent to it. >Then if you think you cannot choose, then why are you asking how to have less suffering and akusala. L: This is simple, not choosing, having less wrong idea of a Self, this made less suffering. KO: In my earlier reply to you, I have explain already, paramathas do not choose, choosing is a concept. You want to have less wrong idea of a self, then start living in pramatha dhammas and not "not choosing", not choosing could mean very subtle aversion because one worry that choosing is having a self. That is not understanding. Dhamma is not about choosing, dhamma dont choose. So there is no need to choose or not to choose. there is only need to understand dhamma. With metta Ken O It also a mistake to think that we could all now indulge in aksuala behaviour and let panna do its work. No. Because whenever akusala arise. viriya arise, there are four functions of viriya during the arising of akusala, the growth of akusala and latency, the stopping of kusala and its kusala accumuations. Natural develeopment is not just about all are conditions and let it be, it is also about considering and understanding dhamma. in the first place, all dhammas are natural by conditions, there is no need > >From: Lukas >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Sunday, 21 February 2010 3:28:29 >Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) > > >Dear Ken O, > >> When you said you cannot choose because we all know dhammas are anatta, that does not mean we just sit down and hopefully conditions will let panna to give you more wisdom while at the same time we could do akusala actions. > >L: Not at the same time, but akusala can condition pa~n~na. In that moments kusala citta is conditioned by past akusala. > >>Then if you think you cannot choose, then why are you asking how to have less suffering and akusala. > >L: This is simple, not choosing, having less wrong idea of a Self, this made less suffering. > >Best wishes >Lukas > > > #105419 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:17 am Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi Lucas (105374) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > ... > L: This is exactly what I am thinking on now. > > We can learn more and more all realities are conditioned, not ours. > =============== J: Yes, knowledge of this truth, based on the direct experience of dhammas, is the essence of the teachings. Before that knowledge can be developed, however, there must be the experience of dhammas as just nama or rupa. In the meantime, an intellectual understanding of dhammas as conditioned, not ours, is already a great help. > =============== > Even they are akusala, very strong that are manifested now. This moments is gone. ... The buddhist way is natural way of life, and sikkha and bhavana is made by understanding, knowing the conditions for development. The we are detachment more and more. The less Self in life is the supreme condition to more kusala. and than this is right effort. > =============== J: Yes, quite so. The perfection of good conduct comes with the eradication of the view of self, rather than from striving for a better standard of conduct. The connection is not so easy to see at first, but grasping it at an intellectual level gives us a whole different perspective on things. > =============== > I remember my first steps on path. My friends drink a lot, and I was practicing buddhism and idint drink and pointing my attention to each kind kusala. Of course you know how this works ;> > And I thought than I will have a benefit of my practice , those friends of mine they only drink and have a fan, they will not share merits.- I thought. > This is what I was thinking, I believed so strong that all 'those mine efforts' will bring a merit in the future. > But I was wrong, this is not like my effort, or I did something. I just simple noticed that this is only different conditions work on me. No I who did this or my will. Just different cetanas, inetention and yoniso/ayoniso manskaras arose and perfprm the Path. > MMy friend asked me Lukas what did you do, please tell me that you are now better guy, you dont drink etc.? > And I couldnt answer. I did nothing i said. > =============== J: A good answer. But quite lost on your friends, I suspect;-)) > =============== > I like to think of right friendship. This is more true to say: 'I had a good friend' then 'I did something particular'. This right friendship is the overall of the holy life. > =============== J: I agree with you on this. We owe everything to those from whom we have learnt what we now know (ultimately, of course, that goes back to the Buddha). > =============== > Just met right friend in Dhamma or read a Dhamma. And leave it all. The Dhamma will work on its own. We needs to take rest from this idea of Self. > =============== J: The Self would always like to take the credit ;-)) Jon #105420 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:20 am Subject: Re: Dhutanga and Noble Eightfold Path. jonoabb Hi Alex (105382) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > Dhutanga as anything needs to be done with wisdom. So is anyone interested in talking about this chapter of VsM on how to do it with wisdom. > =============== J: If we cannot live our present (layperson's) life with wisdom, there's not much point in aspiring to live a different, more difficult (ascetic's) life with wisdom ;-)) Jon #105421 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:29 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" jonoabb Hi Alex (105383) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > ... > An interesting side note is that some people achieved Stream Entry (Supabuddha the leper for example) through that lecture alone. > =============== J: As far as I know, every person to whom an anupubba-katha was given became enlightened or at least took refuge in the Triple Gem (indicating firm confidence based on developed understanding). But this is not surprising given that they were 'selected' by the Buddha because of their propensity for attainment. > =============== So it is possible for Awakening to happen quickly if the conditions are right. > =============== J: What appears to be a quick awakening is in reality the culmination of the development of the path over countless lifetimes. There is no fast track to enlightenment ;-)) > =============== Aeons may not be required. ... There are other stories of people who have done bad deeds, were reborn in hell or animal realms, and then reborn as humans who have met the Buddha and became Awakened (some became arhats). To me this puts in doubt the idea of later idea that one needs to gather a lot of paramis over many aeons. > =============== J: This is speculation. In the texts there are numerous mentions of individuals' development over a span of several Buddha-eras, with no suggestion that it could ever be otherwise. > =============== > So it may not require as hard path as some claim. Infact the big role of accumulations is to encounter and be able to understand Buddhas teaching and to understand it. The rest may take 7, 8, more or less lives. So it can be done! > =============== J: Speculation, with no textual basis! ;-)) > =============== > Ven. Sariputta & Ven. MahaMoggallana belonged to another sect, with a non-Buddhist teacher. Yet when Sariputta met Assaji and heard Buddha's teaching, he became a stream winner. To me this puts in doubt the commentarial story of really long parami path. If they've gathered so many paramis following Buddha's teaching, would they go to another teacher? > =============== J: Sorry, but I don't see any contradiction here. If there are strong accumulations to lead the life of an ascetic, this will probably mean, in practical terms, following a particular teacher. Jon #105422 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:33 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi pt (105387) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > ... > pt: Out of interest I've heard of anusaya as unwholesome latent tendencies, but what would be the opposite term for wholesome latent tendencies? > =============== J: I believe the collective term for wholesome tendencies is aasaya (and for those and the unwholesome latent tendencies together, aasayaanussaya). > =============== > pt: This still seems a bit hard to accept. I mean, though you say that "occurrence" is not a conventional activity, it still doesn't seem like a dhamma to me, and as I remember from discussions with Scott, only dhammas can be conditiones for other dhammas. > =============== J: Ultimately, of course, it is dhammas that condition dhammas. But consider, for example, the case of metta, where the object is a being (a concept). In the ultimate sense a 'being' is the dhamma known as the life-faculty (or perhaps the bhavanga citta), but it's not necessarily always more helpful to state everything in terms of paramattha dhammas. > =============== > I'm also hesitant to call the first two factors "vipaka" in the strict sense as Sarah discussed with KenO recently. > =============== J: You are right. The factors are not vipaka in the strict sense. I should have said 'result of kamma' instead (a much wider term; there are many results of kamma that are not vipaka in the strict sense of the word). > =============== I mean, if we adopt the loose definition of vipaka, then quiet place or a noisy place may just as well be called vipaka in the sense of occurrences that might be a condition for panna to occur. > =============== J: As far as I'm aware, the texts give a quiet place as a support for the development of jhana, but not as support for the development of vipassana. > =============== > So, could you perhaps explain a bit more in terms of what does "largely a matter of vipaka" mean? Thanks. > =============== J: I said "largely" because not only must the true teaching be heard but it must be recognised and appreciated for what it is, and this clearly is not a matter of result of kamma. Jon #105423 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:36 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi KenO (105388) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > ... > KO: My apology, I dont wish to discuss this with you. Why dont you ask A Sujin as you more incline to believe in what she said. So pse ask her, thanks > =============== J: No problem. Perhaps you and I can discuss this further between ourselves when we meet here in Bangkok (looking forward to your arrival tomorrow). > =============== > I am not a mod and it may not be my place to say this. However I am concern over the discussions content of DSG. Lately, it seems that we have become intolerant of others understandings. I have observed lately, DSG has evolved into chastising over usage of words like control, formal mediations, practise or self or give unhelpful examples of anatta like watching TV or there is no killer in killing, and we are not explaining dhamma. > =============== J: You're welcome to express these view, and I appreciate your concern. Another topic for our one-on-one chats, perhaps ;-)) Jon #105424 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:38 am Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi pt (105394) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > ... > pt: Okay, so the 3 stages you mention above would then also be "direct awareness", and so patipatti, even if they happen before actual insight knowledges? > =============== J: Yes, that's how I understand it. > =============== > My point was though, if there's at least a bit of realisation that anger is happening, so a bit of disidentification, even if there's no understanding it as a conditioned impersonal element, does it not mean that there was still the knowing of individual characteristics of a dhamma (dosa, but without recognition of the tilakkhana)? Would this knowing not be equal to the second stage you mention in the first paragraph above (awareness of the individual characteristics of dhammas)? Thanks. > =============== J: The realisation that anger is happening is available to anyone regardless of whether they've heard the teachings or not (unless I'm misunderstanding your meaning ? always possible of course). In which case, it's just a kind of thinking. As I see it, the anger that is the subject of such realisation would have already passed away. Jon #105425 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:41 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" jonoabb Hi Scott (105402) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > ... > Scott: Without a grounding in basic Abhidhamma clarification, it is easy to misunderstand the difference between teachings with individuals as terms of expression versus teachings with dhammas as terms of expression. This leads to a chronic misreading of the suttas. We know, from an understanding of the meaning of 'dhamma,' that dhammas are anatta and that these are all there are - there is no individual. This is not at all to say that there are individuals as realities up until one understands this not to be the case. This is to say that there are only dhammas and never individuals. A 'term of expression' is a concept. This is why I think that Abhidhamma has to be considered first and all along and that Abhidhamma is all about anatta. > =============== Many thanks for the passage from the Muulapariyaaya Sutta and its Commentaries, and for these comments. Very appropriate to the thread. I see it just the way you do. Whether a sutta is about (or is spoken in terms of) dhammas, or whether it's about (or is spoken in terms of) people-and-things, it is dhammas that are to be understood, not people-and-things. Jon The teaching of the Buddha is of four kinds: (1) A teaching that has dhammas as subject and dhammas as terms of expression (dhammaadi.t.thaanaa dhammadesanaa). E.g. 'There are, bhikkhus, these three feelings. What are the three? Pleasant feeling, painful feeling, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling' (S.36:11/iv,216). (2) A teaching that has individuals as subject and dhammas as terms of expression (dhammaadi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa);. E.g. 'This person consists of six elements, six bases of contact, eighteen mental rangings, and four foundations' (M.140,iii,239). (3) A teaching that has individuals as subject and individuals as terms of expression (puggalaadi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa). E.g. "There are, bhikkhus, three kinds of individuals existing in the world. What are the three? The blind, the one-eyed, and the two-eyed' (A.3:29/i,128). (4) A teaching that has dhammas as subject and individuals as terms of expression (dhammaadi.t.thaanaa puggaladesanaa). E.g. 'What, bhikkhus, is the fear of a bad destination? Herein, bhikkhus, someone reflects: The result of bodily misconduct in the life to come is evil' (A4:121/ii,123). #105426 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:49 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" jonoabb Hi Alex (105383) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > ... > > >A: Here is a typical schedule of a teaching for stream entry: > > > > > > Generosity (dana) > > > Virtue (sila) > > > Heaven (sagga) > > > Danger of sensual pleasure (kamanam adinava) > > > Renunciation (nekkhamma) > > > The Four Noble Truths (cattari ariya-saccani)[2] > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html > > That sutta tells us that exclusive teaching of the Buddha started from 4NT. > =============== J: You are assuming that the items before that in the summary were taught at a conventional level only. I don't think that assumption can be made. > =============== 4NT do not seem to emphasize "no beings, no killer, no one who is killed, no weapon of murder, nothing can be done, etc". > =============== J: Nobody here (except you!) has ever mentioned this line of thinking. A straw man, Alex! > =============== > Some teachers DO talk quite a bit about making sure that a meditator does not react in akusala way to something that arises in Meditation. ANd of course they teach that meditation cannot be controlled, there is no Self, no-control, and how to observe satipatthana. > ================ J: Is there not an inherent contradiction here? On the one hand, making sure that one does not react in an akusala way to something that arises in meditation; on the other hand, the idea that meditation cannot be controlled, there is no Self, no-control. It can't be both ways! > =============== > >J: But do you go further and say that, according to the teachings as you >understand them, the development of awareness requires a certain level >of sila or samadhi before it can begin (and, if so, what level would >that be)? > > If person has commited 5 anantarika kamma, he cannot achieve any superhuman states in this and next life. > =============== J: Yes, but we are really concerned with the beginning stages of the development of awareness/insight. > =============== If a person has strong kilesas then s/he cannot become an aryan. Sila, Dhutanga, and meditation can hold them in check to allow wisdom to shine through and eventually uproot the kilesas. > =============== J: It is the development of awareness and insight that leads to the attenuation, and eventual eradication, of kilesa. To say that a person with strong kilesa cannot become enlightened seems to imply otherwise, namely, that the key lies with tackling the kilesas. > =============== > > Theoretically speaking it is possible to make a sure strong resolution to keep sila and thus perfect it within one lecture of the Buddha (see Supubuddha story for example). ... > > Some gifted people may or may not require much of sila-samadhi for certain stages. But if we aren't stream-winners yet, it is more likely that we are of the more inferior kind, required MORE not less help and support. There is a difference between bare minimum [for the brightest, quickest and most gifted students, who have also met the Buddha] and what is actually required in our case. > =============== J: Thanks for these detailed comments, but you've not really addressed the question, namely, whether there's any necessary prerequisite, in terms of sila and samadhi attainment, to beginning levels of satipatthana development. Jon #105427 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:50 am Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" kenhowardau Hi pt, --------------------- <. . .> KH: > > I don't think a jhana meditator would ever appear unwise or irritable. He would be, quite literally, saintly. pt: > I don't know really. I think some would be saintly based on actual wisdom. For others, if only jhana is developed, then their defilements should remain the same and should come back once the equanimity and contentment that jhana provides dissipate. I think Devadatta was a jhana master though not much of a saint. There were probably others, like the Buddha's attendant (before Ananda) who I think was also a jhana master but left for another sect and slandered the Buddha, etc. ---------------------- Yes I take your point. I don't really know either. Obviously, some people can be capable of both great good and great evil. Does that mean some others are capable of great good and minor evil; others, minor good and great evil; and the rest minor good and minor evil? I don't know - only guessing. ---------- <. . .> KH: > If you have the accumulations for jhana development you will know it.<. . .> pt: > Probably, though it's hard to tell. I guess when something feels natural it's probably due to accumulations, though then awareness is n eeded to discern whether these are wholesome or unwholesome in a particular case. ----------- The important thing to remember is that wisdom (samatha or vipassana) is always a matter of understanding. Its not a matter of awe and mystery. So a person should ask himself, is his decision to develop jhana based on clear, sensible understanding? Or is there a lot of fuzzy thinking and religious gibberish going on? Ken H #105428 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > lot of thanks for transmitting our questions. ... S: Actually, it was Nina who read out your detailed qus and I'm sure she'll give a more detailed response in due course. I'll also pass on your other letter to her tomorrow. .... > > If possible, please just one more question: > > What arises first? Nama&rupa or consciousness? ... S: K.Sujin will say: (in the context of D.O), what is nama? What is rupa? What is consciousness? When we answer these questions, the answer to your question becomes apparent. So let's answer one at a time, changing the order round. What is meant by consciousness (vi~n~naana) in this context of D.O.? Metta Sarah ======== #105429 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Lukas wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > very helpful! > > "just thinking" I like this. > > She mentioned this perfectly "We are taking refuge only in 3 gems" when Nina told about her brother. .... S: Yes, what she meant was that only these precious gems don't bring grief and sorrow, because there is no attachment involved when there is understanding of present dhammas. .... > I am suffering from bad deeds you can tell her, I could not change my akusalas, so I am suffering. .... S: She'll say that it's because it's lobha, *me* and *my bad deeds*. Attachment leads to suffering. Wishing for kusala, wishing for good deeds....all more lobha for *me*. .... > > Maybe you can stay more with this thininkg now? > Is there any particular way to stop thinking? ... S: Why do you wish to stop thinking? Why do we wish for anything? It's not *Lukas* and *Lukas's bad deeds*, just common, ordinary dhammas. What about now? Any bad deeds now? All gone as Ken O said.... Metta Sarah ======== #105430 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:30 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Mike & all, Thank you very much for your interest and patience with all the short-hand/cryptic notes and points: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > >S: 3. Anatta and why people react strongly. "It's not what they like." > >People are more interested in other aspects, but then it's > > developing kusala for oneself, not for the sake of understanding > > dhammas. Without an understanding of anatta, it can never be the > > development just for the sake of understanding dhammas. Listening > > for the sake of understanding - that is the result of understanding. > > Mike: Since anatta is a central concept of the Dhamma, and I haven't seen anyone denying it, presumably the above is actually a short-hand to refer to the reaction of "those who deny that anatta necessarily implies interpretation XXX". .... S: That's a good point. I didn't raise the qu above or give the answer, so I can only guess at what's implied in both. Firstly, non-Buddhists will probably not accept anatta as a central concept on any level, I'm sure you'll agree. They are therefore likely to react strongly to any suggestions pointing in this direction. Secondly, as you say, for anyone who has studied the Dhamma at all, anatta is a central concept, so why would they react strongly? Only if a)they have a different interpretation XXX, as you suggest or b)they have the same interpretation, but find it particularly disturbing. So let me ask you, as someone who has studied the Dhamma in quite some detail under different teachers and in different places, which of the following you agree/disagree with. Are there any comments you *react strongly* to? I think almost everyone here will react to at least some of the last items....even Ken O!! Actually, I'd be interested to hear responses/quiz answers from as many people as possible:) After reading the responses, I might refine it, but not much time now. **** So, for all: Agree/Disagree. Any strong reaction? .... 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God 2. The Buddha passed away over 2500 years ago 3. The Buddha taught that there are 5 khandhas 4. These khandhas consist of mental and physical dhammas (phenomena). 5. All such (conditioned) namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) are impermanent and thereby unsatisfactory. 6. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma. 7. The Buddha taught that all dhammas (sabbe dhammaa) are anatta. 8. Apart from these conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma, there are no other realities, no other paramattha dhammas. 9. Each nama or rupa arising and falling away now, such as seeing or visible object or feeling has the characteristic of anatta. 10. That dhamma which has the characteristic of anatta cannot be made to arise by anyone's will. Simply, there is not *anyone* to have a will. 11. All conditioned dhammas arise according to various conditions (as included in the 24 paccaya), not according to anything else. 12. Apart from these paramattha dhammas, anything else, anything else at all, is a concept. By definition, it is therefore not a reality. 13. When we think of Mike, Sarah, our house or the computer, there is just the thinking about concepts. If there is no thinking about them, there is no Mike, Sarah, a house or a computer. 14. What is touched is tangible object, what is seen is visible object. That's all. 15. When there is the idea of the softness being *my arm* or *my hair* and so on (in many complex ways), there is atta-sa~n~naa, remembrance of self and wrong view of self, sakkaaya di.t.thi. 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. 17. The only way that attanu-ditthi and sakkaaya di.t.thi will ever be eradicated is through the developed understanding of the reality appearing at this moment. Through such understanding of the tangible object, the feeling, the visible object or whatever appears, the characteristic of anatta becomes apparent. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. 20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way! .... Thanks in advance for any responses. Metta Sarah ======= #105431 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) szmicio Dear Ken O, >KO: Do not think just because it is all conditions, we let akusala behaviour continue to grow. When we said it is all conditions, it is not talking about indifference or inaction, it is about understanding dhamma when it arise. L: Yes but in moments of indifference and inaction, there is exactly indifference and inaction. > Also we have to be careful when we said all are conditions, it could arise due to lobha to explain our akusala behaviour as an excuse and we become indifferent to it. L: Yes it can happen. Then this is akusala, conditioned. I think when 4 Noble Truths will start to work, no excuses, there is no need to have one. Best wishes Lukas #105432 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ashkenn2k Dear Jon Yes?I am anticipating to meet you and the?dinosaurs, it been a while since we meet.??:-)? I? must make it a habit to meet you all more often, as who knows what vipaka will do to us.??? IMHO, dhamma friends are hard to friend in samasara, lets value it while our vipaka allows us.??? It is a pleasure to meet you all and I hope?all of you could bear with me. you got topic, so does Sarah... hmm I got a feeling it is going to be a long ride and also dont gang up on me :-)) cheers Ken O p.s.? you should go to Bangkok?more often, I notice you seems to response to email faster when you are in Bangkok than in HK.? ?? >Hi KenO > >(105388) >--- In dhammastudygroup@ yahoogroups. com, Ken O wrote: >> ... >> KO: My apology, I dont wish to discuss this with you. Why dont you ask A Sujin as you more incline to believe in what she said. So pse ask her, thanks >> ============ === > >J: No problem. Perhaps you and I can discuss this further between ourselves when we meet here in Bangkok (looking forward to your arrival tomorrow). > >> ============ === >> I am not a mod and it may not be my place to say this. However I am concern over the discussions content of DSG. Lately, it seems that we have become intolerant of others understandings. I have observed lately, DSG has evolved into chastising over usage of words like control, formal mediations, practise or self or give unhelpful examples of anatta like watching TV or there is no killer in killing, and we are not explaining dhamma. >> ============ === > >J: You're welcome to express these view, and I appreciate your concern. Another topic for our one-on-one chats, perhaps ;-)) > >Jon > #105433 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:53 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Mike, part 2 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > >S: 5. Dieter's question about KS's opinion about Ajahn Chah. She said > >she didn't > >know him. What about his views? She asked for an example. Someone >mentioned > >sitting still, going to the forest. "No understanding", she replied. > > Mike: I'm not a follower of Ajahn Chah, but "Sitting still" is hardly a helpful description of anyone's approach, any more than "just read and think a bit" would be a useful description of AS's approach (and would get a similarly, deserved, curt dismissal). .... S: Yes, a very fair comment. Perhaps the point was that if there is any idea of "sitting still"or "going to the forest" as being any part of the practice, of the Way, then it indicates a wrong understanding. As a side-note and a way of *balance*, I once prepared a Dana, a meal for Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Sumedho in London and also offered some books and other small items. I've never liked cooking and many hours were involved in this preparation. When I met Ajahn Chah and presented the meal, he already knew from A.Sumedho that I studied the Abhidhamma under K.Sujin and did not follow any formal sitting/walking meditation. It was a very pleasant meeting and we all laughed a lot (especially A.Chah). I thought we got on well and had a common appreciation for the value of practice in daily life situations, such as this one. However, I heard quite some time later from a friend, that I (and K.Sujin) were described as people who "don't practice!" "They just read Abhidhamma!" So, the "no understanding", "no practice" comments flow both ways, it seems! In any case, as others have said, I think it's the Dhamma, not the teachers that should be studied. I don't see any point in asking A what they think of B. We can ask for a comment on a view or a quote. Thx for your other kind comment. Metta Sarah p.s You've referred to your teacher several times. May I ask who this is? Do you have a link or any quotes you'd like to share? Appreciating all your discussions here. ======== #105434 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Sarah Hmm nice try :-) using no 16 to draw me to say disagree or agree. No disagreement, it is just for musing as I said before. Just dont give me a list during Bangkok, ok :-) be kind to this nama and rupa. cheers ken O >Dear Mike & all, > >Thank you very much for your interest and patience with all the short-hand/cryptic notes and points: > >--- In dhammastudygroup@ yahoogroups. com, "Mike" wrote: >> >S: 3. Anatta and why people react strongly. "It's not what they like." >> >People are more interested in other aspects, but then it's >> > developing kusala for oneself, not for the sake of understanding >> > dhammas. Without an understanding of anatta, it can never be the >> > development just for the sake of understanding dhammas. Listening >> > for the sake of understanding - that is the result of understanding. >> >> Mike: Since anatta is a central concept of the Dhamma, and I haven't seen anyone denying it, presumably the above is actually a short-hand to refer to the reaction of "those who deny that anatta necessarily implies interpretation XXX". >.... >S: That's a good point. I didn't raise the qu above or give the answer, so I can only guess at what's implied in both. > >Firstly, non-Buddhists will probably not accept anatta as a central concept on any level, I'm sure you'll agree. They are therefore likely to react strongly to any suggestions pointing in this direction. > >Secondly, as you say, for anyone who has studied the Dhamma at all, anatta is a central concept, so why would they react strongly? Only if a)they have a different interpretation XXX, as you suggest or b)they have the same interpretation, but find it particularly disturbing. > >So let me ask you, as someone who has studied the Dhamma in quite some detail under different teachers and in different places, which of the following you agree/disagree with. Are there any comments you *react strongly* to? I think almost everyone here will react to at least some of the last items....even Ken O!! > >Actually, I'd be interested to hear responses/quiz answers from as many people as possible:) After reading the responses, I might refine it, but not much time now. >**** >So, for all: Agree/Disagree. Any strong reaction? >.... >1. There is no soul, no Almighty God > >2. The Buddha passed away over 2500 years ago > >3. The Buddha taught that there are 5 khandhas > >4. These khandhas consist of mental and physical dhammas (phenomena). > >5. All such (conditioned) namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) are impermanent and thereby unsatisfactory. > >6. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma. > >7. The Buddha taught that all dhammas (sabbe dhammaa) are anatta. > >8. Apart from these conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma, there are no other realities, no other paramattha dhammas. > >9. Each nama or rupa arising and falling away now, such as seeing or visible object or feeling has the characteristic of anatta. > >10. That dhamma which has the characteristic of anatta cannot be made to arise by anyone's will. Simply, there is not *anyone* to have a will. > >11. All conditioned dhammas arise according to various conditions (as included in the 24 paccaya), not according to anything else. > >12. Apart from these paramattha dhammas, anything else, anything else at all, is a concept. By definition, it is therefore not a reality. > >13. When we think of Mike, Sarah, our house or the computer, there is just the thinking about concepts. If there is no thinking about them, there is no Mike, Sarah, a house or a computer. > >14. What is touched is tangible object, what is seen is visible object. That's all. > >15. When there is the idea of the softness being *my arm* or *my hair* and so on (in many complex ways), there is atta-sa~n~naa, remembrance of self and wrong view of self, sakkaaya di.t.thi. > >16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. > >17. The only way that attanu-ditthi and sakkaaya di.t.thi will ever be eradicated is through the developed understanding of the reality appearing at this moment. Through such understanding of the tangible object, the feeling, the visible object or whatever appears, the characteristic of anatta becomes apparent. > >18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. > >19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. > >20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way! >.... >Thanks in advance for any responses. > >Metta > >Sarah >======= > > > #105435 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 1:58 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) sarahprocter... Hi Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: >> you got topic, so does Sarah... hmm I got a feeling it is going to be a long ride and also dont gang up on me :-)) ... S: Ha, ha...that's right! I've got my notes and all our topics of disagreement ready...there'll be no escape:-)) Have a good flight and see you soon. You'll be travelling with us and Nina in a van to KK on Tuesday, so we'll be able to gang up then, though you'll have Vince T who'll be happy to support you with some STEPS and will soon break up any gangs:-)) Metta Sarah ====== #105436 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:03 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Jon (PT), sorry for being far behind in my response to previous messages .. I am bit slow in following all the postings on DSG ;-) so I hope you don't mind jumping in when stumbling upon some of your comments. You wrote: : As far as I'm aware, the texts give a quiet place as a support for the development of jhana, but not as support for the development of vipassana. D: I assume that you connect the development of vipassana / insight with satipatthana . You certainly know that the development of sati is in detail described by the Maha Satipatthana Sutta hence reading the text , I believe you may change your comment : (excerpt) '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. etc. unquote It is interesting to read here Thanissaro Bhikkhu's comment : (excerpt ) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.22.0.than.html At first glance, the four frames of reference for satipatthana practice sound like four different meditation exercises, but MN 118 makes clear that they can all center on a single practice: keeping the breath in mind. When the mind is with the breath, all four frames of reference are right there. The difference lies simply in the subtlety of one's focus. It's like learning to play the piano. As you get more proficient at playing, you also become sensitive in listening to ever more subtle levels in the music. This allows you to play even more skillfully. In the same way, as a meditator gets more skilled in staying with the breath, the practice of satipatthana gives greater sensitivity in peeling away ever more subtle layers of participation in the present moment until nothing is left standing in the way of total release. ' unquote with Metta Dieter #105437 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) moellerdieter Dear Sarah , I noted the items below from your list for later response : 10. That dhamma which has the characteristic of anatta cannot be made to arise by anyone's will. Simply, there is not *anyone* to have a will. 8. Apart from these conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma, there are no other realities, no other paramattha dhammas 12. Apart from these paramattha dhammas, anything else, anything else at all, is a concept. By definition, it is therefore not a reality. 13. When we think of Mike, Sarah, our house or the computer, there is just the thinking about concepts. If there is no thinking about them, there is no Mike, Sarah, a house or a computer. 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. 17. The only way that attanu-ditthi and sakkaaya di.t.thi will ever be eradicated is through the developed understanding of the reality appearing at this moment. Through such understanding of the tangible object, the feeling, the visible object or whatever appears, the characteristic of anatta becomes apparent. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. 20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way! .... with Metta Dieter #105438 From: Vince Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:30 pm Subject: Re[2]: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: K.Sujin will say: (in the context of D.O), what is nama? What is > rupa? What is consciousness? When we answer these questions, the > answer to your question becomes apparent. > So let's answer one at a time, changing the order round. > What is meant by consciousness (vi~n~naana) in this context of D.O.? I'm not sure what Sujin will say. But I understand your interpretation is not the same of my question. My doubt is not about meanings. My question is about knowing what's the first in the arising: consciousness or nama&rupa. It is only one question, not many :) Vince. #105439 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) moellerdieter Dear Sarah (Mike) , you wrote: ' Dieter's question about KS's opinion about Ajahn Chah. She said she didn't know him. What about his views? She asked for an example. Someone mentioned sitting still, going to the forest. "No understanding", she replied.' Mike: I'm not a follower of Ajahn Chah, but "Sitting still" is hardly a helpful description of anyone's approach, any more than "just read and think a bit" would be a useful description of AS's approach (and would get a similarly, deserved, curt dismissal). .... S: Yes, a very fair comment. Perhaps the point was that if there is any idea of "sitting still"or "going to the forest" as being any part of the practice, of the Way, then it indicates a wrong understanding. D: I don't recall to ask for passing this question to K.S. as I expected a similar answer .. another point of course is K.S. 's response of "sitting still, going to the forest" : "No understanding" , which I understand as she has no understanding about . You may remember that we discussed before the emphases the Buddha gave on meditation /contemplation in the forest or a otherwise secluded place, to claim otherwise would show disrespect to plenty of suttas. S: As a side-note and a way of *balance*, I once prepared a Dana, a meal for Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Sumedho in London and also offered some books and other small items. I've never liked cooking and many hours were involved in this preparation. When I met Ajahn Chah and presented the meal, he already knew from A.Sumedho that I studied the Abhidhamma under K.Sujin and did not follow any formal sitting/walking meditation. It was a very pleasant meeting and we all laughed a lot (especially A.Chah). I thought we got on well and had a common appreciation for the value of practice in daily life situations, such as this one. However, I heard quite some time later from a friend, that I (and K.Sujin) were described as people who "don't practice!" "They just read Abhidhamma!" So, the "no understanding", "no practice" comments flow both ways, it seems! D: I could imagine to have a pleasant meeting with K.S. students .. as long we are not talking about the training . In a way A.Ch. expressed in simple terms what outsiders may think about the group . S: In any case, as others have said, I think it's the Dhamma, not the teachers that should be studied. I don't see any point in asking A what they think of B. We can ask for a comment on a view or a quote. D: that is right .. no point in asking A what they think of B , it should refer on a stated view or a a special quote. with Metta Dieter #105440 From: "Mike" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:05 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > So, for all: Agree/Disagree. Any strong reaction? > .... > 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God > 2. The Buddha passed away over 2500 years ago > 3. The Buddha taught that there are 5 khandhas > 4. These khandhas consist of mental and physical dhammas > (phenomena). > 5. All such (conditioned) namas and rupas (mental and physical > phenomena) are impermanent and thereby unsatisfactory. > 6. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma. > 7. The Buddha taught that all dhammas (sabbe dhammaa) are anatta. > 8. Apart from these conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma, there are no other realities, no other paramattha dhammas. > 9. Each nama or rupa arising and falling away now, such as seeing > or visible object or feeling has the characteristic of anatta. Mike: Nothing controversial in 1-9. > 10. That dhamma which has the characteristic of anatta cannot be > made to arise by anyone's will. Simply, there is not *anyone* to > have a will. Here is where the questions start to become loaded. The first phrase is redundant, given that all dhammas are anatta. And of course there in no "anyone" to have a will. > 11. All conditioned dhammas arise according to various conditions (as included in the 24 paccaya), not according to anything else. > > 12. Apart from these paramattha dhammas, anything else, anything > else at all, is a concept. By definition, it is therefore not a > reality. Sure, that's simply the definition of paramattha, so adds no information. > 13. When we think of Mike, Sarah, our house or the computer, there > is just the thinking about concepts. If there is no thinking about > them, there is no Mike, Sarah, a house or a computer. Unclear what you mean. Do you mean that the nama-rupa cease if there is no-one thinking about them. > 14. What is touched is tangible object, what is seen is visible > object. That's all. Yes. > 15. When there is the idea of the softness being *my arm* or *my > hair* and so on (in many complex ways), there is atta-sa~n~naa, > remembrance of self and wrong view of self, sakkaaya di.t.thi. Sure. > 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object > being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu > di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. Sure. > 17. The only way that attanu-ditthi and sakkaaya di.t.thi will ever > be eradicated is through the developed understanding of the reality >appearing at this moment. Through such understanding of the tangible > object, the feeling, the visible object or whatever appears, the >characteristic of anatta becomes apparent. Seems like a long way to say it. I think you mean that you have to see and understand it, which is a no-brainer. > 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in > order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying > to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong > path again. Here's the real loaded question, and as far as I can tell this argument applies just as much to the AS approach of developing understanding as any "meditation" approach of developing understanding. I would say it completely trivialises what most Buddhist teachers teach, which is not some clumsy attempt to "develop more kusala". They (and AS) are a bit more subtle than that. > 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other > than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. I presume you're talking about Dhamma, rather than learning to add or to read, or something. In that case, yes, one is trying to understand dhammas. > 20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way! "Middle way" is a much misused expression. I've no idea what you mean by it in this context. As I see it, the significant point of controversy between AS other teachers I respect is 18. As we knew all along. The key issue is: "How and why does correct understanding arise?" AS has one approach. Others have other approaches. Perhaps they are all correct, perhaps all wrong, perhaps one correct, others wrong. Metta Mike #105441 From: "Mike" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 8:25 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > >S: 5. Dieter's question about KS's opinion about Ajahn Chah. > S: [Nice discussion or meeting Ajahn Chah...] > So, the "no understanding", "no practice" comments flow both ways, > it seems! Of course. As one would expect when using a trivialised picture of either approach... > p.s You've referred to your teacher several times. May I ask who > this is? Do you have a link or any quotes you'd like to share? I don't have any famous teachers. The two teachers who have given me the most guidance are Thailand-ordained monks (our local Wat is a branch of a Bangkok Wat) who originally came from the US and Bangladesh. They teach the Mahasi approach. So if you want any quotes you can read Sayadaw Mahasi, U Pandita, etc. I've met a handful of other teachers, in Hong Kong and New Zealand. I've had a couple of short (weekend) retreats with one of Ajahn Chah's students (Ajahn Tiradhammo, who is currently in Wellington, NZ). It's useful to get some different points of view sometimes. E.G. from DSG. :) Metta Mike #105442 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 10:33 pm Subject: Bangkok discussions with A.S Feb 2010 - Ajahn Chah truth_aerator Hello Sarah, Dieter, all, >--- "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Dear Sarah (Mike) , > > you wrote: > > ' Dieter's question about KS's opinion about Ajahn Chah. She said she didn't know him. What about his views? She asked for an example. Someone mentioned sitting still, going to the forest. "No understanding", she replied.' > Mike: I'm not a follower of Ajahn Chah, but "Sitting still" is hardly a helpful description of anyone's approach, any more than "just read and think a bit" would be a useful description of AS's approach (and would get a similarly, deserved, curt dismissal). > .... > S: Yes, a very fair comment. Perhaps the point was that if there is any idea of "sitting still"or "going to the forest" as being any part of the practice, of the Way, then it indicates a wrong understanding. > > Ajahn Chah does NOT NOT NOT teach the above. Whoever said that was either too cryptic, or didn't know what Ajah Chah taught. Here are some points that I've learned from his translated talks 1) Ajahn Chah was against very long sitting. He said something like "Chickens can sit for many hours and aren't awakened". He didn't like if people spend too much in deep samadhi. Just enough for being aware. 2) He did teach informal awareness and understanding of what is happening now. The mind and its reaction toward 6 sense objects is the field of study. 3) He did emphasis "everything is teaching us" and that Samadhi is for wisdom and understanding. =The practice of samadhi is for developing wisdom and understanding= What do you have sitting here right now? There are body and mind, that's all, only these two things. All that is contained within this frame sitting here now is called body. The mind is that which is aware and is thinking at this very moment. These two things are also called nama and rupa. Nama refers to that which has no rupa, or form. All thoughts and feelings, or the four mental khandhas of feeling, perception, volition and consciousness, are nama, they are all formless. When the eye sees form, that form is called ruupa, while the awareness is called nama. Together they are called naama and rupa, or simply body and mind. Understand that sitting here in this present moment are only body and mind. But we get these two things confused with each other. If you want peace you must know the truth of them. The mind in its present state is still untrained; it's dirty, not clear. It is not yet the pure mind. We must further train this mind through the practice of meditation. Some people think that meditation means to sit in some special way, but in actual fact standing, sitting, walking and reclining are all vehicles for meditation practice. You can practice at all times. Samadhi literally means the firmly established mind. To develop samadhi you don't have to go bottling the mind up. Some people try to get peaceful by sitting quietly and having nothing disturb them at all, but that's just like being dead. The practice of samadhi is for developing wisdom and understanding." -Pg 175 "So whatever we see and encounter, we should contemplate carefully. We delight in sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and ideas. So please contemplate. You all know what these things are: forms the eye sees, for example, such as the forms of men and women. You certainly know what sounds are, as well as smells, tastes, and physical contacts. Then there are the mental impressions and ideas. When we have these contacts through the physical senses, mental activity arises. All things gather here." -Teaching of Ajahn Chah pg 444 With metta, Alex #105443 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:02 pm Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" truth_aerator Hello Jon, All, > "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > (105383) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > ... > > > >A: Here is a typical schedule of a teaching for stream entry: > > > > > > > > Generosity (dana) > > > > Virtue (sila) > > > > Heaven (sagga) > > > > Danger of sensual pleasure (kamanam adinava) > > > > Renunciation (nekkhamma) > > > > The Four Noble Truths (cattari ariya-saccani)[2] > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html > > > > That sutta tells us that exclusive teaching of the Buddha started from 4NT. > > =============== > > J: You are assuming that the items before that in the summary were >taught at a conventional level only. I don't think that assumption >can be made. There are plenty of suttas on generosity. About Heaven, there is even a whole book in KN (vimanavatthu) about devas, and there are many suttas about Devas, Brahmas and so on. I can provide specific quotes. On Danger of sensual pleasures there are suttas with many similes. Ex: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.054x.than.html In fact Buddha was used a lot of references to people and other compounded things. To tell you the truth, it seems that synthesis (making wholes out of parts) is as conventional as analysis (breaking wholes into parts). Both are mental activities. If you look from analytical point of view, you see parts. If you see from synthetic point of view, you see wholes. Is the world made of wholes or parts? What prevents parts from being little wholes themselves? > > > =============== > > Some teachers DO talk quite a bit about making sure that a meditator does not react in akusala way to something that arises in Meditation. ANd of course they teach that meditation cannot be controlled, there is no Self, no-control, and how to observe satipatthana. > > ================ > > J: Is there not an inherent contradiction here? > > On the one hand, making sure that one does not react in an akusala >way to something that arises in meditation; The "not reacting" is not an action based on greed or anger. Infact when one understands anicca, dukkha, anatta - there is less reaction toward the externals. >on the other hand, the idea that meditation cannot be controlled, >there is no Self, no-control. > > It can't be both ways! No reacting isn't trying to control things. Actually it is understanding that doesn't react as a delusional Atta that wants to grab or reject things. The more understanding of anatta there is, the less the mind is distracted because there is no need for non-existent Atta to grab or reject something. Meditation is NEVER done to control things, or to "numb the mind to the surroundings". It is understanding that doesn't produce greed, anger, delusion, restlessness, doubt and so on. > J: Yes, but we are really concerned with the beginning stages of >the development of awareness/insight. Awareness and insight into conditionality is support for sila. Without understanding right vs wrong, one cannot intentionally have sila. IMHO if understanding doesn't lead to sila and samadhi, then it is not real understanding. With metta, Alex #105444 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau Hi Vince, I hope you won't mind some comments from the gallery. :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > Dear Sarah > > you wrote: > > > S: K.Sujin will say: (in the context of D.O), what is nama? What is > > rupa? What is consciousness? When we answer these questions, the > > answer to your question becomes apparent. > > So let's answer one at a time, changing the order round. > > What is meant by consciousness (vi~n~naana) in this context of D.O.? > > > I'm not sure what Sujin will say. But I understand your > interpretation is not the same of my question. My doubt is not about > meanings. > > My question is about knowing what's the first in the arising: > consciousness or nama&rupa. > > It is only one question, not many :) > > --------- KH: Yes, it is only one question, but is it a trick question? As we all know, consciousness is nama. Nama is consciousness. If you are asking someone, 'which came first, consciousness or nama?' you must let them ask you, "In which particular context is the word "consciousness" being used here? To which particular nama is it referring?" Otherwise, it's a trick question, isn't it? Ken H #105445 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:04 am Subject: On Accumulations. truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > J: What appears to be a quick awakening is in reality the >culmination of the development of the path over countless >lifetimes. There is no fast track to enlightenment ;-)) [cut] The evidence in the suttas, for me, questions the theory of "long path of accumulations". To put bluntly, there is no talk on being a Buddhist for a long long time. For example the Buddha Gotama. There isn't any original sutta or his claim to met more than one Buddha, Buddha Kassapa. In MN81 He was Brahmin Jotipala who had an anagami lay friend Ghatikara who was trying to convince Jotipala to see Buddha Kassapa. Jotipala didn't want to see Buddha Kassapa, he even kept insulting him saying "Friend, Ghatikara, what use comes seeing these monkish shavellings. To me, the above shows that Buddha was not a Buddhist. No Buddhist would insult a Buddha and refuse to see him. Eventually Jotipala was dragged to see Buddha Kassapa and changed his heart, became a monk and two lives later became Buddha Gotama. http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/081-ghatikara-\ e1.html === In Therigatha there is a story of a nun (which attained Arhatship under Buddha Gotama) who 7 lives back, in city of Erakaccha was a wealthy goldsmith. 7) Being rich youth he slept with someone's wife. 6) He was reborn and cooked in hell. 5) He was reborn as a monkey who got castrated, 4) then as one-eyed lame she-goat. 3)Then castrated calf, then 2) as hermaphrodite. In the last life he was reborn as slave-girl in difficult situation. Eventually she became nun and an Arhat. Isidasi Therigatha (group of 40 verses) No mention of long path of accumulations of being reborn as a monk or a nun, or even lay disciple. While the good accumulations had been there, I mean you have to have lots of good accumulations to be reborn as a 3-rooted human, meet a Buddha and become an Arahat. So IMHO the biggest and most important accumulations are to be reborn as a human who meets dhamma and can (at least theoretically) reach maggaphala. And if one for some reason doesn't achieve even stream-entry path now, if that person really works hard at understanding and practice, there is no reason why the next life, being triple-rooted will not result in maggaphala. So it is for many Buddhists 7 or 8 more lives. So claim that it requires aeons and aeons of gathering accumulations little by little is right in a way. If you don't give all-out right effort with understanding, then the path may be long. But it doesn't have to be longer than 7-8 more lives, at most, and for people who have enough understanding. Dhamma is powerful. IMHO it is heresy to claim that it cannot produce results of full nibbana within 1->7-8 lives at most, from the time one encounters it. With metta, Alex #105446 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Feb 21, 2010 11:10 pm Subject: Causality! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Transcendence from Ignorance to Nibb?na! Buddha once explained the entire chain of causes leading to Nibbana: Ignorance is the proximate cause of mental construction. Mental construction is the proximate cause of consciousness. Consciousness is the proximate cause of name-&-form. Name-&-form is the proximate cause of the 6 senses. The 6 senses is the proximate cause of contact. Contact is the proximate cause of feeling. Feeling is the proximate cause of craving. Craving is the proximate cause of clinging. Clinging is the proximate cause of becoming. Becoming is the proximate cause of birth. Birth is the proximate cause of ageing, decay and death. Ageing, decay and death is the proximate cause suffering. Suffering is the proximate cause of faith. Faith is the proximate cause of elation. Elation is the proximate cause of joy. Joy is the proximate cause of calmness. Calmness is the proximate cause of happiness. Happiness is the proximate cause of concentration. Concentration is the proximate cause of seeing and knowing reality. Seeing and knowing reality is the proximate cause of disgust. Disgust is the proximate cause of disillusion. Disillusion is the proximate cause of mental release. Mental release is the proximate cause of ending all mental fermentation linked with ignorance, associated with becoming, and caused by sensing. Ending all mental fermentation is the proximate cause of Freedom.. Ending all mental fermentation is the proximate cause of Peace.. Ending all mental fermentation is the proximate cause of Bliss.. This - only this - is Nibbana ... The Butterfly Effect => A Storm! 1 Cause => Many Effects! <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya II 29-32 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #105447 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:46 am Subject: "No understanding"?! Jhana, Brahmas, Awakening truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Dieter, Jon, KenO, all, > "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Sarah, Dieter, all, > > >--- "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > > > Dear Sarah (Mike) , > > > > you wrote: > > > > ' Dieter's question about KS's opinion about Ajahn Chah. She said >she didn't know him. What about his views? She asked for an example. >Someone mentioned sitting still, going to the forest. "No >understanding", she replied.' Analyzing that statement "going to the forest. sitting still" actually summarizes entire Dhamma! Understanding of dangers of Sensual pleasures (and the advantage of renunciation) one renounces improper surroundings filled with sensual pleasures and goes into solitude. Kaya & citta viveka. Quite a bit of insight there into kama adinava. Sitting with a still mind does require certain degree of insight into what "Anatta" means. It requires insight into no-Self to have a really calm and alert mind that doesn't wants to grasp mental or physical things. As someone has said, "to be is to do". A delusion of "Self" wants to do more and more (thus less stillness and less seclusion. What material things to possess in seclusion? A big drop down for the ego), to gather more and more.... Thinking is doing, looking is doing, hearing is doing, etc with the rest of the senses. In deep samadhi these things do not occur as wisdom shines and temporary (at first) dispels the delusion of doing and The Doer. Also one of the hindrances to calm mind is doubt, doubt into triple-gem. An Arahat has no problems with going to the forest and sitting still. An Arahant has understanding the natural result of which is seclusion and stillness. It is what "Self" wants to do, to gather more and more things for itself and be entangled into a world. I am going to propose a very sutta teaching. Non-Buddhists (who do not believe in the Buddha) have *never* achieved Jhana for one of obstacles to it is Doubt in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. Rebirth into a/rupa loka DOES NOT REQUIRE JHANA, not Buddhist Jhana anyways. Just merit and determination to be reborn there. "Again the bhikkhu is endowed with faith, virtues, learning, benevolence and wisdom. The bhikkhu learns, that gods born in the sphere of consciousness ... re ... in the sphere of nothingness, re ... in the sphere of neither perception nor non perception have a long life span and enjoy much pleasantness. It occurs to him. O! I should be born with gods of the sphere of neither perception nor non perception with long life, much pleasantness. This is the path and method to be born there." MN120 No Jhana (A Buddha's unique re-discovery) is required. In MN127 there is a description of being reborn in a rupa loka called "gods of impure effulgence" because one does metta with hindrances of sloth&torpor with restlessness & worry. Again this is not a Jhanic state which doesn't have them. Yet one is reborn somewhere in Gods of limited radiance (a 2nd "jhana" rupa loka) " a certain bhikkhu pervades, indulges, and abides with impure effulgence. Because his bodily misconduct is not thoroughly overcome, sloth and torpor and restlessness and worry are not well turned out; he has a blinking effulgence. After the breakup of the body, after death he is born with the gods of impure effulgence. ... a certain bhikkhu pervades, indulges, and abides with pure effulgence. Because his bodily misconduct is thoroughly overcome, sloth and torpor and restlessness and worry are well turned out; he has a non-blinking effulgence. After the breakup of the body, after death, he is born with the gods of pure effulgence. Friend Kacc?na, on account of this, of these gods born in the same category, some are with impure effulgence and others with pure effulgence." - MN127 So KenO, this explains why Brahmas may be un-awakened. They are worldlings devoid of Buddha's path which includes Jhana. With Metta, Alex #105448 From: Ken O Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Lukas With respect, everyone who understand conceptual anatta could answer like you. I could also answer like you. But do we live in dhamma. Are we aware when we see, hear, smel, taste, touch and think or we just think we do. I believe you will write again on your dosa. Till then, just aware it as dhamma, even those after what you feel or think about the dosa or words, they are just cetasikas and thinking. Cheers Ken O > > >Dear Ken O, > >>KO: Do not think just because it is all conditions, we let akusala behaviour continue to grow.  When we said it is all conditions, it is not talking about indifference or inaction, it is about understanding dhamma when it arise. > >L: Yes but in moments of indifference and inaction, there is exactly indifference and inaction. > >> Also we have to be careful when we said all are conditions, it could arise due to lobha to explain our akusala behaviour as an excuse and we become indifferent to it.  > >L: Yes it can happen. Then this is akusala, conditioned. >I think when 4 Noble Truths will start to work, no excuses, there is no need to have one. > >Best wishes >Lukas > > > #105449 From: "kanchuu2003" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:15 am Subject: How is mind defined? kanchuu2003 Dear All, Greetings! How is mind defined as one of the senses? Regards, Kanchuu #105450 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:02 am Subject: Re: Musings13 - Prior Attainments of the Bodhisatta ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for your reply. > S: 1. The quote you gave about the dhammanusarin and saddhanusarin seemed to be referring to sotapannas, not cula sotapannas to me. pt: Hm, not sure, to me it seems that in the quote I gave the second-last paragraph that describes a person with a "modicum of discernment" is exactly equal to cula-sotapanna as he is assured not to be reborn in lower realms and of attaining stream-entry in that life. The last paragraph that describes the one who "knows and sees" is actually called stream-enterer there, so there is a clear difference between the two. > S: 2. Picking up on some of Ken O's good points/quotes - the example he gave of the bodhisatta who committed sexual misconduct with the King's wife, (Harika Jataka, I believe) - I think this (and others) are good examples of how the bodhisatta couldn't have reached the stage of cula-sotapanna in the life when he made the aspiration to the previous Buddha. > > 3. When I referred to the great wisdom (which you asked about) to be developed by the bodhisatta, I was referring particularly to the great attainments of the samma-sambuddha at the time of enlightenment. pt: Ok, but in that case I still don't understand what exactly is the bodhisatta developing in all his numerous lives as a bodhisatta when it comes to the parami of wisdom? I mean, he already perfected panna of the level of samatha that's responsible for jhanas and abhinnas, but in your opinion he cannot go from there into developing vipassana level of panna. So then what else is there for him to develop in terms of wisdom? At the moment it seems that the parami of wisdom is simply not being developed by a bodhisatta at all. > S: Also, if you have any particular qus on this or any other topic you'd like me to try and raise with KS, pls let me know. (I have one or two others of yours noted). pt: Thank for the opportunity. The only one I remember is why air (as distinct from space) is not a condition for hearing. The other could be this one that I've just asked - what kind of wisdom is a bodhisatta developing if it's neither of the samatha kind (which he already perfected prior to the bodhisatta aspiration) nor of the vipassana kind (which he cannot develop, except in the last life)? Best wishes pt #105451 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:34 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ptaus1 Hi Jon, > J: I believe the collective term for wholesome tendencies is aasaya (and for those and the unwholesome latent tendencies together, aasayaanussaya). pt: Thanks. > J: Ultimately, of course, it is dhammas that condition dhammas. But consider, for example, the case of metta, where the object is a being (a concept). In the ultimate sense a 'being' is the dhamma known as the life-faculty (or perhaps the bhavanga citta), but it's not necessarily always more helpful to state everything in terms of paramattha dhammas. pt: Sorry, I guess KenH gave me his virus of wanting everything served in the form of paramathha dhammas :) I'm not very good yet in connecting the conceptual meanings with the paramattha world in a helpful way. > J: I should have said 'result of kamma' instead (a much wider term; there are many results of kamma that are not vipaka in the strict sense of the word). pt: Could you say a bit more about these non-vipaka results of kamma? I guess that would again be something a bit more conventional? > J: As far as I'm aware, the texts give a quiet place as a support for the development of jhana, but not as support for the development of vipassana. pt: True, but I think jhana is often given as a support for right samadhi, which in turn is a support for right view. > J: I said "largely" because not only must the true teaching be heard but it must be recognised and appreciated for what it is, and this clearly is not a matter of result of kamma. pt: Ok, I think I agree that teaching must first be heard (in case of savakas), so that panna can be reinvigorated on the basis of development in previous lives, but after this has happened, it seems almost any occurrence can be a condition for panna, and it's hard to put one higher than the other. E.g. some gaining awakening when a pot shatters, or some that do it with jhana as support, some without jhana, some with 3 direct knowledges, some without, some in seclusion, some not in seclusion, some as ascetics, some not as ascetics, etc. So, I'm still not sure why should preference be given to certain occurrences and not to other ones, even though many are mentioned in the suttas. Or is it simply that the four occurrences you mention are a kind of a distilled way of summarising all those possible occurrences? Best wishes pt #105452 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 7:07 am Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ptaus1 Dear Sarah, > S: Actually, I'd be interested to hear responses/quiz answers from as many people as possible:) After reading the responses, I might refine it, but not much time now. > S: 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God pt: Seems a bit like a view, maybe it'd be easier to say that concepts of soul and an almighty creator god are just concepts, so not real. Not sure. > S: 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. pt: A bit tricky to understand. The way I read "effort to try and be aware at this moment..." would stand for kusala viriya and kusala chanda, so it'd be ok. But it can also be interpreted as akusala viriya, etc. Not sure to which the question refers to. > S: 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. pt: Again tricky. In ultimate terms yes, but perhaps it's a bit, erm, elitist? As a total beginner, it took me several years before I could actually understand what's meant by dhamma (both Dhamma and just dhammas), so maybe now I'm starting to understand it a bit, but initially, it was all about trying find out how to be a better person and lead a better life. Without trying to find those answers, I would have never actually got to a point where I could start to appreciate that it's all about just the understanding of dhammas. Best wishes pt #105453 From: han tun Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:12 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) hantun1 Dear Sarah, I agree with your 20 statements except No. 18. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. As I have said before, I will *try*, to the extent possible, *to avoid* doing unwholesome deeds, and I will *try*, to the extent possible, to *do* wholesome deeds. Now, I know that it will not make sense if I agree the rest of your statements and not agree only No 18. I will be contradicting myself. And that is exactly what I am undergoing, the inner self-conflict. All the Burmese Sayaadaws teach anattaa. So I believe in anattaa. But on the other hand, I also believe in Dhammapada verse 160, attaa hi attano naatho, and that I *must* *try* to *do* something, even if, as you said, it's the wrong path. Please do not tell me that I do not understand Dhammapada verse 160 correctly:>)). Anyway, I thank you very much for coming up with these statements. with respect and deepest appreciation, Han #105454 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:48 am Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau Hi Pt and Sarah, ----------- <. . .> > > S: 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God > pt: > Seems a bit like a view, maybe it'd be easier to say that concepts of soul and an almighty creator god are just concepts, so not real. Not sure. --------- But pt, the soul and Almighty God are not just concepts, they are false concepts. They have no validity in either ultimate reality or conventional reality. ---------------------------------- > > S: 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. > pt: A bit tricky to understand. The way I read "effort to try and be aware at this moment..." would stand for kusala viriya and kusala chanda, so it'd be ok. ----------------------------------- As I understand them, viriya and chanda connect with, and perform their functions with regard to, the present object only. They have nothing to do with a possible future object. ------------------------- <. . .> > > S: 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. > pt: Again tricky. In ultimate terms yes, but perhaps it's a bit, erm, elitist? ------------------------- We must help people to hear the true Dhamma. If they want to hear false Dhamma, fine, but there are already more than enough places where they can do that. --------------------------------- pt: > As a total beginner, it took me several years before I could actually understand what's meant by dhamma (both Dhamma and just dhammas), so maybe now I'm starting to understand it a bit, but initially, it was all about trying find out how to be a better person and lead a better life. Without trying to find those answers, I would have never actually got to a point where I could start to appreciate that it's all about just the understanding of dhammas. ---------------------------------- You were let down by the Buddhist community. The fact that you were a willing participant in the charade was no excuse. :-) Ken H #105455 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:04 am Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ptaus1 Hi KenH (and Sarah), > > > S: 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God > > > pt: > Seems a bit like a view, maybe it'd be easier to say that concepts of soul and an almighty creator god are just concepts, so not real. Not sure. > --------- > > KH: But pt, the soul and Almighty God are not just concepts, they are false concepts. They have no validity in either ultimate reality or conventional reality. pt: :) So they're doubly false then - double the illusion! :) I like that one. > > > S: 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. > > > pt: A bit tricky to understand. The way I read "effort to try and be aware at this moment..." would stand for kusala viriya and kusala chanda, so it'd be ok. > > KH: As I understand them, viriya and chanda connect with, and perform their functions with regard to, the present object only. They have nothing to do with a possible future object. pt: Yep, that's how I understand it as well. > pt: > As a total beginner, it took me several years before I could actually understand what's meant by dhamma (both Dhamma and just dhammas), so maybe now I'm starting to understand it a bit, but initially, it was all about trying find out how to be a better person and lead a better life. Without trying to find those answers, I would have never actually got to a point where I could start to appreciate that it's all about just the understanding of dhammas. > ---------------------------------- > > KH: You were let down by the Buddhist community. The fact that you were a willing participant in the charade was no excuse. :-) pt: Wouldn't say I was let down by the Buddhist community :) I mean the suttas remained the same throughout. Just that at different times I was ready to understand one and the same teaching in different depths. Best wishes pt #105456 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Han (Mike, Sukin & all), --- On Mon, 22/2/10, han tun wrote: >I agree with your 20 statements except No. 18. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. >As I have said before, I will *try*, to the extent possible, *to avoid* doing unwholesome deeds, and I will *try*, to the extent possible, to *do* wholesome deeds. >Now, I know that it will not make sense if I agree the rest of your statements and not agree only No 18. I will be contradicting myself. And that is exactly what I am undergoing, the inner self-conflict. All the Burmese Sayaadaws teach anattaa. So I believe in anattaa. But on the other hand, I also believe in Dhammapada verse 160, attaa hi attano naatho, and that I *must* *try* to *do* something, even if, as you said, it's the wrong path. Please do not tell me that I do not understand Dhammapada verse 160 correctly:>) ). >Anyway, I thank you very much for coming up with these statements. .... S: Understood and thank you very much for your careful consideration of the statements. I was delighted that you agreed with all the other comments, including the one about the house and the one about attanuditthi:). To all, we felt very honoured this morning that Han and his charming adult grandson kindly came across Bangkok with all its traffic congestion to join us for a leisurely breakfast. Nina and Lodewijk also popped over for some of the time - a most enjoyable occasion. We discussed many topics with Han including the one above. Han's grandson has grown up and been educated (in Myanmar) as a Buddhist and has considered the Teachings for himself, just looking to the Buddha as his Teacher. We read out the 20 statements to him as well, but he disagreed with most of them, even starting with the first one! As I recall, he did agree with the one Han disagreed with!! He didn't like "reality", "realities", "dhamma", "dhammas" and thought many of the comments should just refer to arahats. He didn't accept that all impermanent dhammas are dukkha - he thought this depended on the person and thought that only arahats know anatta. He also strongly thought that it's oneself that makes things happen, such as choosing to fly over from Hong Kong, deciding what to eat and so on. We had very lively discussions, lots of strong reactions, Mike, but in a very pleasant way. So this was partly my point - to indicate that we all, including Han's grandson, agree that the teachings are about anatta (as you said, Mike), but people do disagree with/react to many aspects of what this means as you'll have seen by now. Another topic that came up with Han was on vipaka (following from my discussion with Ken O). Han mentioned the "12 vipaka" and perhaps we can discuss these in more detail from an Abhidhamma perspective. No hurry, Han, but I think this would be a useful topic sometime, perhaps after I return from KK. ....and talking of Ken O, he arrived in Bangkok this afternoon (from Singapore where he lives with his wife and children) and has just spent part of the afternoon with us, sitting together with us by our hotel pool discussing every DSG topic at his break-neck pace. Of course, this was all just a rehearsal before he's questioned by K.Sujin tomorrow. He now claims he's never disagreed with Jon or I on any topic and is begging for mercy:-)) Ha, ha, no chance! Lots and lots of laughter and fun.....wish you all could join us. (Han, when I mentioned we'd seen you in the morning and passed on your warm regards, he said he'd have really liked to have met you and hopes to another time. He didn't realise you were in Bkk.) Metta Sarah ====== #105457 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Hi Mike, I look forward to discussing some of your other comments later.....I need to pack now.... Briefly, --- On Mon, 22/2/10, Mike wrote: > 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in > order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying > to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong > path again. Here's the real loaded question, and as far as I can tell this argument applies just as much to the AS approach of developing understanding as any "meditation" approach of developing understanding. >I would say it completely trivialises what most Buddhist teachers teach, which is not some clumsy attempt to "develop more kusala". They (and AS) are a bit more subtle than that. ... S: This is interesting....the same point Han pulled out as well... ... >As I see it, the significant point of controversy between AS other teachers I respect is 18. As we knew all along. The key issue is: "How and why does correct understanding arise?" >AS has one approach. Others have other approaches. Perhaps they are all correct, perhaps all wrong, perhaps one correct, others wrong. ... S: Do you have any comments on Han's coments on no 18? Very interesting feedback. Like with Han, I was glad to see you agreed with most. Yes, no 18 is a key point..... (if I revise the list, I'll keep it for the last one!). More later, Signing of til we return from the countryside.... (I need to conserve some dhamma-discussion-energy for 3 days with Ken O!! j/k:-)) Metta Sarah ======== #105458 From: Lukas Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) szmicio Dear Sarah, >Han's grandson has grown up and been educated (in Myanmar) as a Buddhist and >has considered the Teachings for himself, just looking to the Buddha as his >Teacher. We read out the 20 statements to him as well, but he disagreed with most of them, even starting with the first one! As I recall, he did agree with the one Han disagreed with!! He didn't like "reality", "realities", "dhamma", "dhammas" and thought many of the comments should just refer to arahats. He didn't accept that all impermanent dhammas are dukkha - he thought this depended on the person and thought that only arahats know anatta. He also strongly thought that it's oneself that makes things happen, such as choosing to fly over from Hong Kong, deciding what to eat and so on. L: This is very nice to hear this. The misery is very deep rooted and this needs some time to have less ideas of Self. But Han's grandson is for sure on the right Path. I think that Path can be much more natural that we ever thought of. I always like to think about lotus flower similes, that Buddha had told. He just saw people as not doers, but like flowers that grows naturally. Best wishes Lukas #105459 From: Lukas Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) szmicio Dear Han, >I agree with your 20 statements except No. 18. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. As I have said before, I will *try*, to the extent possible, *to avoid* doing unwholesome deeds, and I will *try*, to the extent possible, to *do* wholesome deeds. L: This can be easily akusala. The best way is to learn more of right understanding. The best kusala is the right understanding. Best wishes Lukas #105460 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Dieter (& Alex), Thank you very much for noting the points you don't completely agree with. I'll look forward to discussing these with you in more detail. We can just go slowly, one at a time. Much appreciated. Alex, I'm looking forward to seeing your list if you have time..... Anyone else too.... Howard? And thank you for your other comments/feedback. I doubt Nina or anyone will pursue the A.Chah topic, but if so, I'll introduce your quotes and comments. I'll take them along anyway. Metta Sarah --- On Mon, 22/2/10, Dieter Moeller wrote: >I noted the items below from your list for later response : 10. That dhamma which has the characteristic of anatta cannot be made to arise by anyone's will. Simply, there is not *anyone* to have a will. 8. Apart from these conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma, there are no other realities, no other paramattha dhammas 12. Apart from these paramattha dhammas, anything else, anything else at all, is a concept. By definition, it is therefore not a reality. 13. When we think of Mike, Sarah, our house or the computer, there is just the thinking about concepts. If there is no thinking about them, there is no Mike, Sarah, a house or a computer. 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. 17. The only way that attanu-ditthi and sakkaaya di.t.thi will ever be eradicated is through the developed understanding of the reality appearing at this moment. Through such understanding of the tangible object, the feeling, the visible object or whatever appears, the characteristic of anatta becomes apparent. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. 20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way! .... #105461 From: Vince Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Dear Ken, you wrote: > I hope you won't mind some comments from the gallery. :-) no, of course. Always are very welcome :) best wishes. #105462 From: han tun Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:26 pm Subject: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana hantun1 Dear Connie and Alex, Do you have English translation of the following Apadaana? Khuddaka Nikaaya Apadaana Paa.li 39. Ava.taphalavaggo 10. Pubbakammapilotikabuddhaapadaana.m If so, can I have it please? Thank you very much. With metta and respect, Han #105463 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi KenO (105432) > Yes I am anticipating to meet you and the dinosaurs, it been a while since we meet. :-) I must make it a habit to meet you all more often, as who knows what vipaka will do to us. IMHO, dhamma friends are hard to friend in samasara, lets value it while our vipaka allows us. It is a pleasure to meet you all and I hope all of you could bear with me. > =============== J: Yes, we should make the most of the opportunity. There will come a time when there are no more of these dinosaur jamborees to attend. > =============== > p.s. you should go to Bangkok more often, I notice you seems to response to email faster when you are in Bangkok than in HK. > =============== J: There might be others who prefer me in HK with less response ;-)) Jon PS Good to see you again (a short time ago). Looking forward to more chats over the next couple of days. #105464 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Dieter (105436) > sorry for being far behind in my response to previous messages .. I am bit slow in following all the postings on DSG ;-) > so I hope you don't mind jumping in when stumbling upon some of your comments. > =============== J: You're most welcome. > =============== > D: I assume that you connect the development of vipassana / insight with satipatthana . > You certainly know that the development of sati is in detail described by the Maha Satipatthana Sutta hence reading the text , I believe > you may change your comment : > > (excerpt) > '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. etc. > > unquote > =============== J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" The answer to this question has 14 parts to it, comprising the rest of the section on Mindfulness of the Body. (The passage on anapanasati is the first of these parts.) Some of the 14 parts deal with particular cases, and some are of general application. An example of the latter is the part called The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, which reads as follows: "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in wearing the shoulder-cloak, the (other two) robes (and) the bowl, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in regard to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savored, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in defecating and in urinating, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in walking, in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practicing clear comprehension. "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally... and clings to naught in the world. Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." Note that there is no mention here of the need for a quiet place or indeed any specific kind of setting or circumstance. The passage dealing with anapanasati is one of the 'particular case' passages. It is directed to those persons who are already skilled in the development of both samatha/anapanasati and insight (only such a person could 'set mindfulness to the fore' and be 'always mindful' as he breathes in and out). It describe how for such a person there may be the development of insight (to the stage of enlightenment) with jhana as basis. But there is no statement of general doctrine here to the effect that a quiet place is a condition for the development of insight. Jon #105465 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:48 pm Subject: Re: Re[2]: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Vince, Pls let me clarify a little... --- On Mon, 22/2/10, Vince wrote: > S: K.Sujin will say: (in the context of D.O), what is nama? What is > rupa? What is consciousness? When we answer these questions, the > answer to your question becomes apparent. > So let's answer one at a time, changing the order round. > What is meant by consciousness (vi~n~naana) in this context of D.O.? V:> I'm not sure what Sujin will say. But I understand your interpretation is not the same of my question. My doubt is not about meanings. >My question is about knowing what's the first in the arising: consciousness or nama&rupa. >It is only one question, not many :) .... S: Here, consciousness, refers to patisandhi citta (the first citta of life) and all subsequent vipaka cittas conditioned by past kamma. Nama (here in the context of DO), refers to the cetasikas which accompany these moments of consciousness. Because the vipaka cittas are conditioned to arise by past kamma, so are the accompanying cetasikas. The consciousness and nama (here cetasikas), therefore arise together. In the context, rupa refers to the rupas conditioned by past kamma too. At the moment patisandhi citta is conditioned to arise, so are certain groups of rupas, such as the heart-base group. So although we learn that vinnana conditions nama-rupa, in fact they are all conditioned by past kamma to arise together at that first moment of consciousness. This is why we do have to make sure we understand the terms in the same way. Is this how you understand them? Metta Sarah ========= #105466 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:49 pm Subject: Re: VsM instructions on "things to do" and "places/things to avoid" jonoabb Hi Alex (105443) > There are plenty of suttas on generosity. About Heaven, there is even a whole book in KN (vimanavatthu) about devas, and there are many suttas about Devas, Brahmas and so on. I can provide specific quotes. > > On Danger of sensual pleasures there are suttas with many similes. > Ex: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.054x.than.html > =============== J: Thanks for the sutta reference, which I have just checked. As expected, the danger of sensual pleasures is dealt with in the context of satipatthana/insight development. Taking the first of the many similes given in the sutta, we read: *************************** "Suppose a dog, overcome with weakness & hunger, were to come across a slaughterhouse, and there a dexterous butcher or butcher's apprentice were to fling him a chain of bones ? thoroughly scraped, without any flesh, smeared with blood. What do you think: Would the dog, gnawing on that chain of bones ? thoroughly scraped, without any flesh, smeared with blood ? appease its weakness & hunger?" "No, lord. And why is that? Because the chain of bones is thoroughly scraped, without any flesh, & smeared with blood. The dog would get nothing but its share of weariness & vexation." "In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: 'The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a chain of bones, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.' Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace. *************************** Please note the passage "Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, ... [he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, ...]". This is a reference to developed satipatthana. So it is not a case of the dangers of sensual pleasure being taught at a conventional level only. And I'd be surprised if the same did not apply to the other headings (generosity, heavens, etc) in the summary list also. > =============== > The "not reacting" is not an action based on greed or anger. > > Infact when one understands anicca, dukkha, anatta - there is less reaction toward the externals. > > > >on the other hand, the idea that meditation cannot be controlled, >there is no Self, no-control. > > > > It can't be both ways! > > No reacting isn't trying to control things. Actually it is understanding that doesn't react as a delusional Atta that wants to grab or reject things. > > The more understanding of anatta there is, the less the mind is distracted because there is no need for non-existent Atta to grab or reject something. > =============== J: So the statement "making sure that one does not react in an akusala way to something that arises in meditation" actually means "having more understanding of dhammas"? Then why just say so? To put it in terms of "not reacting in an akusala way" is to suggest something quite different. Jon #105467 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:51 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. jonoabb Hi Alex (105445) > To me, the above shows that Buddha was not a Buddhist. No Buddhist would insult a Buddha and refuse to see him. Eventually Jotipala was dragged to see Buddha Kassapa and changed his heart, became a monk and two lives later became Buddha Gotama. > > http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/081-ghatikara-\ e1.html > =============== J: I don't think the conclusion you draw here is a valid one. At that time wrong view had not been eradicated. And there is the result of past kamma to be considered also. Jon #105468 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 1:54 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi pt (105451) > pt: Sorry, I guess KenH gave me his virus of wanting everything served in the form of paramathha dhammas :) I'm not very good yet in connecting the conceptual meanings with the paramattha world in a helpful way. > =============== J: It's good to keep that connection in mind. In the ultimate sense, everything being discussed comes down to dhammas of one kind or another. > =============== > pt: Could you say a bit more about these non-vipaka results of kamma? I guess that would again be something a bit more conventional? > =============== J: The non-vipaka results include both the conventional and the ultimate. Among the former are the 8 worldly conditions of gain and loss, praise and blame, etc. Among the latter are the rupas that comprise the 6 sense bases (eye-base, etc). > =============== > pt: True, but I think jhana is often given as a support for right samadhi, which in turn is a support for right view. > =============== J: Are you referring to the path factor of samma-samadhi being defined in terms of the 4 jhanas? To my understanding, the path factors are the cetasikas that accompany moments of path consciousness. Samma samadhi is the concentration cetasika of ekaggata. At the moment of path consciousness, the accompanying ekaggata cetasika is of the intensity of one of the 4 jhanas. (That in brief is how I understand it.) > =============== > pt: Ok, I think I agree that teaching must first be heard (in case of savakas), so that panna can be reinvigorated on the basis of development in previous lives, but after this has happened, it seems almost any occurrence can be a condition for panna, and it's hard to put one higher than the other. E.g. some gaining awakening when a pot shatters, or some that do it with jhana as support, some without jhana, some with 3 direct knowledges, some without, some in seclusion, some not in seclusion, some as ascetics, some not as ascetics, etc. > > So, I'm still not sure why should preference be given to certain occurrences and not to other ones, even though many are mentioned in the suttas. Or is it simply that the four occurrences you mention are a kind of a distilled way of summarising all those possible occurrences? > =============== J: For every (present-day) savaka, the teachings need to be heard in detail and repeatedly. The other factors you mention are matters of predisposition that vary from one person to another. They are not considered to be prerequisites. Jon #105469 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and pt & Sarah) - In a message dated 2/22/2010 4:51:44 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Pt and Sarah, ----------- <. . .> > > S: 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God > pt: > Seems a bit like a view, maybe it'd be easier to say that concepts of soul and an almighty creator god are just concepts, so not real. Not sure. --------- But pt, the soul and Almighty God are not just concepts, they are false concepts. They have no validity in either ultimate reality or conventional reality. --------------------------------------------------------- That is an assertion, Ken, expressing your belief. But it doesn't express it as belief, but as fact. I also don't believe in any person/being who created the world. But this is a matter of belief, Ken, not knowing. If we were to say that this is the teaching of the Buddha and that we believe it to be so, that would be a true statement. To assert it as fact is to play fast and loose with truth, IMO. =============================== With metta, Howard Safeguarding the Truth "But to what extent, Master Gotama, is there the safeguarding of the truth? To what extent does one safeguard the truth? We ask Master Gotama about the safeguarding of the truth." "If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth. "If a person likes something... holds an unbroken tradition... has something reasoned through analogy... has something he agrees to, having pondered views, his statement, 'This is what I agree to, having pondered views,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. (From the Canki Sutta) #105470 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Dieter & Alex) - In a message dated 2/22/2010 7:36:55 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Dear Dieter (& Alex), Thank you very much for noting the points you don't completely agree with. I'll look forward to discussing these with you in more detail. We can just go slowly, one at a time. Much appreciated. Alex, I'm looking forward to seeing your list if you have time..... Anyone else too.... Howard? ----------------------------------------------------------- I'm in partial agreement and partial disagreement on each of these, Sarah. But by now you all know pretty much how I stand on these, and I'm not keen on going around the merry-go-round yet again. :-) Perhaps as the discussion gets underway, there will be times I'll want to add something. I'll play it by ear. What I consider very important is being able to distinguish what we believe from what we know. What we know, IMO, is very little! ;-) --------------------------------------------------------- And thank you for your other comments/feedback. I doubt Nina or anyone will pursue the A.Chah topic, but if so, I'll introduce your quotes and comments. I'll take them along anyway. Metta Sarah ================================= With metta, Howard Confidence Born of Knowing, Not Faith /'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness" — then you should enter & remain in them.'/ (From the Kalama Sutta) #105471 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:02 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > (105445) > > To me, the above shows that Buddha was not a Buddhist. No Buddhist would insult a Buddha and refuse to see him. Eventually Jotipala was dragged to see Buddha Kassapa and changed his heart, became a monk and two lives later became Buddha Gotama. > > > > http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/081-ghatikara-\ e1.html > > =============== > > J: I don't think the conclusion you draw here is a valid one. At that time wrong view had not been eradicated. And there is the result of past kamma to be considered also. > > Jon > Hello Jon, As I understand it, a Buddhist respects a Buddha and has Faith in Him. If Jotipala was really a Buddhist, he wouldn't reject and say those things to Buddha Kassapa. It is like Christian slandering Christ, and Virgin Mary. Again that story and other stories do cast a doubt as to the Accumulation theory (more closely to Mahayana than Suttas). The story (not found in the early suttas) of Bodhisatta taking a vow from Dipankara (?) Buddha isn't found in suttas such as DN14 (Mahapadana, it lists only the Buddhas starting from Buddha Vipassi). For example, doesn't it contradict Anatta doctrine that a person capable of Arhatship can somehow postpone his awakening through a wish? If Bodhisatta had the right view when he Met Buddha Dipankara (as the story goes), then why didn't he become Arahant then and there? Why did He lose right view and got wrong view as a Jotipala (when his perfections were 99.9%) complete? What is the use or effect of accumulations if they easily turn into wrong views? In fact doesn't this prove to the contrary? That accumulations don't always matter as much as some people believe? Maybe we shouldn't blame all our misdeeds on lack of accumulations. In my orthodox belief, I believe that if a person has causes&conditions to become an Arahant or even a stream-winner, then nothing can stop this selfless process from occuring. It is beyond control. Once you see things as they really are (yathabhutananadassana) then the other effects (nibbida->viraga->vimutti) follow on, regardless of anyone's wish to the contrary. So once there is sufficient understanding, the process will automatically flow to Nibbana. With metta, Alex #105472 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 3:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) truth_aerator >sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Dieter (& Alex), > >Thank you very much for noting the points you don't completely agree >with. I'll look forward to discussing these with you in more detail. >We can just go slowly, one at a time. Much appreciated. > >Alex, I'm looking forward to seeing your list if you have time..... >Anyone else too.... Howard? Dear Sarah, I think you know the points that we have discussions on. >19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other >than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. This isn't different from what meditation teachers see. One wisely observes namarupa and that observation brings provides more data on anicca, dukkha & anatta, which increases understanding. The more understanding there is, the more the mind automatically inclines toward kusala and sabbasankharasamatho rather than akusala. >18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in >order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to >develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path >again. Of course. How can you see anatta, if you believe in Atta that can control things? If impersonal factors of [sati, sila, panna, samatha etc] don't arise due to impersonal causes and conditions, then the understanding is wrong. If there is panna, then proper events occur. No one can control samatha. It is a natural process that happens on its own when there is sufficient panna. None of this refutes the "samatha" process that I call "formal meditation" as taught by certain teachers (ex: Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Brahm) With metta, Alex #105473 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) moellerdieter Hi Alex, below was the comment by Sarah , wasn't it? with Metta Dieter 'If impersonal factors of [sati, sila, panna, samatha etc] don't arise due to impersonal causes and conditions, then the understanding is wrong. If there is panna, then proper events occur. No one can control samatha. It is a natural process that happens on its own when there is sufficient panna. None of this refutes the "samatha" process that I call "formal meditation" as taught by certain teachers (ex: Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Brahm) With metta, Alex ----- Original Message ----- From: truth_aerator To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 22, 2010 4:14 PM Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) >sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Dieter (& Alex), > >Thank you very much for noting the points you don't completely agree >with. I'll look forward to discussing these with you in more detail. >We can just go slowly, one at a time. Much appreciated. > >Alex, I'm looking forward to seeing your list if you have time..... >Anyone else too.... Howard? Dear Sarah, I think you know the points that we have discussions on. >19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other >than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. This isn't different from what meditation teachers see. One wisely observes namarupa and that observation brings provides more data on anicca, dukkha & anatta, which increases understanding. The more understanding there is, the more the mind automatically inclines toward kusala and sabbasankharasamatho rather than akusala. >18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in >order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to >develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path >again. Of course. How can you see anatta, if you believe in Atta that can control things? If impersonal factors of [sati, sila, panna, samatha etc] don't arise due to impersonal causes and conditions, then the understanding is wrong. If there is panna, then proper events occur. No one can control samatha. It is a natural process that happens on its own when there is sufficient panna. None of this refutes the "samatha" process that I call "formal meditation" as taught by certain teachers (ex: Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Brahm) With metta, Alex #105474 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:24 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) glenjohnann Dear Sarah and Nina Nina, thank you very much for introducing my comments re conceit into the discussion on Sat. and for your follow-up question. And Sarah, thanks for reporting on the discussion. When there is no direct awarenesss of realities, yet thoughts arise about the realities that have arisen (but not known directly), such as during the course of thinking when one realizes that there has been conceit involved, I take it from Sarah's report that there is no wise intellectual understanding. Does wise intellectual understanding arise only when there is intellectual understanding that a dhamma, although not directly known, is a dhamma with the characteristic of anatta? Perhaps I am unclear as to the meaning of ?ntellectual" in as it relates to understanding the dhamma. I would be interested in hearing more about wise intellectual understanding - of any reality. Taking wrong intellectual (mis)understanding for wise understanding is akusala and as Sarah said, can only lead to more of the same. Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > 2. Ann had sent Nina an interesting and detailed letter about various reflections on the nuances of conceit and how common it is in a day. Nina read it out and asked for K.Sujin's comments. "Just thinking", was her short answer. Was it wise intellectual thinking, Nina asked? "Just thinking". Thinking a lot about oneself, taking all the akusala for one's own. Accumulating more of such thinking.... (Ann, you might like to share your comments on list....sorry you couldn't join us here this time.) > #105475 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:33 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) glenjohnann Hi Sarah On a quick reading of the questions - agree to all of them. Why the quizz? Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Dear Mike & all, > > Thank you very much for your interest and patience with all the short-hand/cryptic notes and points: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > >S: 3. Anatta and why people react strongly. "It's not what they like." > > >People are more interested in other aspects, but then it's > > > developing kusala for oneself, not for the sake of understanding > > > dhammas. Without an understanding of anatta, it can never be the > > > development just for the sake of understanding dhammas. Listening > > > for the sake of understanding - that is the result of understanding. > > > > Mike: Since anatta is a central concept of the Dhamma, and I haven't seen anyone denying it, presumably the above is actually a short-hand to refer to the reaction of "those who deny that anatta necessarily implies interpretation XXX". > .... > S: That's a good point. I didn't raise the qu above or give the answer, so I can only guess at what's implied in both. > > Firstly, non-Buddhists will probably not accept anatta as a central concept on any level, I'm sure you'll agree. They are therefore likely to react strongly to any suggestions pointing in this direction. > > Secondly, as you say, for anyone who has studied the Dhamma at all, anatta is a central concept, so why would they react strongly? Only if a)they have a different interpretation XXX, as you suggest or b)they have the same interpretation, but find it particularly disturbing. > > So let me ask you, as someone who has studied the Dhamma in quite some detail under different teachers and in different places, which of the following you agree/disagree with. Are there any comments you *react strongly* to? I think almost everyone here will react to at least some of the last items....even Ken O!! > > Actually, I'd be interested to hear responses/quiz answers from as many people as possible:) After reading the responses, I might refine it, but not much time now. > **** > So, for all: Agree/Disagree. Any strong reaction? > .... > 1. There is no soul, no Almighty God > > 2. The Buddha passed away over 2500 years ago > > 3. The Buddha taught that there are 5 khandhas > > 4. These khandhas consist of mental and physical dhammas (phenomena). > > 5. All such (conditioned) namas and rupas (mental and physical phenomena) are impermanent and thereby unsatisfactory. > > 6. Nibbana is the unconditioned dhamma. > > 7. The Buddha taught that all dhammas (sabbe dhammaa) are anatta. > > 8. Apart from these conditioned dhammas and the unconditioned dhamma, there are no other realities, no other paramattha dhammas. > > 9. Each nama or rupa arising and falling away now, such as seeing or visible object or feeling has the characteristic of anatta. > > 10. That dhamma which has the characteristic of anatta cannot be made to arise by anyone's will. Simply, there is not *anyone* to have a will. > > 11. All conditioned dhammas arise according to various conditions (as included in the 24 paccaya), not according to anything else. > > 12. Apart from these paramattha dhammas, anything else, anything else at all, is a concept. By definition, it is therefore not a reality. > > 13. When we think of Mike, Sarah, our house or the computer, there is just the thinking about concepts. If there is no thinking about them, there is no Mike, Sarah, a house or a computer. > > 14. What is touched is tangible object, what is seen is visible object. That's all. > > 15. When there is the idea of the softness being *my arm* or *my hair* and so on (in many complex ways), there is atta-sa~n~naa, remembrance of self and wrong view of self, sakkaaya di.t.thi. > > 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. > > 17. The only way that attanu-ditthi and sakkaaya di.t.thi will ever be eradicated is through the developed understanding of the reality appearing at this moment. Through such understanding of the tangible object, the feeling, the visible object or whatever appears, the characteristic of anatta becomes apparent. > > 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. > > 19. If the development of understanding is for any purpose other than just the understanding of dhammas, it's wrong again. > > 20. This understanding of the present reality is the Middle Way! > .... > Thanks in advance for any responses. > > Metta > > Sarah > ======= > #105476 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) truth_aerator Hello Dieter, all, >"Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > below was the comment by Sarah , wasn't it? > > with Metta Dieter I wrote it. However, none of that alters the fact that meditation, bhavana (or call it as you will) does happen. > 'If impersonal factors of [sati, sila, panna, samatha etc] don't arise due to impersonal causes and conditions, then the understanding is wrong. If there is panna, then proper events occur. > > No one can control samatha. It is a natural process that happens on its own when there is sufficient panna. None of this refutes the "samatha" process that I call "formal meditation" as taught by certain teachers (ex: Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Brahm) > > With metta, > > Alex #105477 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Jon, you wrote: : As far as I'm aware, the texts give a quiet place as a support for the development of jhana, but not as support for the development of vipassana. (D: I assume that you connect the development of vipassana / insight with satipatthana . > You certainly know that the development of sati is in detail described by the Maha Satipatthana Sutta hence reading the text , I believe you may change your comment : > (excerpt) > '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. etc. unquote > =============== J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" D: Jon , no side step please ..;-) I suggested that you may change your awareness of 'the texts give a quiet place ..... not as support for the development of vipassana'. (the term vipassana here understood as equivalent with satipatthana). Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" The answer to this question has 14 parts to it, comprising the rest of the section on Mindfulness of the Body. (The passage on anapanasati is the first of these parts.) D: No , the answer the texts are providing is 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. etc: J: Some of the 14 parts deal with particular cases, and some are of general application. An example of the latter is the part called The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, which reads as follows: "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in wearing the shoulder-cloak, the (other two) robes (and) the bowl, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in regard to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savored, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in defecating and in urinating, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in walking, in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practicing clear comprehension. "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally... and clings to naught in the world. Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." Note that there is no mention here of the need for a quiet place or indeed any specific kind of setting or circumstance. D: no need to mention it here because it is still under the heading ' remain focused on .. sits down ... The instructions for the Satipatthana aim to establish a framework , a kind of file system for the mind about what to be aware of in order to translate that into practise ..seeing the things as they are.. J: the passage dealing with anapanasati is one of the 'particular case' passages. It is directed to those persons who are already skilled in the development of both samatha/anapanasati and insight (only such a person could 'set mindfulness to the fore' and be 'always mindful' as he breathes in and out). It describe how for such a person there may be the development of insight (to the stage of enlightenment) with jhana as basis. D: Jon, it is a training instruction , in training we need to start with what we have. You interpret something what is not stated because - as I can see it so far - it does not fit into the core philosophy of the KS Group , i.e. satipatthana by the book (of Abhidhamma) J: But there is no statement of general doctrine here to the effect that a quiet place is a condition for the development of insight. D: I showed to you that the the texts give a quiet place (as a support for the development of jhana, as well ) as support for the development of vipassana. with Metta Dieter #105478 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) moellerdieter Hi Alex, you wrote; "I wrote it. However, none of that alters the fact that meditation, bhavana (or call it as you will) does happen. > 'If impersonal factors of [sati, sila, panna, samatha etc] don't arise due to impersonal causes and conditions, then the understanding is wrong. If there is panna, then proper events occur.> > No one can control samatha. It is a natural process that happens on its own when there is sufficient panna. None of this refutes the "samatha" process that I call "formal meditation" as taught by certain teachers (ex: Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Brahm) sorry , I do not follow .. but nevermind as it said in context to Sarah's message .. we will perhaps have another opportunity to discuss with Metta Dieter #105479 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 9:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> KH: > > . . . the soul and Almighty God are not just concepts, they are false concepts. They have no validity in either ultimate reality or conventional reality. H: > That is an assertion, Ken, expressing your belief. But it doesn't express it as belief, but as fact. -------- I'm not sure of the point you are making Howard. If I had said the moon was not made of green cheese would you have raised the same objection? As far as I am concerned both statements are equally true. --------------------------------- H: > I also don't believe in any person/being who created the world. But this is a matter of belief, Ken, not knowing. --------------------------------- Let me put it this way: If I know anything, I know there is no soul and no Almighty God. Ken H #105480 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:29 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/22/2010 4:24:33 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> KH: > > . . . the soul and Almighty God are not just concepts, they are false concepts. They have no validity in either ultimate reality or conventional reality. H: > That is an assertion, Ken, expressing your belief. But it doesn't express it as belief, but as fact. -------- I'm not sure of the point you are making Howard. If I had said the moon was not made of green cheese would you have raised the same objection? As far as I am concerned both statements are equally true. --------------------------------- H: > I also don't believe in any person/being who created the world. But this is a matter of belief, Ken, not knowing. --------------------------------- Let me put it this way: If I know anything, I know there is no soul and no Almighty God. -------------------------------------------------- In that case, I salute you!! :-) --------------------------------------------------- Ken H ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #105481 From: Vince Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: Here, consciousness, refers to patisandhi citta (the first citta > of life) and all subsequent vipaka cittas conditioned by past kamma. so I don't agree!! :) I understand D.O. is not limited to the arising of the first citta of life. I understand D.O. explain the co-arising at any time First, there is not patisandhi citta in the D.O. exposition: http://studies.worldtipitaka.org/tipitaka/12S2/1/1.1/1.1.1 "Katamo ca, bhikkhave, pat.iccasamuppa-do? Avijja-paccaya-, bhikkhave, san.kha-ra-; san.kha-rapaccaya- vińńa-n.am.; vińńa-n.apaccaya- na-maru-pam.;" Buddha used the word Vinnana to mean consciousness, and depending of the situation it is applied to both the physical arising and the arising of the -self. Second, Buddha used the word abhinibbatti to mean "reborn" but abhinibbatti means both birth and becoming: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.0:1:1767.pali third, Patisandhi citta is not an equivalent of vinnana. Because the word vinnana is more extensive. Check: http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/getobject.pl?c.3:1:1470.pali > Nama (here in the context of DO), refers to the cetasikas which > accompany these moments of consciousness. > [...] > in fact they are all conditioned by past kamma to arise together at > that first moment of consciousness. > This is why we do have to make sure we understand the terms in the > same way. Is this how you understand them? just in part :). I agree in your progression of the explanation but I don't agree in your interpretation of patisandhi citta as the vinnana appearing in the D.O.formulation of the co-arising It means the practical understanding of what is co-arising it's not the same. I believe Sujin will be aware of this and more implications, then it would be good if she can hear the question as it is. Can you carry to her the question just as it is?. Later we can discuss the answer if you wants :-) thanks and best wishes, #105482 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Vince (Ann, pt & all), --- On Tue, 23/2/10, Vince wrote: >I believe Sujin will be aware of this and more implications, then it would be good if she can hear the question as it is. Can you carry to her the question just as it is?. Later we can discuss the answer if you wants :-) .... S: Will try to do so and report back. Also pt's and any other follow up qus. Checking out shortly.....wil speak on return... Metta Sarah ===== #105483 From: han tun Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) hantun1 Dear Lukas Lukas wrote: Dear Han, > > Han: I agree with your 20 statements except No. 18. 18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. As I have said before, I will *try*, to the extent possible, *to avoid* doing unwholesome deeds, and I will *try*, to the extent possible, to *do* wholesome deeds. ----- > ? L: This can be easily akusala. The best way is to learn more of right understanding. The best kusala is the right understanding. ----- Han: Thank you very much, Lukas, for your kind advice (although I did not ask for it). But I have no intention to change my position whatever the consequence may be, akusala or otherwise. Kind regards, Han #105484 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:25 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> KH: > > If I know anything, I know there is no soul and no > Almighty God. > H: > In that case, I salute you!! :-) ---- I'm not sure if that is a compliment or the opposite. :-) I was watching a current affairs panel show last night. Someone asked if the panel was worried by the fact that our current political leaders were strongly religious - prepared to believe in an invisible being watching over us and listening to our prayers, but not (in some cases) prepared to believe the science of man-made global warming! One panelist lamented the fact that religious people had "beliefs" (and we have to pussyfoot around beliefs) whereas she as an atheist, only had "opinions." :-) Is that the sort of thing you are saying? Should I be pussyfooting around questions of "soul" and "Almighty God" while anyone is allowed to say whatever they like about mental and physical phenomena? Ken H #105485 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Feb 22, 2010 8:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/22/2010 8:25:54 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> KH: > > If I know anything, I know there is no soul and no > Almighty God. > H: > In that case, I salute you!! :-) ---- I'm not sure if that is a compliment or the opposite. :-) I was watching a current affairs panel show last night. Someone asked if the panel was worried by the fact that our current political leaders were strongly religious - prepared to believe in an invisible being watching over us and listening to our prayers, but not (in some cases) prepared to believe the science of man-made global warming! One panelist lamented the fact that religious people had "beliefs" (and we have to pussyfoot around beliefs) whereas she as an atheist, only had "opinions." :-) Is that the sort of thing you are saying? Should I be pussyfooting around questions of "soul" and "Almighty God" while anyone is allowed to say whatever they like about mental and physical phenomena? --------------------------------------------------------- I'm saying nothing more than it is a good practice/habit to say "I believe"/"I think"/"It's my view that" when speaking of something definitely not truly known, even when it is rather likely the case. The Buddha said that as well. ---------------------------------------------------------- Ken H ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #105486 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:56 am Subject: Re: On Accumulations. jonoabb Hi Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > Hi Alex > > > > (105445) > > > To me, the above shows that Buddha was not a Buddhist. No Buddhist would insult a Buddha and refuse to see him. Eventually Jotipala was dragged to see Buddha Kassapa and changed his heart, became a monk and two lives later became Buddha Gotama. > > > > > > http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/081-ghatikara-\ e1.html > > > =============== > > > > J: I don't think the conclusion you draw here is a valid one. At that time wrong view had not been eradicated. And there is the result of past kamma to be considered also. > > > > Jon > > > > > Hello Jon, > > > As I understand it, a Buddhist respects a Buddha and has Faith in Him. > If Jotipala was really a Buddhist, he wouldn't reject and say those things to Buddha Kassapa. It is like Christian slandering Christ, and Virgin Mary. Again that story and other stories do cast a doubt as to > the Accumulation theory (more closely to Mahayana than Suttas). > =============== What you're suggesting doesn't seem to fit with, for example, the Angulimala situation. Will reply to the rest of your message later in the week. Jon #105487 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Dieter --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? > =============== What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? Will reply in detail later in the week. Jon #105488 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:24 am Subject: Re: On Accumulations. truth_aerator Hello Jon, All, > "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon, all, > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > > > Hi Alex > > > > > > (105445) > > > > To me, the above shows that Buddha was not a Buddhist. No Buddhist would insult a Buddha and refuse to see him. Eventually Jotipala was dragged to see Buddha Kassapa and changed his heart, became a monk and two lives later became Buddha Gotama. > > > > > > > > http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/081-ghatikara-\ e1.html > > > > =============== > > > > > > J: I don't think the conclusion you draw here is a valid one. At that time wrong view had not been eradicated. And there is the result of past kamma to be considered also. > > > > > > Jon > > > > > > > > > Hello Jon, > > > > > > As I understand it, a Buddhist respects a Buddha and has Faith in Him. > > If Jotipala was really a Buddhist, he wouldn't reject and say those things to Buddha Kassapa. It is like Christian slandering Christ, and Virgin Mary. Again that story and other stories do cast a doubt as to > > the Accumulation theory (more closely to Mahayana than Suttas). > > =============== > > What you're suggesting doesn't seem to fit with, for example, the Angulimala situation. > > Will reply to the rest of your message later in the week. > > Jon What do you mean? Personally I do not believe that Angulimala was a Buddhist in his previous lives on a quest for more moral perfections. Certainly he had some merit (for 3-rooted rebirth, meeting the Buddha, and eventually becoming an Arhat). If he had so much perfections, why was he a mass murderer? I wouldn't really call it "accumulations of virtue" (for example) if a person did many virtuous things. A lot of merit is required to be reborn in Buddha Sassana, meet the Dhamma and be able to understand it. At this point if understanding really develops, then it is 7-8 more lives - at most. With metta, Alex #105490 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:38 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Hello Jon, Dieter, all, >dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Dieter > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > > > Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? > > =============== > > What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? > > Will reply in detail later in the week. > > Jon They are observed after the Body is dealt with. Any way you spin it, Satipatthana sutta DOES have instructions to go to the root of the tree, or some other secluded place. It does feature many instructions to develop understanding that is best done for beginners in seclusion. It does have samatha or samatha leading instructions . "Going to the forest" does require wisdom and understanding. When some wisdom is present it sees the advantages of those kinds of intense investigations and observations done in solitude. Why does one cling to houseHOLD. Often sensuality is what holds one in a house - hence house+hold. Of course sickness, responsibility for parents/others may be a valid reason. But in all other cases it is kamacchanda, and kamachandha is due to lack of understanding (especially into kama adinava). With metta, Alex #105491 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Jon, you wrote: ('D:Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? ) > =============== What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? D: I used the 'if' to meet your argument that parts may be excluded. All 4 frames are involved for the (training of ) establishment like Alex already pointed out. Mind you : for the establishment ... And for us householders a quite corner will be of support .. with Metta Dieter #105492 From: "connie" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 4:52 pm Subject: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana nichiconn Dear Han, Alex, Regarding an English translation of Khuddaka Nikaaya Apadaana Paa.li 39. Ava.taphalavaggo 10. Pubbakammapilotikabuddhaapadaana.m, I'm not sure there is an available translation of the whole or even big portions of Apadaana; I think mostly, bits and pieces quoted in other books like Pruitt's "The Commentary on the Verses of the Theriis". Pilotika: rag, old cloth. ;) now i'm curious. Can you give me more clues? A past life of our buddha? peace, connie #105493 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 6:53 pm Subject: Re: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana truth_aerator Hello Connie, Han, all, Unfortunately I am not aware of any english translation for that sutta. What is the sutta about? It literally translates as "previous-kamma-cloth-Buddha" Is it about result (merit) of offering a robe for the Buddha? With metta, Alex #105494 From: han tun Date: Tue Feb 23, 2010 9:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana hantun1 Dear Connie and Alex (Sarah), Thank you very much for your responses. > Connie: I'm not sure there is an available translation of the whole or even big portions of Apadaana; I think mostly, bits and pieces quoted in other books like Pruitt's "The Commentary on the Verses of the Theriis". Pilotika: rag, old cloth. ;) now i'm curious. Can you give me more clues? A past life of our buddha? Unfortunately I am not aware of any english translation for that sutta. What is the sutta about? It literally translates as "previous-kamma- cloth-Buddha" Is it about result (merit) of offering a robe for the Buddha? ---------- > Alex: Unfortunately I am not aware of any english translation for that sutta. What is the sutta about? It literally translates as "previous-kamma- cloth-Buddha" Is it about result (merit) of offering a robe for the Buddha? ---------- Han: It is about what the Buddha had done in his previous lives and the kamma-vipaaka he had to suffer even after he had attained the Buddhahood. It was told by the Buddha himself. I have the Pali text and the Burmese translation, but I do not have the English translation. As an example, I will give the First Vipaaka. ---------- The Buddha, in one of his past lives, was a drunkard called Munaa.li. He wrongly accused a Paccekabuddha. As the result of that kamma-vipaaka, the Buddha, in his last life, was wrongly accused in relation to a female ascetic called Sundarii. 67. ‘‘Munaa.li naamaha.m dhutto, pubbe a~n~naasu jaatisu [a~n~naaya jaatiyaa (udaana a.t.tha.)]; Paccekabuddha.m surabhi.m [sarabhu.m (sii.)], abbhaacikkhi.m aduusaka.m. 68. ‘‘Tena kammavipaakena, niraye sa.msari.m cira.m; Bahuuvassasahassaani, dukkha.m vedesi vedana.m. 69. ‘‘Tena kammaavasesena, idha pacchimake bhave; Abbhakkhaana.m mayaa laddha.m, sundarikaaya kaara.naa. ---------- Han: I wish to use the English translation when Sarah and I discuss about the vipaakas. with metta and deepest respect, Han #105495 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:22 am Subject: Re: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana ptaus1 Hi Han, Alex, connie, > Regarding an English translation of Khuddaka Nikaaya Apadaana Paa.li 39. Ava.taphalavaggo 10. Pubbakammapilotikabuddhaapadaana.m From wikipedia: A complete translation of the Apadāna into English is yet to be completed. The following have been translated into English. * Buddhapadana (the 1st), tr Dwijendralal Barua, in B.C. Law Volume, Part II, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1946, pages 186-9 * Paccekabuddhapadana (the 2nd), tr Ria Kloppenborg, in The Paccekabuddha, E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1974 * Ratthapalapadana, tr Mabel Bode, in M?langes d'Indianisme offerts par ses ?l?ves ? S. L?vi, Paris, 1911 * Pubbakammapilotikabuddhapadana, in The Udana Commentary, tr Peter Masefield, Pali Text Society[1], Bristol, volume II * 25 of the last 40 apadanas (the nuns) are included in Commentary on Verses of Theris, tr William Pruitt, 1998, Pali Text Society, Bristol. ----- If Pubbakammapilotikabuddhapadana is what you're after, then it seems it was transalted by P.Masefield in the Udana commentary and published by PTS. I checked my library, they have that book, but it is out at the moment and is due on 13 march. Maybe afterwards I'll borrow it and transcribe the passages you need, if noone else beats me to it. Best wishes pt #105496 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 3:30 am Subject: Re: How is mind defined? ptaus1 Hi Kanchuu, > How is mind defined as one of the senses? It might be a while until someone knowledgeable replies as most of them are on a trip in Thailand right now. In the meantime, maybe you can check Useful posts topics: ayatanas, doors 1 and 2. I think these should talk about the senses and the mind as the sixth one, if that's what you were asking about. If not, maybe you can give a bit more detail about what you want to know. Best wishes pt #105497 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 12:27 am Subject: Name and Fame... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Sliced by Praise, Fame, Gain and Honour: At Savatthi the blessed Buddha said: Friends, horrible are gain, honour, fame, name and praise! As if they cut through the outer skin, then through the inner skin, then through the flesh, then through the sinews, then right through to the bone! Having cut through the bone, they reach the marrow itself. So terrible indeed friends, are gain, honour, fame, name and praise... They are as if splattering pig bile over a mad dogs nose, bitter, vile, wicked, tricky, obstructive to achieving this incomparable security from domination! Friends, I have known of a certain person here whose mind I penetrated with my own mind and have thereby realized: This venerable one would not tell a deliberate lie even for the sake of his own life! Yet, sometime later, I see him telling a deliberate lie, because his mind was overwhelmed & obsessed by gain, honour, fame, name & praise... So destructive, friends, are gain, honour, fame, name and praise, so bitter, so vile and blocking any achievement of matchless security from bondage. Therefore, friends, you should train yourselves thus: "We will leave behind any arisen gain, honour, fame, name & praise and we will not let the arisen gain, honour, fame, name and praise remain obsessing or consuming our minds Thus should you train yourselves...!!!" Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya II 238 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Name and Fame... #105498 From: han tun Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 4:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana hantun1 Dear pt (Connie, Alex), > pt: A complete translation of the Apadāna into English is yet to be completed. The following have been translated into English. * Buddhapadana (the 1st), tr Dwijendralal Barua, in B.C. Law Volume, Part II, Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Poona, 1946, pages 186-9 * Paccekabuddhapadana (the 2nd), tr Ria Kloppenborg, in The Paccekabuddha, E. J. Brill, Leiden, 1974 * Ratthapalapadana, tr Mabel Bode, in M?langes d'Indianisme offerts par ses ?l?ves ? S. L?vi, Paris, 1911 * Pubbakammapilotikab uddhapadana, in The Udana Commentary, tr Peter Masefield, Pali Text Society[1], Bristol, volume II * 25 of the last 40 apadanas (the nuns) are included in Commentary on Verses of Theris, tr William Pruitt, 1998, Pali Text Society, Bristol. ----- If Pubbakammapilotikab uddhapadana is what you're after, then it seems it was transalted by P.Masefield in the Udana commentary and published by PTS. I checked my library, they have that book, but it is out at the moment and is due on 13 march. Maybe afterwards I'll borrow it and transcribe the passages you need, if noone else beats me to it. -------------------- Han: Thank you very much, pt. I really appreciate it. I look forward to receiving your transcript of Pubbakammapilotikabuddhaapadaana.m. With metta and respect, Han #105499 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:57 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > > you wrote: > > ('D:Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? ) > > =============== > > What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? > > D: I used the 'if' to meet your argument that parts may be excluded. All 4 frames are involved for the (training of ) establishment like Alex already pointed out. > Mind you : for the establishment ... > And for us householders a quite corner will be of support .. > --------- Hi Dieter, I commiserate with you when you try so patiently to show various DSG people the conventional meaning of the Dhamma. It's a bit like flogging a dead horse, isn't it? However, I do wish you could see the Dhamma from their perspective. You wouldn't have to agree with it, just see it. It would help you a lot. Do you agree that there is only the present moment? Most people would. It is quite undeniable when you think about it: the past is no more, the future has never existed, and so there is only the present moment. In the present moment, of course, there can be no things to do or places to go. So, in order to see the Dhamma in a conventional way (as a prescription of things to do and places to go) a person would have to first *snap out* of this present-moment way of seeing the world, wouldn't he? There are people at DSG who don't snap out of it. They have found an explanation of the Dhamma that is entirely consistent with the present-moment reality. That is why you aren't making any headway with them? Can you see what I mean? Again, I am not asking you to agree, just to see what I mean. :-) Ken H #105500 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Dieter) - In a message dated 2/24/2010 3:03:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Dieter, I commiserate with you when you try so patiently to show various DSG people the conventional meaning of the Dhamma. It's a bit like flogging a dead horse, isn't it? However, I do wish you could see the Dhamma from their perspective. You wouldn't have to agree with it, just see it. It would help you a lot. Do you agree that there is only the present moment? Most people would. It is quite undeniable when you think about it: the past is no more, the future has never existed, and so there is only the present moment. In the present moment, of course, there can be no things to do or places to go. So, in order to see the Dhamma in a conventional way (as a prescription of things to do and places to go) a person would have to first *snap out* of this present-moment way of seeing the world, wouldn't he? There are people at DSG who don't snap out of it. They have found an explanation of the Dhamma that is entirely consistent with the present-moment reality. That is why you aren't making any headway with them? Can you see what I mean? Again, I am not asking you to agree, just to see what I mean. :-) Ken H =================================== Ken, I think this is a very well-done post of yours, perhaps the best I've seen in putting forward your perspective. The problem that I see with it are that it leaves no room or possibility for anicca and none for bhavana. I think that if you allow yourself to consider it, you may see that there is no possibility for change in an explanation of things that doesn't allow for temporal flow of some sort. Something more needs to be said, it seems to me, than "There is only the present moment". However, I actually think that it matters little what we might say, because reality is impervious to our thinking and, in fact, evades it entirely. I believe that pretty much the best we can do with our thinking is to consistently conclude that "No, that's not quite it." ;-) Yet there is a loveliness and peace in seeing the truth - and, despite the reality of change, it IS a truth - that there is ever and only "now". With metta, Howard Free /I'm a poor but happy man of the Way. All my needs are satisfied by chance: Last night the west wind downed an old tree; at daybreak firewood covered the ground, gauze silk clouds adorned red scarps, dew drop pearls bejeweled green cliffs. What's present has always decided my living. Why should I burden myself with plans?/ (From The Zen Works of Stonehouse) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Lilies /Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these./ (From Matthew 6) #105501 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 4:00 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Howard (and Ken H.), Regarding: H: "...The problem that I see with it are that it leaves no room or possibility for anicca and none for bhavana. I think that if you allow yourself to consider it, you may see that there is no possibility for change in an explanation of things that doesn't allow for temporal flow of some sort..." Scott: The focus is too narrow - too concrete. The misunderstanding here is that, in pointing out that there is only this moment, no one is saying that 'this moment' doesn't end; nor is anyone suggesting that there was no prior moment serving as condition for this one, and a subsequent moment conditioned by this one. When a dhammaa falls away, another arises and then this too falls away. This is basic Abhidhamma, as you know (and disagree with). That takes care of anicca. As far as 'bhaavanaa' goes, when this is misunderstood to refer to something conventional called 'meditation' one then makes statements such as the above. When 'bhaavanaa' is understood as 'development' then the mere arising and falling away of a dhamma (kusala) - in the moment - *is* bhaavanaa. 'Meditation' as conventionally considered is only something someone imagines a person to be able to do. Knowing that it is only the moment relieves one of having to strive to conform to conventional notions. One sees that the emperor has no clothes. Please feel free to leave this alone since we both know how wrong we think the other to be. ;-) Sincerely, Scott. #105502 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 1:51 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) upasaka_howard Hi, Scott - In a message dated 2/24/2010 11:02:55 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, scduncan@... writes: Dear Howard (and Ken H.), Regarding: H: "...The problem that I see with it are that it leaves no room or possibility for anicca and none for bhavana. I think that if you allow yourself to consider it, you may see that there is no possibility for change in an explanation of things that doesn't allow for temporal flow of some sort..." Scott: The focus is too narrow - too concrete. The misunderstanding here is that, in pointing out that there is only this moment, no one is saying that 'this moment' doesn't end; nor is anyone suggesting that there was no prior moment serving as condition for this one, and a subsequent moment conditioned by this one. When a dhammaa falls away, another arises and then this too falls away. This is basic Abhidhamma, as you know (and disagree with). ------------------------------------------------ Though I question moments that have positive duration, the description otherwise is something that I entirely agree with. --------------------------------------------- That takes care of anicca. --------------------------------------------- Yes, indeed it does. I'm not certain that this is Ken's position. ------------------------------------------ As far as 'bhaavanaa' goes, when this is misunderstood to refer to something conventional called 'meditation' one then makes statements such as the above. ------------------------------------------ That issue is tangential to the point I'm raising. I'm simply saying that development requires time. ------------------------------------------ When 'bhaavanaa' is understood as 'development' then the mere arising and falling away of a dhamma (kusala) - in the moment - *is* bhaavanaa. 'Meditation' as conventionally considered is only something someone imagines a person to be able to do. Knowing that it is only the moment relieves one of having to strive to conform to conventional notions. One sees that the emperor has no clothes. Please feel free to leave this alone since we both know how wrong we think the other to be. ;-) ------------------------------------------ I don't think you're *completely* wrong! ;-)) ------------------------------------------ Sincerely, Scott. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #105503 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Ken H, (Howard, ......) you wrote: I commiserate with you when you try so patiently to show various DSG people the conventional meaning of the Dhamma. It's a bit like flogging a dead horse, isn't it? D: what you call 'conventional ' meaning of the Dhamma I call the 4 Noble Truths , Ken. K: However, I do wish you could see the Dhamma from their perspective. You wouldn't have to agree with it, just see it. It would help you a lot. Do you agree that there is only the present moment? Most people would. It is quite undeniable when you think about it: the past is no more, the future has never existed, and so there is only the present moment. D: many years ago I was a fan of Krishnamurti..until I recognized he had no path to offer.. K:In the present moment, of course, there can be no things to do or places to go. So, in order to see the Dhamma in a conventional way (as a prescription of things to do and places to go) a person would have to first *snap out* of this present-moment way of seeing the world, wouldn't he? D: Ken , you assume that there is a lack of understanding of the Here-and -Now .. truth is that the ordinary mind is only capable for a brief moment to be aware of the present without interference by the kamma force or the self deluded will (avijja -sankhara) . In order not to leave awareness (seeing things as they are) to short time experience by chance the mind needs training , i.e. the sila -samadhi -panna sequence of the path. I think the Teaching is very clear about that and the Abhidhamma may very well support one's development , when and if the training has reached an advanced level. Its approach to those advanced ancient disciples can be traced in the scriptures (Sariputa an outstanding example). Problems with understanding occur when the training is supposed to follow the knowledge of Abhidhamma , or even worse when it is supposed to be an alternative of the training. K:There are people at DSG who don't snap out of it. They have found an explanation of the Dhamma that is entirely consistent with the present-moment reality. That is why you aren't making any headway with them? Can you see what I mean? D: that may be the case .. though I haven't given up yet ;-) moreover DSG is a public list under the name of the Buddha Dh?mma and I am not alone among the active members who care for its true spread K: Again, I am not asking you to agree, just to see what I mean. :-) D: I understand Ken ..but do you see my point? There is no nobility without the 8fold Noble Path. with Metta Dieter #105504 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:27 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Howard (and Ken H.), Regarding: H: "Though I question moments that have positive duration, the description otherwise is something that I entirely agree with...I'm not certain that this is Ken's position." Scott: Yes, let's leave aside the whole murky question of 'positive duration/zero duration' because we'll just not reconcile it, although it is, unfortunately, central to the current question. I think I did take Ken to task months ago, not necessarily with his position as much as with his emphasis. While I don't find it helpful to focus so unremittingly on the present moment, I agree with the view that it is the moment that is relevant. This of course circles right back into 'positive/zero duration' because I am able to find no problem with the whole dhammas have characteristics and serve as conditions for subsequent, entirely discrete dhammas. H: "...I'm simply saying that development requires time." Scott: Duration or no duration, that is the question. ;-) I'm afraid that I just don't think that 'time' is a factor in development because time, in the sense I think you intend, is conceptual and is not a condition for development. It isn't a reality. Development is a function of repeated arising and falling away. H: "I don't think you're *completely* wrong! ;-))" Scott: OMG. Sincerely, Scott. #105505 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:27 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) kenhowardau Hi Howard (and Scott), ------------ <. . .> H: > Ken, I think this is a very well-done post of yours, perhaps the best I've seen in putting forward your perspective. The problem that I see with it are that it leaves no room or possibility for anicca and none for bhavana. ------------ Thanks, Howard. Your point about anicca and bhavana is a good one that needs to be discussed. Scott, in his reply, has demonstrated how there can be anicca and bhavana in a world that lasts for only one moment. (And I think you basically agreed with him - at least in the case of anicca.) So far so good; now lets do the same for the rest of the Dhamma. :-) ------------- H: > Something more needs to be said, it seems to me, than "There is only the present moment". However, I actually think that it matters little what we might say, because reality is impervious to our thinking and, in fact, evades it entirely. I believe that pretty much the best we can do with our thinking is to consistently conclude that "No, that's not quite it." ;-) Yet there is a loveliness and peace in seeing the truth - and, despite the reality of change, it IS a truth - that there is ever and only "now". -------------- There is a point at which you and I part company, isn't there Howard? As I see it, every part of the Dhamma (and the Dhamma as a whole) is telling us there is only the present moment. So I have to wonder about this "something more that needs to be said." It worries me. :-) Ken H #105506 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) upasaka_howard In a message dated 2/24/2010 6:35:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and Scott), ------------ <. . .> H: > Ken, I think this is a very well-done post of yours, perhaps the best I've seen in putting forward your perspective. The problem that I see with it are that it leaves no room or possibility for anicca and none for bhavana. ------------ Thanks, Howard. Your point about anicca and bhavana is a good one that needs to be discussed. Scott, in his reply, has demonstrated how there can be anicca and bhavana in a world that lasts for only one moment. (And I think you basically agreed with him - at least in the case of anicca.) So far so good; now lets do the same for the rest of the Dhamma. :-) ------------- H: > Something more needs to be said, it seems to me, than "There is only the present moment". However, I actually think that it matters little what we might say, because reality is impervious to our thinking and, in fact, evades it entirely. I believe that pretty much the best we can do with our thinking is to consistently conclude that "No, that's not quite it." ;-) Yet there is a loveliness and peace in seeing the truth - and, despite the reality of change, it IS a truth - that there is ever and only "now". -------------- There is a point at which you and I part company, isn't there Howard? As I see it, every part of the Dhamma (and the Dhamma as a whole) is telling us there is only the present moment. ------------------------------------------------- Well, yeah. I think that is a silly statement, a super-gross exaggeration. ;-) ----------------------------------------------- So I have to wonder about this "something more that needs to be said." It worries me. :-) ---------------------------------------------- Relax. :-) --------------------------------------------- Ken H =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #105507 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) upasaka_howard Hi again, Ken - Sorry for the missed salutation! (To you and also Scott) in the following: In a message dated 2/24/2010 7:20:18 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: In a message dated 2/24/2010 6:35:56 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard (and Scott), ------------ <. . .> H: > Ken, I think this is a very well-done post of yours, perhaps the best I've seen in putting forward your perspective. The problem that I see with it are that it leaves no room or possibility for anicca and none for bhavana. ------------ Thanks, Howard. Your point about anicca and bhavana is a good one that needs to be discussed. Scott, in his reply, has demonstrated how there can be anicca and bhavana in a world that lasts for only one moment. (And I think you basically agreed with him - at least in the case of anicca.) So far so good; now lets do the same for the rest of the Dhamma. :-) ------------- H: > Something more needs to be said, it seems to me, than "There is only the present moment". However, I actually think that it matters little what we might say, because reality is impervious to our thinking and, in fact, evades it entirely. I believe that pretty much the best we can do with our thinking is to consistently conclude that "No, that's not quite it." ;-) Yet there is a loveliness and peace in seeing the truth - and, despite the reality of change, it IS a truth - that there is ever and only "now". -------------- There is a point at which you and I part company, isn't there Howard? As I see it, every part of the Dhamma (and the Dhamma as a whole) is telling us there is only the present moment. ------------------------------------------------- Well, yeah. I think that is a silly statement, a super-gross exaggeration. ;-) ----------------------------------------------- =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #105508 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 12:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) kenhowardau Hi Dieter, ---------- <. . .> KH: > > . . . the past is no more, the future has never existed, and so there is only the present moment. D: > many years ago I was a fan of Krishnamurti. .until I recognized he had no path to offer.. ----------- I don't know any details about Krishnamurti's teaching, and so the relevance is lost on me. You do realise I was quoting a sutta, don't you? ---------------- <. . .> D: > Ken , you assume that there is a lack of understanding of the Here-and -Now .. truth is that the ordinary mind is only capable for a brief moment to be aware of the present without interference by the kamma force or the self deluded will (avijja -sankhara) . In order not to leave awareness (seeing things as they are) to short time experience by chance the mind needs training , i.e. the sila -samadhi -panna sequence of the path. ----------------- As usual, it is difficult to see if we are on the same track. But, yes, I think we are agreeing that training is required before a mind (citta) can properly understand the present-moment reality (dhamma-arammana). So let's hope there has been some training, eh? :-) ----------------------- D: > i.e. the sila -samadhi -panna sequence of the path. ----------------------- I don't want to digress here into whether the path is a 'sequence of factors' or a 'co-arising of factors,' but let's consider that the present moment is all that there is: Wouldn't it be a shame if we weren't allowed to know it as such? If there were a rule against considering the true nature of the world - because we hadn't sufficiently developed sila and samadhi yet - that would be a terrible shame, wouldn't it? ---------------- D: > I think the Teaching is very clear about that and the Abhidhamma may very well support one's development, when and if the training has reached an advanced level. Its approach to those advanced ancient disciples can be traced in the scriptures (Sariputa an outstanding example). Problems with understanding occur when the training is supposed to follow the knowledge of Abhidhamma, ---------------- The Abhidhamma is here now. Right now there is a citta (eye citta, for example), a visible object, an eye contact, a feeling (etc) that depends on eye contact . . . And that's all! How could it be any simpler? What better starting place could there be than the Abhidhamma? ---------------------- D: > or even worse when it is supposed to be an alternative of the training. ---------------------- You mean the training that is not actually found in the Tipitaka! Nowhere in the Tipitaka is there any kind of training other than the development of right understanding. Buddhist teachers the world over are telling us to walk in special ways, and quieten the mind in special ways (etc), but the Tipitaka is just telling us about conditioned dhammas. So that we can understand the ones that have arisen now! ------------------------------------- <. . .> D: > moreover DSG is a public list under the name of the Buddha Dhamma and I am not alone among the active members who care for its true spread -------------- Yes, of course. If DSG was only for already-enlightened beings there would be no need for it. :-) Ken H #105509 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:19 pm Subject: The 3 Jewels! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The 3 Jewels of Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha: Worthy, honourable and perfectly self-Enlightened is the Buddha! Consummated in knowledge and behaviour, totally transcended, expert in all dimensions, knower of all worlds, unsurpassable trainer of those who can be tamed, both teacher and guide of gods as well as of humans, blessed, exalted, awakened and enlightened is the Buddha ! Perfectly formulated is this Buddha-Dhamma , visible right here and now, immediately effective, timeless, inviting each and everyone to come and see for themselves, inspect, examine and verify. Leading each & everyone through progress towards perfection. Directly observable, experiencable and realizable by each intelligence... Perfectly training is the Noble Sangha community of Buddha's disciples; training the right way, the true way, the good way, and the direct way! Therefore do these 8 kinds of individuals, the 4 Noble pairs, deserve both gifts, self-sacrifice, offerings, hospitality and reverential salutation with joined palms, since this Noble Sangha community of the Buddha's Noble disciples, is an unsurpassable and forever unsurpassed field of merit, in this world, for this world, to honour, respect, support and protect... Repeating this verbal device daily induces growth of faith, confidence and conviction, which is the initiating spiritual ability... By thorough examination this matures into the ability to understand! Just like a razor blade which can be sharpened on a mirror... Faith emanates from the heart!!! More on these 3 Jewels - the Trinity- in Buddhism: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/library/DPPN/wtb/s_t/ti_ratana.htm <. . .> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The 3 Jewels! #105510 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:25 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Dear Scott, all, I hope we can all agree that it is good to have understanding of namarupa arise as often as possible and in all situations. With metta, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Howard (and Ken H.), > > Regarding: > > H: "Though I question moments that have positive duration, the description otherwise is something that I entirely agree with...I'm not certain that this is Ken's position." > > Scott: Yes, let's leave aside the whole murky question of 'positive duration/zero duration' because we'll just not reconcile it, although it is, unfortunately, central to the current question. I think I did take Ken to task months ago, not necessarily with his position as much as with his emphasis. While I don't find it helpful to focus so unremittingly on the present moment, I agree with the view that it is the moment that is relevant. This of course circles right back into 'positive/zero duration' because I am able to find no problem with the whole dhammas have characteristics and serve as conditions for subsequent, entirely discrete dhammas. > > H: "...I'm simply saying that development requires time." > > Scott: Duration or no duration, that is the question. ;-) I'm afraid that I just don't think that 'time' is a factor in development because time, in the sense I think you intend, is conceptual and is not a condition for development. It isn't a reality. Development is a function of repeated arising and falling away. > > H: "I don't think you're *completely* wrong! ;-))" > > Scott: OMG. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #105511 From: Gemunu Rohana Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 7:31 am Subject: 31 planes of existance in Buddhist teaching - a coloured illustration in 3d (Sinhala) gemunu.rohana Hello everyone, ?? This is my imagination of 31 planes of existance in 3d just for the sake of memorizing most of the details taught in Abhidharma (Created using Google SketchUp7.0). The first slide contains the Narakaadiya (the 136 Hells ) in all the details I could find by referring the books stated in the slides. The second slide contains all 31 planes and the life spans in each, in addition to the types of persons (out of total 12) exist in each plane. ??? Please note that all the details are in Sinhala which is my mother tongue. Please feel free to translate the slides to English and re-destribute to everyone if you know all the Buddhist English terms for contents in the slides. All the details are undestorted content taken from books by most ven. Rerukaane Chandawimala Thero. Buy and refer "Abhidharma Maargaya" and "Abhidharmaye Moolika Karunu" if you want to study the contents in extra details (available at relatively very low prices in all leading bookshops). Please forward the slides to everyone you know and share the knowledge to preserve them in more and more Buddhist minds. May the tripple Gem Bless you! May you attain Sowan ( Nirwaana) in this very life! #105512 From: Gemunu Rohana Date: Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:12 pm Subject: Re: Dhamma: 31 planes of existance in Buddhist teaching - a coloured illustration in 3d (Sinhala) [1 Attachment] gemunu.rohana Dear Rabi, ?????Thanks a lot?for?volunteering to translate the slides to English. You replied just after the request made by sister Susila on English translation.?Honestly I do not have more time to invest on studying exact English terms for all the content (Due to my commitments to vipassana meditation). The great Damma daana you are volunterring will defenitely help you reach Nirwaana even faster. Please help sister Susila with the information she wants w.r.t. Abhidamma since you are already studying it in detail. Also remember to destribute your translation among all the Buddhist forums for everyones benefit once you are done with it. There are more coloured PDF illustrations done by me on Vipassana?meditation and Abhidamma (summary style). unfortunately only in Sinhala. Hope you will be able to translate them (or get someone to translate)?too for Buddhist English readers.?Plan to destribute them all in due course.?I decided to forward this reply to the forums for the benefit of everyone interested. Please make not of the yahoo groups and join them to destribute your work (when you have time) The giving of Damma excels all givings! ?May the tripple Gem Bless you! May you attain Sowan ( Nirwaana) in this very life! ________________________________ From: Rabi Krishnaratne To: Gemunu Rohana Sent: Thu, February 25, 2010 5:42:25 AM Subject: Re: Dhamma: 31 planes of existance in Buddhist teaching - a coloured illustration in 3d (Sinhala) [1 Attachment] Metta to you Gemunu. I am studying Abhidammatha Sangaha edited by Bikkhu Bodhi of Buddhist Publication Society which was previously edited by late Venerable Naradha and will try to do the english translation. Rabi <...> #105513 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:27 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding;: A: "I hope we can all agree that it is good to have understanding of namarupa arise as often as possible and in all situations." Scott: Why do you hope this? Please explain your choice and use of the term 'namarupa' in this statement. Why are you referring specifically to 'mentality-materiality?' Sincerely, Scott. #105514 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:28 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Dear Scott, all, >Scott wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding;: > >A: "I hope we can all agree that it is good to have understanding of >namarupa arise as often as possible and in all situations." > > Scott: Why do you hope this? Understanding is crucial aspect of Dhamma. >Please explain your choice and use of the term 'namarupa' I have meant "everything" by that term. Understand that namarupa in present moment is anicca, dukkha and anatta. Similarly can be said, Understand that 5 aggregates in the present moment is anicca, dukkha and anatta. This was true in the past, will be true in the future, and is true in the present moment. With metta, Alex #105515 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:01 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding;: A: "I have meant 'everything' by that term. Understand that namarupa in present moment is anicca, dukkha and anatta...Understand that 5 aggregates in the present moment is anicca, dukkha and anatta." Scott: Why do you refer to conglomerates ('namarupa', '5 aggregates')? Sincerely, Scott. #105516 From: "connie" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 9:42 am Subject: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana nichiconn Dear pt, Han, Alex, Sarah... Thank you. Yes, the Apadaana is quoted in the Udana Commentary, Meghiya Ch., 8. Sundari. You can find a copy named zMunaali.txt in the group's Files section. peace, connie ps. the usual apologies for any typos/carelessness on my part. and now, it's off to the blackberry jungle. c #105517 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Sarah >....and talking of Ken O, he arrived in Bangkok this afternoon (from Singapore where he lives with his wife and children) and has just spent part of the afternoon with us, sitting together with us by our hotel pool discussing every DSG topic at his break-neck pace. Of course, this was all just a rehearsal before he's questioned by K.Sujin tomorrow. He now claims he's never disagreed with Jon or I on any topic and is begging for mercy:-)) Ha, ha, no chance! Lots and lots of laughter and fun.....wish you all could join us. KO:? I am just back.???In the discussions, there are still no texture support?on attanuditthi and akasa.? I did not agreed with the definition of akasa even during lunch time.????We cannot say by understanding.???When other people quote other teacher we will use the textual support, we should be consistent to our approach.? You have?to provide textual support to your 3rd term of akasa is unconditional?and attanuditthi is wider than sakkayaditthi.? with metta Ken O >? >Dear Han (Mike, Sukin & all), > >--- On Mon, 22/2/10, han tun wrote: >>I agree with your 20 statements except No. 18. >18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path again. > >>As I have said before, I will *try*, to the extent possible, *to avoid* doing unwholesome deeds, and I will *try*, to the extent possible, to *do* wholesome deeds. > >>Now, I know that it will not make sense if I agree the rest of your statements and not agree only No 18. I will be contradicting myself. And that is exactly what I am undergoing, the inner self-conflict. All the Burmese Sayaadaws teach anattaa. So I believe in anattaa. But on the other hand, I also believe in Dhammapada verse 160, attaa hi attano naatho, and that I *must* *try* to *do* something, even if, as you said, it's the wrong path. Please do not tell me that I do not understand Dhammapada verse 160 correctly:>) ). > >>Anyway, I thank you very much for coming up with these statements. >.... >S: Understood and thank you very much for your careful consideration of the statements. I was delighted that you agreed with all the other comments, including the one about the house and the one about attanuditthi: ). > >To all, we felt very honoured this morning that Han and his charming adult grandson kindly came across Bangkok with all its traffic congestion to join us for a leisurely breakfast. Nina and Lodewijk also popped over for some of the time - a most enjoyable occasion. > >We discussed many topics with Han including the one above. > >Han's grandson has grown up and been educated (in Myanmar) as a Buddhist and has considered the Teachings for himself, just looking to the Buddha as his Teacher. We read out the 20 statements to him as well, but he disagreed with most of them, even starting with the first one! As I recall, he did agree with the one Han disagreed with!! He didn't like "reality", "realities", "dhamma", "dhammas" and thought many of the comments should just refer to arahats. He didn't accept that all impermanent dhammas are dukkha - he thought this depended on the person and thought that only arahats know anatta. He also strongly thought that it's oneself that makes things happen, such as choosing to fly over from Hong Kong, deciding what to eat and so on. We had very lively discussions, lots of strong reactions, Mike, but in a very pleasant way. > >So this was partly my point - to indicate that we all, including Han's grandson, agree that the teachings are about anatta (as you said, Mike), but people do disagree with/react to many aspects of what this means as you'll have seen by now. > >Another topic that came up with Han was on vipaka (following from my discussion with Ken O). Han mentioned the "12 vipaka" and perhaps we can discuss these in more detail from an Abhidhamma perspective. No hurry, Han, but I think this would be a useful topic sometime, perhaps after I return from KK. > >....and talking of Ken O, he arrived in Bangkok this afternoon (from Singapore where he lives with his wife and children) and has just spent part of the afternoon with us, sitting together with us by our hotel pool discussing every DSG topic at his break-neck pace. Of course, this was all just a rehearsal before he's questioned by K.Sujin tomorrow. He now claims he's never disagreed with Jon or I on any topic and is begging for mercy:-)) Ha, ha, no chance! Lots and lots of laughter and fun.....wish you all could join us. > >(Han, when I mentioned we'd seen you in the morning and passed on your warm regards, he said he'd have really liked to have met you and hopes to another time. He didn't realise you were in Bkk.) > >Metta > >Sarah >====== > #105518 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:22 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Dear Scott, all, >dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding;: > > A: "I have meant 'everything' by that term. Understand that namarupa >in present moment is anicca, dukkha and anatta...Understand that 5 >aggregates in the present moment is anicca, dukkha and anatta." > > Scott: Why do you refer to conglomerates ('namarupa', '5 aggregates')? Because it has triple characteristics. Or do you believe that any*thing* is not anicca, dukkha or anatta? With metta, Alex #105519 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Ken H, you wrote: KH: > > . . . the past is no more, the future has never existed, and so there is only the present moment. D: > many years ago I was a fan of Krishnamurti. .until I recognized he had no path to offer.. ----------- I don't know any details about Krishnamurti's teaching, and so the relevance is lost on me. D: his point was exclusively Here -and -Now ..interesting life story .. you should Google K:You do realise I was quoting a sutta, don't you? D: I recall something similar , what was still your source? One may however not forget that the Here-and-Now- is the accumulation of the past and our reaction towards it is the major factor for the future, see as well S:N. XXX 145 Transl. T.B. : Monks, I will teach you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak. "Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma. "And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma. "And what is the cessation of kamma? Whoever touches the release that comes from the cessation of bodily kamma, verbal kamma, & mental kamma: This is called the cessation of kamma. "And what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is called the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. "So, monks, I have taught you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. 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, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." ---------------- <. . .> D: > Ken , you assume that there is a lack of understanding of the Here-and -Now .. truth is that the ordinary mind is only capable for a brief moment to be aware of the present without interference by the kamma force or the self deluded will (avijja -sankhara) . In order not to leave awareness (seeing things as they are) to short time experience by chance the mind needs training , i.e. the sila -samadhi -panna sequence of the path. ----------------- As usual, it is difficult to see if we are on the same track. But, yes, I think we are agreeing that training is required before a mind (citta) can properly understand the present-moment reality (dhamma-arammana). So let's hope there has been some training, eh? :-) D: the track I try to convey concerns the path training which the Buddha again and again pointed out and which can be traced quite easily . It is quite logical that avoidance of the unwholesome and taking care for the wholesome (kamma), i.e. sila , provides the ground for concentration . And concentration(samadhi) -this learning to remain focused e.g. on the four frames of satipatthana - enables that insight , which knows (panna) by own experience the nature of things ( dhammas): anicca, dukkha, anatta . Following: (S.N. XII, 23 :... knowledge and clearseeing according to actuality is the condition for disentchantment, disentchantment is the condition for detachment , detachment is the condition for liberation and liberation is the condition for knowledge of exhaustion. Please note that knowledge and clearseeing to actuality (i.e. Here-and-Now) serves only as condtion, is not the end ... what is your track (of training)? so far for now.. with Metta Dieter #105520 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:30 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding;: A: "Because it has triple characteristics. Or do you believe that any*thing* is not anicca, dukkha or anatta?" Scott: Because *what* has triple characteristics, Alex? Precision, man. What exactly is the 'thing' you are referring to? Sincerely, Scott. #105521 From: han tun Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 2:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) hantun1 Dear Sarah, When we met at the breakfast on 22 February 2010, you said you were surprised that I agreed to No. 16. 16. When there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, a thing, a substance or whole, it is attanu di.t.thi, also an idea of atta, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. You remembered very well that I strongly disagreed with Ajahn Sujin, about two years ago, when she explained attanudi.t.thi with the examples of a biscuit tin and a glass. Why then I agreed now? After that discussion two years ago, I read Samaadi.t.thi Diipanii by Ledi Sayaadaw. In Part Three of the Diipanii, Sayaadaw wrote that the word attaa is used to convey the following three interpretations: (1) asaaraka.t.thena-anattaa: on account of being without essence or substance it is called anattaa. (2) asaamika.t.thena-anattaa: on account of not having any owner or overlord it is called anattaa. (3) avasavattana.t.thena-anattaa: on account of its not yielding to another's will it is called anattaa. Sayaadaw elaborated further on these three interpretations, and under asaaraka.t.thena-anattaa, he wrote: "I shall explain the above with an example. There are such things as wooden bowl, earthen bowl, brass bowl, silver bowl and gold bowl. A bowl made of wood has wood as its substance and is called a wooden bowl; a bowl made of earth has earth as its substance and it is called an earthen bowl; a bowl made of iron has iron as its substance and is called an iron bowl; a bowl made of silver has silver as its substance and is called a silver bowl; and a bowl made of gold has gold as its substance and is called a gold bowl. Here, the word 'bowl' is merely the name by which is indicated a certain pictorial idea (sa.n.thaana-pa~n~natti), and this conventional term of 'bowl' possesses no essence or substance as an ultimate thing". Han: Thus, in the context of the first interpretation by Ledi Sayaadaw, I agreed that when there is an idea of the tangible object or visible object being a computer, or a biscuit tin, or a glass, it is attanu di.t.thi, but not sakkaaya di.t.thi. I do not expect others to agree with me, and if someone disagrees with me I will not defend my stand, and I have nothing more to add. Respectfully, Han #105522 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 4:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) kenhowardau Hi Dieter, -------------------- <. . .> D: > One may however not forget that the Here-and-Now- is the accumulation of the past and our reaction towards it is the major factor for the future, see as well S:N. XXX 145 Transl. T.B.: Monks, I will teach you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak. --------------------- Thanks for another excellent sutta quote. I like the way many suttas begin with "I will teach you the . . ." and then go on to show how some banal, commonplace, simple fact can be understood in the light of the profound, unique, difficult to understand, Dhamma. I always rely on experts to interpret suttas for me, and I can't see some of the precise points being made in this one. However, I do know that the subject, "new and old kamma, the cessation of kamma and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma," is being explained in terms of paramattha dhammas. The eye, nose, ear (etc) are paramattha dhammas. Wouldn't you agree? ------------------------------ > "Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body...The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma. "And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma. ------------------------------------------------------ The Buddha is talking about "now" isn't he? He is not talking about some future time when we have (for example) gone to a quiet place, sat with folded legs and concentrated on breathing. ---------------------------------------- > "And what is the cessation of kamma? Whoever touches the release that comes from the cessation of bodily kamma, verbal kamma, & mental kamma: This is called the cessation of kamma. ---------------------------------------- The translation is obscure to my mind, but we know from other suttas that nibbana is the cessation of conditioned dhammas. ----------------------------------------------------------- > "And what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is called the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. ------------------------------------------------------------ To an outsider, that could sound banal, commonplace, straightforward and no different from lots of other teachings. But to someone who understood it - to someone who knew that the entire world existed for only one moment - it would be totally profound and unique. The path taught by the Buddha was a single citta! Just like now! :-) --------------------------------- > "So, monks, I have taught you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Whatever a teacher should do - seeking the welfare of his disciples, out of sympathy for them - that have I done for you. ---------------------------------- So he has taught conditioned dhammas, their cause, their cessation, and the path. He has done everything a teacher of ultimate reality possibly could do. The next part can be tricky: -------------------------------------- > "Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." --------------------------------------- We know that the word jhana can have different meanings in different contexts. (See Useful Posts - jhana, two meanings.) Here, I can only see it as meaning, develop insight. It most certainly does not mean practice jhana absorption, the same thing that was already taught by other teachers before the Buddha ever appeared in the world. Why the Buddha mentioned roots of trees and empty dwellings, I am not sure. Perhaps he was saying that the monks now had everything they needed - the Dhamma and the basic requisites of life? Or perhaps he was telling them to continue on as before with their normal, daily routines, while knowing there were ultimately only dhammas. ------------------------------------------ D: > the track I try to convey concerns the path training which the Buddha again and again pointed out and which can be traced quite easily . It is quite logical that avoidance of the unwholesome and taking care for the wholesome (kamma), i.e. sila , provides the ground for concentration .And concentration(samadhi) -this learning to remain focused e.g. on the four frames of satipatthana - enables that insight , which knows (panna) by own experience the nature of things ( dhammas): anicca, dukkha, anatta . Following: (S.N. XII, 23 :... knowledge and clearseeing according to actuality is the condition for disentchantment, disentchantment is the condition for detachment , detachment is the condition for liberation and liberation is the condition for knowledge of exhaustion. Please note that knowledge and clearseeing to actuality (i.e. Here-and-Now) serves only as condtion, is not the end ... -------------------------------------------- I see knowledge and clear seeing as the beginning, middle, and end of the Path. So we don't quite see eye-to-eye on that. :-) ---------------------------------- D: > what is your track (of training)? ---------------------------------- "The Path exists, but no traveller on it is seen." (Vis.) So there cannot be "my" track of training, can there? There can only be the paramattha dhammas that make up the path. Just as, now, there are only the dhammas that make up seeing or hearing etc. So I am not trying to be pedantic, I genuinely don't think in terms of "my" training. Ken H #105523 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 3:48 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Dear Scott, allm > "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding;: > >A: "Because it has triple characteristics. Or do you believe that >any*thing* is not anicca, dukkha or anatta?" > > Scott: Because *what* has triple characteristics, Alex? Precision, >man. What exactly is the 'thing' you are referring to? 5 aggregates (rupa, vedana, sanna, sankhara and vinnana) Where are you going with these questions? With metta, Alex #105524 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:23 pm Subject: The 7 Latent Tendencies... bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The Seven Latent Tendencies (Anusaya ): 1: The Latent Tendency to Sense-Desire. 2: The Latent Tendency to Aversion and Anger. 3: The Latent Tendency to Skeptical Doubt. 4: The Latent Tendency to Speculative Views. 5: The Latent Tendency to the Conceit "I am". 6: The Latent Tendency to Craving for Becoming. 7: The Latent Tendency to Blind Ignorance. These are inherently deeply imbedded, hidden in the core of the mind, where these subtle tendencies ever again exert their harmful influence over our thoughts, speech & behaviour. Biased by such corrupt inclinations, any intention to act will produce detrimental and painful future results... The only tool capable of overcoming and extracting them is this quite Noble Eightfold Way: The Ariya Magga: 1. Right View (samma-ditthi) 2. Right Motivation (samma-sankappa) 3. Right Speech (samma-vaca) 4. Right Action (samma-kammanta) 5. Right Livelihood (samma-ajiva) 6. Right Effort (samma-vayama) 7. Right Awareness (samma-sati) 8. Right Concentration (samma-samadhi) More on the Latent Tendencies (Anusaya ): <. . .> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri Lanka * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The 7 Latent Tendencies... #105525 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:56 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding;: A: "5 aggregates (rupa, vedana, sanna, sankhara and vinnana). Where are you going with these questions?" Scott: I am pretty sure you used the term 'namarupa' as opposed to, say, dhammas, on purpose. You sought agreement but I am pretty sure, once you actually spell out your meanings, we won't agree. From long association I know that your deep and strong belief in one's ability to set conditions for the arising of kusala based on your own understanding of 'effort' will be behind any seemingly agreeable response you make. To me, this is wrong view and it suffuses the way you see the Dhamma. Sincerely, Scott (a very trusting sort ;-)) #105526 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 6:44 pm Subject: Re: To Connie and Alex: Apadaana ptaus1 Dear connie, (Han, Alex) Thanks very much for Han's apadana. Your fingers must be running on rocket-grade fuel to transcribe this much in such a short time :) Best wishes pt > Yes, the Apadaana is quoted in the Udana Commentary, Meghiya Ch., 8. Sundari. You can find a copy named zMunaali.txt in the group's Files section. #105527 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:26 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ptaus1 Hi Jon, Thanks for your reply. > J: Are you referring to the path factor of samma-samadhi being defined in terms of the 4 jhanas? To my understanding, the path factors are the cetasikas that accompany moments of path consciousness. Samma samadhi is the concentration cetasika of ekaggata. At the moment of path consciousness, the accompanying ekaggata cetasika is of the intensity of one of the 4 jhanas. (That in brief is how I understand it.) pt: In this connection, is the cetasika of concentration the same in jhana and vipassana? What I mean is - often it's said that panna can be of two kinds/levels - samatha and vipassana, which is why developing jhana and panna of the samatha kind doesn't really help with developing panna of the vipassana kind. However, when you say above that the cetasika concentration reaches the intensity of the first jhana during path consciousness (vipassana), does that mean that the kind of concentration cetasika is of the same kind as the one in the first jhana (samatha)? I.e. the samatha/vipassana split aplies only to panna, not to other cetasikas? > J: For every (present-day) savaka, the teachings need to be heard in detail and repeatedly. > > The other factors you mention are matters of predisposition that vary from one person to another. They are not considered to be prerequisites. pt: Thanks, "prerequisite" is a good term to have in mind. Best wishes pt #105528 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 7:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ptaus1 Hi KenH, (Dieter, Alex) > > "Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. > Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." > --------------------------------------- > > KenH: We know that the word jhana can have different meanings in different contexts. (See Useful Posts - jhana, two meanings.) Here, I can only see it as meaning, develop insight. It most certainly does not mean practice jhana absorption, the same thing that was already taught by other teachers before the Buddha ever appeared in the world. pt: Thanks for mentioning the UP topic on two kinds of jhana, I wasn't aware of this. I.e. without it, your statement that "pratice jhana" in fact means "develop insight" would seem quite dubious. But after reading a few posts from the UP topic, it seems that "practice jhana" is a mistranslation and more likely the meaning was to develop meditation on characterisics (i.e. vipassana) rather than meditation on object (samatha). As I presume Dieter and Alex might be skeptical about this as well, please read a few posts from the UP topic that KenH suggests: Jhana16 - Two Meanings... Like this post by RobertK for example, which addresses the same sutta passage abut the trees and "practice jhana": http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/11524 Best wishes pt #105529 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 10:29 pm Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ptaus1 Hi Jon, Thanks for your reply. > J: The realisation that anger is happening is available to anyone regardless of whether they've heard the teachings or not (unless I'm misunderstanding your meaning ? always possible of course). In which case, it's just a kind of thinking. As I see it, the anger that is the subject of such realisation would have already passed away. pt: Could you please explain a bit how is the direct awareness of individual characteristics of dhammas that you mention (so not insight stage as yet, and not recognising the tilakkhana yet) different from realisation that anger is happening that's available to anyone (here let's discount the thinking that comes after realising that there's anger - Nina already suggested that there's identification with the anger there - i.e. "my anger", "I'm angry", etc. But, I'm considering that before this thinking can happen, there has to be at least a moment first of knowing that this is anger (as distinct from sorrow for example)). So I'm still just trying to find out what is the difference between the awareness of individual characteristics of dhammas that you mention, and the one that's available to everyone. Thanks. Best wishes pt #105530 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:13 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. jonoabb Hi Alex (105471) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > As I understand it, a Buddhist respects a Buddha and has Faith in Him. > If Jotipala was really a Buddhist, he wouldn't reject and say those things to Buddha Kassapa. It is like Christian slandering Christ, and Virgin Mary. Again that story and other stories do cast a doubt as to > the Accumulation theory (more closely to Mahayana than Suttas). > =============== I think the texts do not classify persons as "Buddhists" (by which I think you mean, persons who have come across the teachings in a previous lifetime) and others. The commentaries make it clear that the path to enlightenment is a path of many aeons and Buddha-eras in its duration. > =============== > For example, doesn't it contradict Anatta doctrine that a person capable of Arhatship can somehow postpone his awakening through a wish? If Bodhisatta had the right view when he Met Buddha Dipankara (as the story goes), then why didn't he become Arahant then and there? > =============== There is no conflict between the teaching on anatta as a characteristic of dhammas and the notion that an aspiration to an achievement beyond mere enlightenment (i.e., to Buddhahood or to becoming one of the 'foremost' disciples of a Buddha) should have the effect of prolonging the time it will take to become enlightened. It seems quite obvious to me that if there is to be attainment of enlightenment with special powers/skills etc, there must be the acquisition of special powers/skills etc in the lifetimes before enlightenment. > =============== Why did He lose right view and got wrong view as a Jotipala (when his perfections were 99.9%) complete? > =============== It's not a question of 'losing' right view and 'getting' wrong view. It's a question of being a person who has accumulations of both wrong and right view, and of there being occasion for the arising of one rather than the other. Even the Buddha as a Bodhisatta in his final life pursued ascetic practices that he later came to see as being not the path. > =============== > In my orthodox belief, I believe that if a person has causes&conditions to become an Arahant or even a stream-winner, then nothing can stop this selfless process from occuring. It is beyond control. Once you see things as they really are (yathabhutananadassana) then the other effects (nibbida->viraga->vimutti) follow on, regardless of anyone's wish to the contrary. So once there is sufficient understanding, the process will automatically flow to Nibbana. > =============== What you say here describes the person known as 'cula-sotapanna'. Prior to a certain stage of insight development, there is no assurance of attainment of enlightenment; that is to say, accumulated wrong view can still assert itself and lead to the commission of akusala kamma sufficient to result in the loss of insight already attained. Jon #105531 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:07 pm Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi KenO It was great having you at the discussions at Kaeng Krachaan. I hope you found it useful. (105388) > KO: Even when we talk about satipatthana sutta, about the body mindfulness, then feelings, these are consider steps. > =============== In our discussion yesterday morning (at KK ? seems a world away already!) you said that the notion of satipatthana as "steps" was based on the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta which, you explained, specifies jhana then mindfulness of the body then mindfulness of feelings in that order. I'd be interested to see the commentary passage in question. Would you mind posting it? Thanks. > =============== > KO: I have made this assertation that it is the withdrawal of the senses before one could achieve jhanas. > =============== You seemed to agree at the discussion yesterday morning that references to withdrawal from sense-pleasures are references to arising panna. Thus it would not be something separate from or other than the development of samatha itself. Jon #105532 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Dieter (105477) > J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" > > D: Jon , no side step please ..;-) > =============== J: Just repeating a sutta quote which you posted ;-)) > =============== > I suggested that you may change your awareness of 'the texts give a quiet place ..... not as support for the development of vipassana'. (the term vipassana here understood as equivalent with satipatthana). > Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? > =============== J: You are referring to this one reference within the section on awareness of the body, namely, the case of the person who is already skilled in anapanasati (and awareness/insight). To my understanding, the reference to the quiet place is a reference to an existing lifestyle (supporting the development of samatha/jhana), rather being an instruction for those whose lifestyle is otherwise to change it (in order to support the development of awareness/insight). > =============== > D: No , the answer the texts are providing is > 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. etc: > =============== J: As I read the sutta, this is just the beginning of the answer to the question of how a person remains focussed on the body in and of itself. The complete answer continues for another 13 parts. > =============== > "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; ... > > Note that there is no mention here of the need for a quiet place or indeed any specific kind of setting or circumstance. > > D: no need to mention it here because it is still under the heading ' remain focused on .. sits down ... > =============== J: I disagree ;-)) The part dealing with anapanasati (that includes the passage about remaining focused etc") ends with the words "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, ...". Then follows the part on the Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, beginning "And further, O bhikkhus, ..." and ending with the words ""Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, ...". And so on for the remaining 12 parts of the section on kayanupassana. > =============== > The instructions for the Satipatthana aim to establish a framework , a kind of file system for the mind about what to be aware of in order to translate > that into practise ..seeing the things as they are.. > =============== J: The sutta does not specify an order to be followed. It simply explains all the possible objects of awareness/insight, classifying them as fourfold (with a certain amount of overlap). > =============== > D: Jon, it is a training instruction , in training we need to start with what we have. > You interpret something what is not stated because - as I can see it so far - it does not fit into the core philosophy of the KS Group , i.e. satipatthana by the book (of Abhidhamma) > =============== J: I'm giving the words 'set mindfulness to the fore' and 'always mindful' a particular interpretation, one that you disagree with ;-)) Your suggestion of a "training instruction" is equally an interpretation rather than a direct quote. > =============== > D: I showed to you that the the texts give a quiet place (as a support for the development of jhana, as well ) as support for the development of vipassana. > =============== J: As I say, this is a matter of interpretation. Jon #105533 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:29 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. jonoabb Hi Alex (105488) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > ... > What do you mean? Personally I do not believe that Angulimala was a Buddhist in his previous lives on a quest for more moral perfections. Certainly he had some merit (for 3-rooted rebirth, meeting the Buddha, and eventually becoming an Arhat). > =============== J: You are suggesting, I think, that Angulimala heard the teachings for the first time ever in his final lifetime. That is certainly not the orthodox interpretation of the teachings. > =============== If he had so much perfections, why was he a mass murderer? I wouldn't really call it "accumulations of virtue" (for example) if a person did many virtuous things. > =============== J: There are ample instances in the Theratherigatha of followers who, having heard the teachings and developed insight, committed strong akusala kamma subsequently. > =============== > A lot of merit is required to be reborn in Buddha Sassana, meet the Dhamma and be able to understand it. At this point if understanding really develops, then it is 7-8 more lives - at most. > =============== J: In my view our focus should be on the development of understanding, rather than on the anticipation of becoming enlightened any time soon ;-)) Jon #105534 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Feb 25, 2010 11:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Alex (105490) > > What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? > > They are observed after the Body is dealt with. > =============== J: I'd be interested to know what part(s) of the sutta convey to you the idea that awareness of feeling, mind and dhammas can only be developed after mindfulness of the body has been developed (and to what stage would that mindfulness of the body have to be developed?). Please note that the section on mindfulness of dhammas includes mindfulness of rupas, of jhana citta and in fact of everything that is covered by the preceding 3 sections. > =============== > Any way you spin it, Satipatthana sutta DOES have instructions to go to the root of the tree, or some other secluded place. > =============== J: That is your reading of the section on anapanasati. We may have to agree to disagree on this point ;-)) > =============== It does feature many instructions to develop understanding that is best done for beginners in seclusion. It does have samatha or samatha leading instructions . > ================ J: The part dealing with anapanasati is not for beginners (IMO)! > =============== > > "Going to the forest" does require wisdom and understanding. When some wisdom is present it sees the advantages of those kinds of intense investigations and observations done in solitude. > > > Why does one cling to houseHOLD. Often sensuality is what holds one in a house - hence house+hold. Of course sickness, responsibility for parents/others may be a valid reason. But in all other cases it is kamacchanda, and kamachandha is due to lack of understanding (especially into kama adinava). > =============== J: If as you say (rightly, I think) kamachanda is due to a lack of understanding, then the 'cure' should be the development of understanding (rather than seclusion). Jon #105535 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:17 am Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 mikenz66 Hi Jon: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > In our discussion yesterday morning (at KK ? seems a world away already!) you said that the notion of satipatthana as "steps" was based on the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta which, you explained, specifies jhana then mindfulness of the body then mindfulness of feelings in that order. > > I'd be interested to see the commentary passage in question. Would you mind posting it? Thanks. Here's the link: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html I'm not sure which mention of jhana you want, but the first mention is in discussing this passage from the synopsis: Sutta: Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus as follows: "This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." Commentary: Cattaro Satipatthana = "The Four Arousings of Mindfulness." Four in relation to classes of objects of mindfulness. ... [talks about different types, dull-witted, keen-witted, etc...] ... Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse: The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. Metta Mike #105536 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 1:56 am Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi pt (105527) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > ... > pt: In this connection, is the cetasika of concentration the same in jhana and vipassana? What I mean is - often it's said that panna can be of two kinds/levels - samatha and vipassana, which is why developing jhana and panna of the samatha kind doesn't really help with developing panna of the vipassana kind. > =============== J: The ekaggata cetasika is one of the 'universal' cetasikas, that is to say, that arises with every citta. When the citta is kusala, so is the ekaggata, when the citta is akusala, so is the ekaggata. It has no particular moral/ethical quality of its own. Likewise, when the citta is of path level (mundane or supramundane), the ekaggata is of the appropriate level/strength. > =============== > However, when you say above that the cetasika concentration reaches the intensity of the first jhana during path consciousness (vipassana), does that mean that the kind of concentration cetasika is of the same kind as the one in the first jhana (samatha)? I.e. the samatha/vipassana split aplies only to panna, not to other cetasikas? > =============== J: As I understand it, the reference to jhana is illustrative of the intensity of the concentration that occurs at magga citta level. Hoping this answers your question. Jon #105537 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:18 am Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi pt (105529) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > ... > pt: Could you please explain a bit how is the direct awareness of individual characteristics of dhammas that you mention (so not insight stage as yet, and not recognising the tilakkhana yet) different from realisation that anger is happening that's available to anyone (here let's discount the thinking that comes after realising that there's anger - Nina already suggested that there's identification with the anger there - i.e. "my anger", "I'm angry", etc. But, I'm considering that before this thinking can happen, there has to be at least a moment first of knowing that this is anger (as distinct from sorrow for example)). > =============== J: The function of sati is to not be forgetful of the characteristic of a presently arising dhamma. Thus, what appears when there is direct awareness is a characteristic of a dhamma, that is to say, in the case of, say, seeing consciousness, that it is the (mere) experiencing of an object (namely, of visible object). That's why it's helpful to consider more about dhammas, their characteristics and functions. There needs to be a good appreciation at the intellectual level of namas and rupas, the nature of sati, and how moments of sati differ from non-sati moments (which is of course exactly your question!) The realisation, available to anyone, that anger is happening is not accompanied by sati and panna, and does not have a dhamma as its object. It is in fact thinking about the manifestation of anger that has happened moments ago. > =============== > So I'm still just trying to find out what is the difference between the awareness of individual characteristics of dhammas that you mention, and the one that's available to everyone. Thanks. > =============== J: This whole area is frequently the subject of discussion in our meetings with AS, and I recommend listening to what she has to say about it. Hoping this has been of some help. There's no 'text-book' answer here ;-)) Jon #105538 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Ann, (Sukin, Ken O & all) Of course, we thought of you in KK, knowing how much you'd have liked to have joined us - hopefully next time! --- On Tue, 23/2/10, glenjohnann wrote: >When there is no direct awarenesss of realities, yet thoughts arise about the realities that have arisen (but not known directly), such as during the course of thinking when one realizes that there has been conceit involved, I take it from Sarah's report that there is no wise intellectual understanding. Does wise intellectual understanding arise only when there is intellectual understanding that a dhamma, although not directly known, is a dhamma with the characteristic of anatta? Perhaps I am unclear as to the meaning of ?ntellectual" in as it relates to understanding the dhamma. >I would be interested in hearing more about wise intellectual understanding - of any reality. Taking wrong intellectual (mis)understanding for wise understanding is akusala and as Sarah said, can only lead to more of the same. .... S: More (separately) from the first eveing discussion in KK. Near the beginning of the discussion, we were sitting outside in the garden and KS was mentioning intellectual right understanding and so I read out your comments to her and the group. KS responded by saying that while we're talking about and reflecting on such experiences, such as conceit that arose during the day, what has gone? In other words, all that we have contemplated on or just read about has gone a long time ago. All day, we're just following the story and this is throughout life unless right understanding of present realities develops. So, (as I understand), thinking about past experiences, even past dhammas, is clearly not the understanding of present realities. Intellectual right understanding, pariyatti, has to be the understanding of present dhammas, otherwise it could not lead to the development of satipatthana and the growth of the eightfold path. Thx for the helpful contribution. If you have any further follow up, we'll have another discussion on Sat afternoon at the Foundation. Metta Sarah p.s This is one of Sukin's favourite topics, so he may be interested to add more or Ken O (if he was listening!!) ====== #105539 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Fri, 26/2/10, Ken O wrote: >KO:? I am just back.???In the discussions, there are still no texture support?on attanuditthi and akasa.? I did not agreed with the definition of akasa even during lunch time.????We cannot say by understanding.???When other people quote other teacher we will use the textual support, we should be consistent to our approach.? You have?to provide textual support to your 3rd term of akasa is unconditional? and attanuditthi is wider than sakkayaditthi.? ... S: :-) You just have a different understanding of the "textual support" I provide.... and in the end, as KS was saying, "The dhamma is not in the book". It comes down to the understanding. Any attanuditthi when you like in the mirror? How about for the child or the monkey? What about when you look at the computer? Of if the child or monkey looks at the computer? Glad you made it home safely! As Jon said, we were glad you could join us and hope you found it worthwile, even though none of us had come with the "textual supports" you'd have liked to have seen:) I started listening to a tape for editing and can hear all your laughter and then a big crash when the first chair collapsed.....Anything can happen!! It was all most enjoyable for us as well as being packed with good dhamma discussion. (For others, Ken found the pace too slow, so after day 1, he read a book, "Survey", at the same time as listening to and joining in the discussions, as well as walking around, eating, drinking and showing complete mastery in multi-tasking:-)) Why not give everyone a short account of the "dinosaur jamboree"? Metta Sarah ========= #105540 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Sarah and Ann You are right, I am not listening on that email when you ask as I could not recall :-).? I must have been looking for snack to bite, or something to drink or looking around. >KS responded by saying that while we're talking about and reflecting on such experiences, such as conceit that arose during the day, what has gone? In other words, all that we have contemplated on or just read about has gone a long time ago. All day, we're just following the story and this is throughout life unless right understanding of present realities develops. > >So, (as I understand), thinking about past experiences, even past dhammas, is clearly not the understanding of present realities. Intellectual right understanding, pariyatti, has to be the understanding of present dhammas, otherwise it could not lead to the development of satipatthana and the growth of the eightfold path. KO:? You are also right on this, when we reflect on past experiences is it not understanding the present realities but only thinking of the memories.? Only when one is aware that the present moment is thinking of the past experiences, that is wise intellectual understanding.??? Does wise intellectual understanding arise only when there is intellectual understanding that a dhamma, although not directly known, is a dhamma with the characteristic of anatta? KO:? Yes only?at the present moment. We all hope Sukin will write :-)? Cheers Ken O >? >Dear Ann, (Sukin, Ken O & all) > >Of course, we thought of you in KK, knowing how much you'd have liked to have joined us - hopefully next time! > >--- On Tue, 23/2/10, glenjohnann wrote: >>When there is no direct awarenesss of realities, yet thoughts arise about the realities that have arisen (but not known directly), such as during the course of thinking when one realizes that there has been conceit involved, I take it from Sarah's report that there is no wise intellectual understanding. Does wise intellectual understanding arise only when there is intellectual understanding that a dhamma, although not directly known, is a dhamma with the characteristic of anatta? Perhaps I am unclear as to the meaning of ?ntellectual" in as it relates to understanding the dhamma. > >>I would be interested in hearing more about wise intellectual understanding - of any reality. Taking wrong intellectual (mis)understanding for wise understanding is akusala and as Sarah said, can only lead to more of the same. >.... >S: More (separately) from the first eveing discussion in KK. Near the beginning of the discussion, we were sitting outside in the garden and KS was mentioning intellectual right understanding and so I read out your comments to her and the group. > >KS responded by saying that while we're talking about and reflecting on such experiences, such as conceit that arose during the day, what has gone? In other words, all that we have contemplated on or just read about has gone a long time ago. All day, we're just following the story and this is throughout life unless right understanding of present realities develops. > >So, (as I understand), thinking about past experiences, even past dhammas, is clearly not the understanding of present realities. Intellectual right understanding, pariyatti, has to be the understanding of present dhammas, otherwise it could not lead to the development of satipatthana and the growth of the eightfold path. > >Thx for the helpful contribution. If you have any further follow up, we'll have another discussion on Sat afternoon at the Foundation. > >Metta > >Sarah >p.s This is one of Sukin's favourite topics, so he may be interested to add more or Ken O (if he was listening!!) >====== #105541 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ashkenn2k Dear Sarah I most happy and honour to be there.? Just that the pace is a bit slow, so to prevent myself from disturbing the rest of the group, I read a book at the same time.? Also hmm I broke two chairs, another during dinner time, quite embrassing. So not good for me to tell about Bkk, I am a very poor example of a good discussers.? Also maybe we should suggest the hotelier to have cable tv, there is no channel in English, all Thais.? I could only watch football which I dont usually watch and cartoons.? TV is one of my favourite lobha. hmm :-)? you are right?dhamma is not in the book.? This is also the reason use by?the modern teachers.? I felt?we should be consistent in our approach so that no one doubt us when we quote from the commentary and texts.?IMHO, :-), we should base?discussion on?dhamma by having text support?and understanding,? that is my preference (my accumulations). ?I also like to thank Sukin?and Alf who take lots of effort in arranging this.? Also the?dana of the Thai lady? (sorry forget her names) who provide the discussion place and food.??May their good deeds be known, and cherish.? May they be full of joy and happiness. ?I like talking to David, the new DSGer?also.? I hope he joins in and he has great accumulations in anatta.? Sukin also have an interesting talk with me about vipakas, hope he could join the list and talk about it.? His understanding of dhamma is superb so does?his knowledge on premier league.? ?I learn a lot on Premier League from Sukin :-). Cheers Ken O >? >Dear Ken O, > >--- On Fri, 26/2/10, Ken O wrote: > >>KO:? I am just back.???In the discussions, there are still no texture support?on attanuditthi and akasa.? I did not agreed with the definition of akasa even during lunch time.????We cannot say by understanding.???When other people quote other teacher we will use the textual support, we should be consistent to our approach.? You have?to provide textual support to your 3rd term of akasa is unconditional? and attanuditthi is wider than sakkayaditthi.? >... >S: :-) You just have a different understanding of the "textual support" I provide.... and in the end, as KS was saying, "The dhamma is not in the book". It comes down to the understanding. Any attanuditthi when you like in the mirror? How about for the child or the monkey? What about when you look at the computer? Of if the child or monkey looks at the computer? > >Glad you made it home safely! > >As Jon said, we were glad you could join us and hope you found it worthwile, even though none of us had come with the "textual supports" you'd have liked to have seen:) I started listening to a tape for editing and can hear all your laughter and then a big crash when the first chair collapsed... ..Anything can happen!! It was all most enjoyable for us as well as being packed with good dhamma discussion. (For others, Ken found the pace too slow, so after day 1, he read a book, "Survey", at the same time as listening to and joining in the discussions, as well as walking around, eating, drinking and showing complete mastery in multi-tasking: -)) > >Why not give everyone a short account of the "dinosaur jamboree"? > >Metta > >Sarah >========= > > #105542 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Alex, Delighted to read your feedback on the 20 points on anatta. I was very impressed - you nearly got full marks by nearly agreeing with them all:-)). Just shows that those who stick around long enough, argue enough with myself and others, you'll eventually get to see the light:-)). --- On Mon, 22/2/10, truth_aerator wrote: >>18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in >order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to >develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path >again. A:> Of course. How can you see anatta, if you believe in Atta that can control things? >If impersonal factors of [sati, sila, panna, samatha etc] don't arise due to impersonal causes and conditions, then the understanding is wrong. If there is panna, then proper events occur. >No one can control samatha. It is a natural process that happens on its own when there is sufficient panna. ... S: If you had stopped there, it would have been full marks, but then you started to throw away quite a few marks.... .... A:>None of this refutes the "samatha" process that I call "formal meditation" as taught by certain teachers (ex: Ajahn Chah and Ajahn Brahm) .... S: Appreciated your feedback, Alex. Metta Sarah ======== #105543 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Jon I think some time I felt misrepresented. I hope to make it clear once and for all, I have been saying, one always need panna to develop samantha or vipassana bhavana. I did not say that you do not need kusala to have samantha because one need samantha to withdraw from sensual pleasures as alobha arise with kusala cittas. I also like to make it very clear that any objects of samantha bhavana must suit the persons accumulations and the conditions must be right. Our discussion is not about whether one need panna to have samantha or vipassana bhavana, because I know from the on start there must be panna. Our topic is whether there is any method. Now, this person have already the panna, the teacher, the accmulation and conditions as spelt out in the Visud so we only talk about method and not panna. Definitely without panna, there is no development in any bhavana. The 32 body parts; Visud, VIII, 50. Now when he does the recitation, he should divide it up inot the "skin pentrad" etc and do it forwards and backwards. After saying, "Head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin', he should repeat it backwards, 'Skin, teeth, nails, body, hairs, head hairs'. 51 Next to that, with the 'kidney pentrad', after saying "flesh .... 56. The recitation should be done verbally in this way a hundred times, a thousand times,.. 57. The mental recitation should be done just as it is done verbally Dont ask me for my opinion on that statement, I prefer you to tell me your why this is not a method according to your opinion Sorry if I sound impatient (lots of dosa) because I felt I am being misread and misunderstood despite that I have clarified a few times in the emails and in the dicussions. Cheers Ken O >Hi KenO > >It was great having you at the discussions at Kaeng Krachaan. I hope you found it useful. > >(105388) >> KO: Even when we talk about satipatthana sutta, about the body mindfulness, then feelings, these are consider steps. >> ============ === > >In our discussion yesterday morning (at KK – seems a world away already!) you said that the notion of satipatthana as "steps" was based on the commentary to the Satipatthana Sutta which, you explained, specifies jhana then mindfulness of the body then mindfulness of feelings in that order. > >I'd be interested to see the commentary passage in question. Would you mind posting it? Thanks. > >> ============ === >> KO: I have made this assertation that it is the withdrawal of the senses before one could achieve jhanas. >> ============ === > >You seemed to agree at the discussion yesterday morning that references to withdrawal from sense-pleasures are references to arising panna. Thus it would not be something separate from or other than the development of samatha itself. KO: Hmm I never said that you do not need panna to develop samantha bhavana towards jhanas. If you see my posts to other members, I always stressed panna which is not satipatthana. I also explain to a few that only kusala is samantha. #105544 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Hello Jon, Sarah, all, > "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > (105490) > > > What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? > > > > They are observed after the Body is dealt with. > > =============== > > J: I'd be interested to know what part(s) of the sutta convey to you the idea that awareness of feeling, mind and dhammas can only be developed after mindfulness of the body has been developed (and to what stage would that mindfulness of the body have to be developed?). > Example, the Anapanasati sutta. There the steps progress from kaya to dhammanupassana. Furthermore the kaya->dhammanupassana is arranged from lesser to more difficult steps. It may make sense to start with easier, more visible and grosser aspects and to go to the most subtle ones. Skipping steps may not always be the quickest way... >J: If as you say (rightly, I think) kamachanda is due to a lack of >understanding, then the 'cure' should be the development of >understanding (rather than seclusion). > > Jon And one of the prerequisites IS physical seclusion. This is both in the suttas (such as 3rd requirement for panna). "Having heard the Dhamma, he achieves a twofold seclusion: seclusion in body & seclusion in mind. This is the third cause, the third requisite condition... http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.002.than.html With metta, Alex #105545 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 12:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Dieter (105491) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > ... > D: I used the 'if' to meet your argument that parts may be excluded. All 4 frames are involved for the (training of ) establishment like Alex already pointed out. > Mind you : for the establishment ... > And for us householders a quite corner will be of support .. > =============== J: I understand what you are suggesting. As I see it, however, even in the part on anapanasati, the reference to the quiet place relates to the development of jhana rather than of insight. We may have to agree to disagree on this for now ;-)) Jon #105546 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:55 am Subject: Re: On Accumulations. truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, Buddhist = one who has taken refuge (in action, not in mere words) in triple gem and tries to behave with sammaditthi. >J: The commentaries make it clear that the path to enlightenment >is >a path of many aeons and Buddha-eras in its duration. Do the Commentators know better then the Buddha? Again, the suttas in 4 Nikayas do NOT mention the very long path of being a Buddhist, studying reality, and acquisition of merit. Buddha himself has stated that awakening under his direct guidance could occur in as little as 12 hours. MN85. Many people became stream enterers or even Arahants within one life. Sure they had to have good enough merit to be reborn and see the Buddha, but without there being sutta evidence of Mahayana like aeons of accumulations... To me it sounds like depreciating the power of the Buddha and his Teaching. It seems like the "length of the path" is used as an excuse not to put in as much understanding as possible into this moment... http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/085-bodhirajak\ umara-e1.html With metta, Alex #105548 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Jon, you wrote: D: I showed to you that the the texts give a quiet place (as a support for the development of jhana, as well ) as support for the development of vipassana. > =============== J: As I say, this is a matter of interpretation. D: vs it is not a matter of interpretation : Your claim 'the texts give a quiet place ..... not as support for the development of vipassana'. (the term vipassana here understood as equivalent with satipatthana). contradicts the obvious wording of Maha Satipatthana Sutta and therefore is false. ' J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?"> > D: Jon , no side step please ..;-) > =============== J: Just repeating a sutta quote which you posted ;-)) D: no , in respect to above you changed to a side line You quoted a part of the sutta , often used to demonstrate that sitting /quite place is not a proper interpretation of satipatthana . J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?" The answer to this question has 14 parts to it, comprising the rest of the section on Mindfulness of the Body. (The passage on anapanasati is the first of these parts.) Some of the 14 parts deal with particular cases, and some are of general application. An example of the latter is the part called The Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, which reads as follows: "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in looking straight on (and) in looking away from the front, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in bending and in stretching, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in wearing the shoulder-cloak, the (other two) robes (and) the bowl, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in regard to what is eaten, drunk, chewed and savored, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in defecating and in urinating, is a person practicing clear comprehension; in walking, in standing (in a place), in sitting (in some position), in sleeping, in waking, in speaking and in keeping silence, is a person practicing clear comprehension. "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally... and clings to naught in the world. Thus, also, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu lives contemplating the body in the body." Note that there is no mention here of the need for a quiet place or indeed any specific kind of setting or circumstance D: I wonder whether you noted that there is a difference between sati and satipatthana , the latter the training to develop (samma sati) , the former application in daily life. D: Isn't it obvious that the texts- if not all but at least for a part of the four frames give a quite place (wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ) as support? Jon: What about the other 3 foundations (feelings, mind, dhammas)? D: I used the 'if' to meet your argument that parts may be excluded. All 4 frames are involved for the (training of ) establishment like Alex already pointed out. Mind you : for the establishment ... And for us householders a quite corner will be of support .. And your statement involves all 4 frames.. J: To my understanding, the reference to the quiet place is a reference to an existing lifestyle (supporting the development of samatha/jhana), rather being an instruction for those whose lifestyle is otherwise to change it (in order to support the development of awareness/insight). D: I am not sure what you mean by an existing lifestyle .. you said before : " As far as I'm aware, the texts give a quiet place as a support for the development of jhana, but not as support for the development of vipassana" which means you assume that unlike the development of Jhana , i.e. training for samma samadhi , the development for samma sati does not require a quite place. And I showed you that it is a support for both , quoting the Maha Satipatthana texts > 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. etc: > =============== J : You are referring to this one reference within the section on awareness of the body, namely, the case of the person who is already skilled in anapanasati (and awareness/insight). D: not already skilled .. the skill is to be developed .. as part of the three factors of the samadhi training sequence. For all you need concentration in order to develop them towards perfection . You start with in- and outbreathing to establish it in order to remain increasingly focused e.g. on the details mentioned under the 4 frames J: "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; ...> > Note that there is no mention here of the need for a quiet place or indeed any specific kind of setting or circumstance.> > D: no need to mention it here because it is still under the heading ' remain focused on .. sits down ... > =============== J: I disagree ;-)) The part dealing with anapanasati (that includes the passage about remaining focused etc") ends with the words "Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, ...".. Then follows the part on the Four Kinds of Clear Comprehension, beginning "And further, O bhikkhus, ..." and ending with the words ""Thus he lives contemplating the body in the body internally, ...". And so on for the remaining 12 parts of the section on kayanupassana. D: ?? after he knows where to pay attention to (satipatthana ) , thus he lives .. (sati in daily life) > =============== > The instructions for the Satipatthana aim to establish a framework , a kind of file system for the mind about what to be aware of in order to translate > that into practise ..seeing the things as they are.. > =============== J: The sutta does not specify an order to be followed. It simply explains all the possible objects of awareness/insight, classifying them as fourfold (with a certain amount of overlap). D: it makes sense to follow the systematic of the order , starting with the body , then feeling ..etc. one may not forget its relation to the khandas > =============== J: (> D: Jon, it is a training instruction , in training we need to start with what we have. > You interpret something what is not stated because - as I can see it so far - it does not fit into the core philosophy of the KS Group , i.e. satipatthana by the book (of Abhidhamma) > =============== J: I'm giving the words 'set mindfulness to the fore' and 'always mindful' a particular interpretation, one that you disagree with ;-)) D: because I see your interpretation going astray from the orginal .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #105551 From: A T Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:50 pm Subject: Jhana (Rob2k's post) corrected. truth_aerator Hello Pt1, RobertK2, all, > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: >pt: >Thanks for mentioning the UP topic on two kinds of jhana, > I wasn't aware of this. I.e. without it, your statement that >"pratice >jhana" in fact means "develop insight" The phrase "jha-yatha, cunda, ma- pama-dattha" is Do Jha-na, Cunda, don't be heedless! jha-yatha = 2nd person plural imperative of jha-yati. jha-yato = present active verb dative/genitive case of jha-yati ajha-yato = a + jha-yato no + jha-na In Dhp 372 jha-na and jha-yato are used to mean the same thing. Natthi jha-nam. apańńassa, pańńa- natthi ajha-yato [ajjha-yino (ka.)]; Yamhi jha-nańca pańńa- ca, sa ve nibba-nasantike. - Dhp 372 "There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one with no jhana. But one with both jhana & discernment: he's on the verge of Unbinding. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.25.than.html In the suttas such as DN29 what leads to Nibbana are the 4 Jhanas that are pleasures leading to awakening. ‘‘Catta-rome, cunda, sukhallika-nuyoga- ekantanibbida-ya vira-ga-ya nirodha-ya upasama-ya abhińńa-ya sambodha-ya nibba-na-ya sam.vattanti. Katame catta-ro? pat.hamam. -> catuttham. jha-nam.... DN29 PTS DN 3.131 Of course the Buddhist jhana requires wisdom and Jhana leads to stream and up to Arhatship. DN29. There is no wisdom without Jhana, either. Both are required. Dhp 372. Jhana was what the Buddha awoke (or even discovered). AN9.42 & SN2.7. There isn't much (if any) evidence of Jhana prior to Buddha's rediscovery. There have been many people who have claimed insight, but not real Jhana. After all, Jhana IS the path to Awakening MN36, and non-Buddhist do not have path to Awakening. 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 Jhana Is Right Concentration (samma-sama-dhi) - SN 45.8 Jhana is the only 4 Meditative absorptions that the Buddha has praised. MN108. Not access (upacara), nor momentary (khanika) samadhi. Samadhi is the path, lack of samadhi is not a path at all. "sama-dhi maggo, asama-dhi kummaggo’’ti" PTS AN 3.420 It is *impossible* to break 5 lower and 5 upper fetters without Jhana. MN64 The RobK2 post didn't say anything to refute Jhana. Quite the opposite, the Buddha said in imperative tone to "Go do Jha-na, Ananda". The trees, and empty houses are suitable places for cultivation of that sort of tranquillity, disconnected from 5 senses. Do you understand what imperative is? It is not a past passive, matter of fact statement. It is like a command. Buddha didn't say "go do vipassana", he said go and do jhana. All the reference and claims in atthakatha need to be checked with the suttas. DN16 . ==== "8-11. Then the Blessed One said: "In this fashion, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu might speak: 'Face to face with the Blessed One, brethren, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a community with elders and a chief. Face to face with that community, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name live several bhikkhus who are elders, who are learned, who have accomplished their course, who are preservers of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with those elders, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation'; or: 'In an abode of such and such a name lives a single bhikkhu who is an elder, who is learned, who has accomplished his course, who is a preserver of the Dhamma, the Discipline, and the Summaries. Face to face with that elder, I have heard and learned thus: This is the Dhamma and the Discipline, the Master's Dispensation.' "In such a case, bhikkhus, the declaration of such a bhikkhu is neither to be received with approval nor with scorn. Without approval and without scorn, but carefully studying the sentences word by word, one should trace them in the Discourses and verify them by the Discipline. If they are neither traceable in the Discourses nor verifiable by the Discipline, one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is not the Blessed One's utterance; this has been misunderstood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' In that way, bhikkhus, you should reject it. But if the sentences concerned are traceable in the Discourses and verifiable by the Discipline, then one must conclude thus: 'Certainly, this is the Blessed One's utterance; this has been well understood by that bhikkhu — or by that community, or by those elders, or by that elder.' And in that way, bhikkhus, you may accept it on the first, second, third, or fourth reference. These, bhikkhus, are the four great references for you to preserve." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.16.1-6.vaji.html#t-37 Natthi jha-nam. apańńassa, pańńa- natthi ajha-yato [ajjha-yino (ka.)]; Yamhi jha-nańca pańńa- ca, sa ve nibba-nasantike. - Dhp 372 "Now, 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 concentration, 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 renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html DN29 PTS DN 3.131 For pleasures leading to revulsion, dispassion cessation, peace, DIRECT KNOWLEDGE, awakening & Nibbana. JHANA LEADS TO direct knowledges. ‘‘Catta-rome, cunda, sukhallika-nuyoga- ekantanibbida-ya vira-ga-ya nirodha-ya upasama-ya abhińńa-ya sambodha-ya nibba-na-ya sam.vattanti. Katame catta-ro? ‘‘Idha, cunda, bhikkhu vivicceva ka-mehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkam. savica-ram. vivekajam. pi-tisukham. pat.hamam. jha-nam. upasampajja viharati. Ayam. pat.hamo sukhallika-nuyogo... 4 fruits of devotion to pleasure of Jhana (stream to arhatship) ‘ime kho, a-vuso, catta-ro sukhallika-nuyoge anuyutta-nam. viharatam. catta-ri phala-ni catta-ro a-nisam.sa- pa-t.ikan.kha-. Katame catta-ro? Idha-vuso, bhikkhu tin.n.am. sam.yojana-nam. parikkhaya- sota-panno hoti avinipa-tadhammo niyato sambodhipara-yan.o. Idam. pat.hamam. phalam., pat.hamo a-nisam.so. Puna caparam., a-vuso, bhikkhu tin.n.am. sam.yojana-nam. parikkhaya- ra-gadosamoha-nam. tanutta- sakada-ga-mi- hoti, sakideva imam. lokam. a-gantva- dukkhassantam. karoti. Idam. dutiyam. phalam., dutiyo a-nisam.so. Puna caparam., a-vuso, bhikkhu pańcannam. orambha-giya-nam. sam.yojana-nam. parikkhaya- opapa-tiko hoti, tattha parinibba-yi- ana-vattidhammo tasma- loka-. Idam. tatiyam. phalam., tatiyo a-nisam.so. Puna caparam., a-vuso, bhikkhu a-sava-nam. khaya- ana-savam. cetovimuttim. pańńa-vimuttim. dit.t.heva dhamme sayam. abhińńa- sacchikatva- upasampajja viharati. Idam. catuttham. phalam. catuttho a-nisam.so. Ime kho, a-vuso, catta-ro sukhallika-nuyoge anuyutta-nam. viharatam. ima-ni catta-ri phala-ni, catta-ro a-nisam.sa- pa-t.ikan.kha-’’ti. ======= SN 1.48 Yo jha-namabujjhi [jha-namabudha- (ka. si-.), jha-namabuddhi (sya-. kam.. pi-. ka.)] buddho, bujjhu from bujjhati = knows; understands; perceives; is awake. Buddha awoke to Jhana. ======= Bhagava- etadavoca – ‘‘sama-dhim., bhikkhave, bha-vetha; sama-hito, bhikkhave, bhikkhu yatha-bhu-tam. paja-na-ti bha-vetha = imperative present causative 2nd person plural. sama-dhi, sama-hito -> yatha-bhu-tam. paja-na-ti Note: sama-dhi & sama-hito sound more like samatha not vipassana. PTS SN 3.13 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.005.than.html ====== Jhana as Samma-Samadhi part of N8P: ‘‘Katamo ca, bhikkhave, samma-sama-dhi? Idha, bhikkhave, bhikkhu vivicceva ka-mehi vivicca akusalehi dhammehi savitakkam. savica-ram. vivekajam. pi-tisukham. pat.hamam. jha-nam. upasampajja viharati. Vitakkavica-ra-nam. vu-pasama- ajjhattam. sampasa-danam. cetaso ekodibha-vam. avitakkam. avica-ram. sama-dhijam. pi-tisukham. dutiyam. jha-nam. upasampajja viharati. Pi-tiya- ca vira-ga- upekkhako ca viharati sato ca sampaja-no, sukhańca ka-yena pat.isam.vedeti, yam. tam. ariya- a-cikkhanti – ‘upekkhako satima- sukhaviha-ri-’ti tatiyam. jha-nam. upasampajja viharati. Sukhassa ca paha-na- dukkhassa ca paha-na- pubbeva somanassadomanassa-nam. atthan.gama- adukkhamasukham. upekkha-satipa-risuddhim. catuttham. jha-nam. upasampajja viharati – ayam. vuccati, bhikkhave, samma-sama-dhi-’’ti. PTS SN 5.9 "And what, monks, is right concentration? (i) 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. (ii) With the stilling of directed thoughts & evaluations, he enters & remains in the second jhana: rapture & pleasure born of concentration, unification of awareness free from directed thought & evaluation — internal assurance. (iii) 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.' (iv) 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, monks, is called right concentration." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn45/sn45.008.than.html With metta, Alex #105552 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) kenhowardau Hi pt, ----- > pt: Thanks for mentioning the UP topic on two kinds of jhana, I wasn't aware of this. I.e. without it, your statement that "pratice jhana" in fact means "develop insight" would seem quite dubious. But after reading a few posts from the UP topic, it seems that "practice jhana" is a mistranslation and more likely the meaning was to develop meditation on characterisics (i.e. vipassana) rather than meditation on object (samatha). ----- You have inspired me to actually reread some of those UP's. Usually I just rely on my memory from the first reading - anything to avoid work! It's heavy going; I haven't worked out yet whether "practise jhana" is a correct translation that could mean different things - including "practice vipassana" - or whether the translation itself should be something else, such as "practice vipassana" or just "practise" (meditate). Back to the posts! Ken H #105553 From: A T Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:12 pm Subject: Buddha's discovery of Jhana and N8P truth_aerator Dear Pt1, Rob2k, all, The middle path discovered by the Buddha is neither indulging in bodily mortification (attakilamatha-nuyogo), nor in sensual pleasures (ka-mesu ka-masukhallika-nuyogo). The middle path of the Buddha that he has discovered leads to "...leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding." “...upasama-ya abhińńa-ya sambodha-ya nibba-na-ya sam.vattati’’ PTS SN 5.420 Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta In DN29 PTS DN 3.131 Jhanas are said to: “...upasama-ya abhińńa-ya sambodha-ya nibba-na-ya sam.vattanti” "...leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding." The phrasing used to Describe N8P in that part is the same as the phrase to describe Jhana. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html Jhana as part of N8P was unknown before the Buddha, and the Buddha awoke or 'rediscovered' Jhana as said in Pańca-lacan.d.asuttam.. Buddha didn't rediscover Vipassana. He discovered (or awoke to) Jhana. The imperatives for Cunda and Ananda were: "jha-yatha, cunda, ma- pama-dattha" and “jha-yatha-nanda, ma- pama-dattha” There is also Dhp 372 line that says: Natthi jha-nam. apańńassa, pańńa- natthi ajha-yato [ajjha-yino (ka.)]; "There's no jhana for one with no discernment, no discernment for one with no jhana.” http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.25.than.html jha-yatha = 2nd person plural imperative of jha-yati. Jha-yati has present active verb dative/genitive case of “jha-yato”. ajha-yato = a + jha-yato. No + jha-na So jha-yato and jha-nam. have the same meaning and are only used in different grammatical ways. This also fits the meaning were advice to Cunda in DN29 was that Jhana leads to Nibbana. Buddha didn’t say to the Cunda to do Vipassana. He told him that Jhana leads from stream entry and up to Arhatship. ===== With metta, Alex #105554 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 5:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > It's heavy going; I haven't worked out yet whether "practise jhana" is a correct translation that could mean different things - including "practice vipassana" - or whether the translation itself should be something else, such as "practice vipassana" or just "practise" (meditate). > > > Back to the posts! > > Ken H > Dear KenH, all, Considering that Buddha has taught Jhana resulting in stream entry to Arhatship to Cunda in DN29, it is not unlikely that Buddha meant Jhana to Cunda in MN8. In MN36 Buddha has said that Jhana is the path to Awakening, which the Buddha has discovered (Pancalacandaasuttam) As I have said elsewhere Jhayatha is related to Jhana. In Dhp 372 Jhana and Jhayato are used interchangeably. Also Ven, Ananda has said quoting a poem by a deva about Buddha awakening to Jhana: "'Truly in a confining place, he found an opening ? the one of extensive wisdom, the awakened one who awakened to jhana, the chief bull, withdrawn, the sage.' http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.042.than.html With metta, Alex #105555 From: "Mike" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Delighted to read your feedback on the 20 points on anatta. I was very impressed - you nearly got full marks by nearly agreeing with them all:-)). > Just shows that those who stick around long enough, argue enough with myself and others, you'll eventually get to see the light:-)). > > --- On Mon, 22/2/10, truth_aerator wrote: > > >>18. If there's any effort to try and be aware at this moment, in >order to understand the presently appearing object, or any trying to >develop more kusala, such as more metta, then it's the wrong path >again. > > A:> Of course. How can you see anatta, if you believe in Atta that can control things? Mike: I'm still puzzled why any of those points should be considered particularly controversial in Dhamma circles. As far as I can understand, the only important disagreement you have with people such as Alex, or any of the teachers I respect, is in the detailed interpretation of #18. None of those teachers is saying that there is some atta control agent (as Alex nicely puts it above), they simply differ on how best to realise that. Mike: To totally oversimplify, it seems to me that the approach you advocate is to realise anatta by considering it very carefully. The alternative is to attempt to control stuff, and see how it goes. Sooner or later the lack of control becomes painfully obvious... Metta Mike #105556 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 6:56 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. ptaus1 Hi Jon (Alex), > J: Prior to a certain stage of insight development, there is no assurance of attainment of enlightenment; that is to say, accumulated wrong view can still assert itself and lead to the commission of akusala kamma sufficient to result in the loss of insight already attained. pt: Could you please clarify what kind of insight was already attained? As I understood Sarah, there's no development of insight knowledges prior to the last life. Thanks. Best wishes pt #105557 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ptaus1 Hi Mike (KenH, Sarah), > Mike: To totally oversimplify, it seems to me that the approach you advocate is to realise anatta by considering it very carefully. The alternative is to attempt to control stuff, and see how it goes. Sooner or later the lack of control becomes painfully obvious... pt: I think this is a good description. I also have to say that it reminds me a bit of the time when I was younger and my parents would tell me not to do certain things as they won't lead to any good, but I would reply "Leave me alone and let me make my own mistakes, how else can I learn?!" And then after making the mistake, I'd of course quietly say to myself "Damn it, should have listened to what my parents said." It's the same neverending dilemma with control/no control I think. E.g. as far as I can gather from KenH's posts, even he had to go through several decades of trying to control stuff so that he can finally begin to appreciate the no-control advice :) (I hope I'm not misrepresenting you here KenH :). Best wishes pt #105558 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:59 pm Subject: The Twin Truths! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: The Twin Truths won by Dual Consideration: The blessed Buddha once said: Friends, the first consideration is: Whatever Suffering arises, all that is caused by Mental Construction! The consequent second consideration is: Stilling of all Mental Construction thereby ceases all Suffering completely! Knowing this danger: - All Suffering is caused by Mental Construction -, by silencing all experience, sensation and feeling, the wise escape all Pain! Considering these twin truths cautiously, resolutely and enthusiastically, one may either enter the state of Nibbana right here and now in this life, or if there is remaining traces of clinging left, the state of a non-returner. Those who neglect understanding of mental construction, the origin of mental construction, the end of mental construction, and how mental construction is eliminated, are incapable of release by understanding, are incapable of mental release, are incapable of direct knowledge, and are thereby incapable of making an end...They repeat birth, ageing, decay, sickness and death ever again... While those who undertake understanding of mental construction, Origin, End and Way, indeed are capable of mental release by understanding, sure certainty, and capable of making an end... They are near the deathless dimension! <...> Source: The Bundle of Threads. The Sutta-Nipata 724-765 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/khuddaka/suttaNip ata/index.html http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=201818 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <..> #105559 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (2) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Cryptic Notes from the Tuesday evening discussion in KK (in the countryside outside Bangkok) in the garden: 1. Seeing now - Abhidhamma or Sutta? Suttas are more difficult to understand. For example, the Mahasatipatthana Sutta - sati is not clearly understood, so the sutta is misunderstood. It refers to many realities and any reality can be understood if it appears now. 2. Terms and details - Understand the reality rather than thinking of terms such as paticcasamupada or Mahasatipatthana. What is citta now? It cannot be satipatthana without right understanding. Sitting - thinking there can be awareness of a reality, but it's not understanding. How can there be sitting and understanding? 3. Sadness - Forget it! There is attachment to remembrance. Dhamma is not 'you'! There has to be awareness of all kinds of dhammas which arise in a day, otherwise we move away from this moment, otherwise, too, "I" is the slave of tanha all the time, morning til night. 4. Most precious - The understanding, that's all! 5. Citta as the "innermost" reality. Cetasikas are 'outer' (as in outer ayatanas). They only arise with cittas. 6. Intellectual understanding (and Ann's Qu as given already). Also Lukas' qu about intellectual understanding of the 3 rounds and sacca nana - Do we have to know the word or term? What's the use? Sacca nana - understanding of the truth, that's it! Lobha - only the word...what about the moment of the reality arising now? 7. Sakkaya ditthi, attanuditthi, micha ditthi - (see U.P. under 'attanuditthi' for details) When it is 'something', there is the idea of permanence. Is there wrong view all day? What about for children, animals? What about when looking in the mirror for a monkey or sotapanna? Understand reality which arises and falls away. We cannot pinpoint which is ditthi, which is lobha. When panna arises, it cannot be wrong at all. The latent tendency, anusaya, is lying dormant in the citta for all but the sotapanna, but there is only wrong view when it arises, such as when there is an idea of something that is permanent. 8. Sanna, memory or perception? - Sati being aware with all kusala cittas Sanna arising with each citta, even when older and forgetting names and details. Atta sanna and anatta sanna - none of it has any connection with our conventional ideas of memory and memory losss. 9. Origins of the Abhidhamma - Dhamma Vinaya realities are Dhamma. Abhi means very subtle... In the Tipitaka, some references to Abhi, but 'seeing sees', whether we read it in the suttas or Abhidhamma. Abhidhamma in the suttas throughout. Abhi - an adjective for dhamma. What dhamma is not 'abhi' to understand? ***** Metta Sarah ======= #105560 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ptaus1 Hi KenH, Alex, > KenH: I haven't worked out yet whether "practise jhana" is a correct translation that could mean different things - including "practice vipassana" - or whether the translation itself should be something else, such as "practice vipassana" or just "practise" (meditate). pt: Same here. In particular regarding Robert's note: > RobK: The Dhammapada 371 :"Meditate, o bhikkhu and be not heedless." (same pali phrase as the sutta you quoted above. The atthakatha says "o bhikkhus meditate by the two kinds of meditative absorptions" And the tika notes that this is twofold in "the sense of meditative absorption that arises depending on an object and meditative absorption that arises dependent on characteristics" The tika later explains this by saying that the first is (p506 note 6 of carter and palihawadana) "the eight attainments (jhanas) to be obtained by training the mind in concentrating on one of the thirty eight objects such as kasina [or metta, or Buddha or Dhamma or breath etc] and the second means 'insight wisdom, path and fruit'..to be obtained by reflecting on the three characteristics'" pt: My understanding of this is that "practice jhana" or "Jhaayatha" can mean any of those things (i.e. develop just samatha, just vipassana, develop both, just develop as in "meditate"). So, I think it would depend on the sutta context in every particular instance what exactly is meant by jhaayatha. So, in case of Kamma sutta SN 35.145 that we were discussing, I think that your (KenH) analysis was right that it deals with the ultimates and insight, and hence, I agree with your conclusion that "practice jhana" should be understood in terms of "develop insight". Of course, this doesn't mean that in some other suttas with different contexts, this same phrase couldn't mean develop samatha, or develop both, like in suttas that Jon and Dieter are discussing now for example. Regarding points that Alex raises in his recent posts about jhana - thanks for your (Alex) quotes and analysis. I'm familiar with the position regarding jhana that you put forward, as I've read many works by modern teachers who emphasize jhana. That said, I'm not particularly concerned whether it was jhana that was rediscovered by the Buddha, or whether it was vipassana as some other teachers say, or was it both, or was there some special Buddhist jhana or not, etc. I mean, I'm interested in developing both jhana and insight, so it's all good to me. So, I kind of find it a bit more interesting to try and understand a particular sutta by context. And in case of this particular Kamma sutta, it seems to be all about insight. So, even if the Buddha was speaking to jhana masters there, I would think that his advice to them of "practice jhana" would mean to develop vipassana, what they might have done by entering jhana and exiting with vipassana occurring on exit. Importantly, the advice to develop vipassana would be equally applicable to those who are not jhana masters. That's just my understanding at the moment. Either way, would be nice to hear if there's something in the commentaries about this particular sutta. I find it strange that the commentaries to the four nikayas haven't been translated yet. There's seems to be plenty of translations of the khuddaka nikaya commentaries, but not so on the four nikayas. Best wishes pt #105561 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > My question is about knowing what's the first in the arising: > consciousness or nama&rupa. > > It is only one question, not many :) ... S: She also replied that consciousness(citta) and nama (cetasika) arise together. I wrote down an exact quote which I can't find at the moment, but there was not much more said. (Will let you know when I come across it). Metta Sarah ===== #105562 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:16 pm Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi Mike (and KenO) Thanks for coming in with this passage from the commentary, Mike. (105535) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > ... > I'm not sure which mention of jhana you want, but the first mention is in discussing this passage from the synopsis: > > Sutta: Then the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus as follows: "This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." > > Commentary: Cattaro Satipatthana = "The Four Arousings of Mindfulness." Four in relation to classes of objects of mindfulness. > ... > [talks about different types, dull-witted, keen-witted, etc...] > ... > Because he does not continue to stay in the coarse: The keen-witted man pursuing the path of quietude lays hold of the gross subject of meditation, but he does not stay in that. He lays hold of feeling, the subtle subject of meditation, by way of the factors of absorption [jhana] after attaining to and emerging from the absorption reached with the material body as subject. > =============== J: Yes, this may well be the passage KenO had in mind. The passage is actually from the sub-commentary, elaborating on the following from the commentary: << << << << Why did the Buddha teach just Four Arousings of Mindfulness and neither more nor less? By way of what was suitable for those capable of being trained. In regard to the pair of the dull-witted and the keen-witted minds among tamable persons of the craving type and the theorizing type, pursuing the path of quietude [samatha] or that of insight [vipassana] in the practice of meditation, the following is stated: [1] For the dull-witted man of craving type the Arousing of Mindfulness through the contemplation of the gross physical body is the Path to Purity; [2] for the keen-witted of this type, the subtle subject of meditation on the feeling. [3] And for the dull-witted man of the theorizing type the Path to Purity is the Arousing of Mindfulness through a subject not too full of distinctions, namely, consciousness [citta]; [4] for the keen-witted of this type, the subject which teems with distinctions, namely the contemplation on things of the mind ? mental objects [dhammanupassana]. [5] For the dull-witted man, pursuing quietude, the First Arousing of Mindfulness, body-contemplation, is the Path to Purity, by reason of the feasibility of getting at the mental reflex; [6] for the keen-witted of this type, because he does not continue to stay in the coarse, the second Arousing of Mindfulness, the contemplation on feeling, is the Path to Purity. [7] And for the dull-witted man pursuing the path of insight, the subject of meditation without many distinctions, the contemplation on consciousness, is the Path to Purity; [8] and for the keen-witted of this type the contemplation on mental objects which is full of distinctions. >> >> >> >> Does this commentary passage specify steps to be followed? I don't think so. It expands on the first reference in the introductory section of the sutta to the Four Arousings/foundations of Mindfulness, before those Four Arousings are even enumerated. It's language is descriptive in nature (i.e., it is describing the course taken by a certain class of follower), and it is stated in general terms (there is no detail capable of being followed). If these were instructions to be followed, it would mean the listener would first have to know to which class of person he belonged, before he could know which 'instruction' to follow. To my understanding, there is no method being laid down here, only a description of how different types of person tend attain enlightenment by mindfulness of certain objects more than others. Thanks again for giving the passage. I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this issue. KenO, is there any other passage you had in mind? Jon #105563 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:23 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 jonoabb Hi KenO (105543) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > ... > I think some time I felt misrepresented. I hope to make it clear once and for all, I have been saying, one always need panna to develop samantha or vipassana bhavana. I did not say that you do not need kusala to have samantha because one need samantha to withdraw from sensual pleasures as alobha arise with kusala cittas. I also like to make it very clear that any objects of samantha bhavana must suit the persons accumulations and the conditions must be right. > =============== J: Yes, I agree you've consistently said all this. Apologies if I've misrepresented you in any way. To my understanding, our discussion has all along been about the 'method' point. > =============== > Our discussion is not about whether one need panna to have samantha or vipassana bhavana, because I know from the on start there must be panna. Our topic is whether there is any method. Now, this person have already the panna, the teacher, the accmulation and conditions as spelt out in the Visud so we only talk about method and not panna. Definitely without panna, there is no development in any bhavana. The 32 body parts; > > Visud, VIII, > > 50. Now when he does the recitation, he should divide it up inot the "skin pentrad" etc and do it forwards and backwards. After saying, "Head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin', he should repeat it backwards, 'Skin, teeth, nails, body, hairs, head hairs'. > > 51 Next to that, with the 'kidney pentrad', after saying "flesh .... > > 56. The recitation should be done verbally in this way a hundred times, a thousand times,.. > > 57. The mental recitation should be done just as it is done verbally > =============== J: Thanks for quoting a specific passage. It makes the discussion so much more meaningful ;-)) The reason why I don't consider this to be a method is because, as you point out above, the main ingredient of samatha development, namely the panna, is assumed. So there is nothing here that can be followed, because panna is the prerequisite. On the other hand, the person who has the necessary panna probably doesn't need to be told 'first verbally, then mentally'. > =============== > Dont ask me for my opinion on that statement, I prefer you to tell me your why this is not a method according to your opinion > =============== J: I think what you’re saying is that it's a method for the person of already well-developed panna. But for us, the only relevant question is how the panna of samatha comes to be well-developed. Do you know of any 'method' given in the texts for this? > =============== Sorry if I sound impatient (lots of dosa) because I felt I am being misread and misunderstood despite that I have clarified a few times in the emails and in the dicussions. > =============== J: No problem. Hoping this has cleared up any misunderstandings, and that our discussion can proceed as before. Jon #105564 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Alex (105544) > > J: I'd be interested to know what part(s) of the sutta convey to you the idea that awareness of feeling, mind and dhammas can only be developed after mindfulness of the body has been developed (and to what stage would that mindfulness of the body have to be developed?). > > Example, the Anapanasati sutta. There the steps progress from kaya to dhammanupassana. > =============== J: Well we could discuss the Anapanasati Sutta (separately, perhaps). For now, we are discussing the Satipatthana Sutta. Any indication in that sutta that body must come before the others? > =============== > Furthermore the kaya->dhammanupassana is arranged from lesser to more difficult steps. > =============== J: I agree that rupas are grosser and easier to comprehend intellectually than namas. However, while this may well explain the order of presentation, it doesn't mean that the first-mentioned must be developed before the development of the others can begin. > =============== > >J: If as you say (rightly, I think) kamachanda is due to a lack of >understanding, then the 'cure' should be the development of >understanding (rather than seclusion). > > And one of the prerequisites IS physical seclusion. This is both in the suttas (such as 3rd requirement for panna). > =============== J: Yes, I understand this to be your interpretation ;-)) > =============== > "Having heard the Dhamma, he achieves a twofold seclusion: seclusion in body & seclusion in mind. This is the third cause, the third requisite condition... > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.002.than.html > =============== J: But this passage is merely descriptive. It does not specify physical seclusion as a prerequisite for the development of awareness/insight. Jon #105565 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:28 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. jonoabb Hi Alex (105546) > >J: The commentaries make it clear that the path to enlightenment >is >a path of many aeons and Buddha-eras in its duration. > > Do the Commentators know better then the Buddha? > =============== J: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you've quoted anything spoken by the Buddha on this issue yet. > =============== > Again, the suttas in 4 Nikayas do NOT mention the very long path of being a Buddhist, studying reality, and acquisition of merit. > =============== J: I think you're wrong here, but I don't have any sutta reference handy. Will keep this point in mind and hopefully come back to you later. (Anyone with a sutta ref on this point?) > =============== > Buddha himself has stated that awakening under his direct guidance could occur in as little as 12 hours. MN85. Many people became stream enterers or even Arahants within one life. > =============== J: (!!) I'm afraid I'm not with you here. Which people? > =============== Sure they had to have good enough merit to be reborn and see the Buddha, but without there being sutta evidence of Mahayana like aeons of accumulations... To me it sounds like depreciating the power of the Buddha and his Teaching. > > It seems like the "length of the path" is used as an excuse not to put in as much understanding as possible into this moment... > =============== J: Yes, one or other (or both) of us is on the wrong track ;-)) > =============== > http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/085-bodhirajak\ umara-e1.html > =============== J: Any particular text from this sutta you have in mind? Jon #105566 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (3) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, A quote from last Sat's discussion on metta: "If he really understands metta, he doesn't want metta because it's only a conditioned dhamma." [Also, an extra note from Tuesday's discussion on attanuditthi - When there's an idea of something, there's an idea of permanence, so without attanuditthi, no sassata ditthi (idea of eternalism). Sassata ditthi leads to silabbataparamasa, following rules and rituals, such as paying homage to the Creator. (See Ken O's good refs in #104121) Sakkaya ditthi and attanuditthi are not just words, but refer to the understanding of realities. Without this understanding, there's always an idea of something.] ***** Cryptic Notes from the Wednesday morning discussion in KK in the garden: 1. More on sadness - usually we think a lot, but now there is hardness. Thinking about many situations, but not understanding the innermost reality which is citta. Understand, not by reading, but now! Confidence with panna, by understanding the present reality. 2. Lukas's qu about present reality - Doubt, only when talking about the Dhamma because of ignorance about the present reality. 3. Rebirth, no self - If no understanding about the present reality, we cannot understand rebirth. How come there is this citta without the first citta of life? What appears is not, NOT in the book. Understanding this now is the beginning of understanding about rebirth. 5. The roof of lobha - Are you secure under the roof? But it cannot protect us from lobha. The roof prevents understanding, it cannot protect [See Dhaniya Sutta as given recently by Han]. Not knowing lobha is there.. The roof of lobha, ditthi and mana, just protecting the self, not letting go of it. 6. Calm - wanting to have it Want to have it because we don't know what it is. Is it calm or pleasant feeling now? What is the purpose of developing calm? If there is wanting to fix the mind on breath, it is attachment. Breath - what is the nature of it? If we don't study breath, cannot know it, cannot know the particular vayo dhatu We need to study very carefully to see the danger of attachment to sensuous objects because the anusaya conditions lobha to arise. 7. Methods The only method is panna. People want to be told what to do. Just sitting - can there be right understanding? So forget 'method' because the path depends on understanding. Can the 32 parts of the body be a method? If the object of right understanding concerns foulness, when there is that level of understanding, it's calm. It's not 'can do' or 'cannot do'. Kusala anytime as sila, dana, samatha. Everyone has kusala cittas arising. These are calm. Also attachment all day. It depends on understanding to know whether calm or attachment is developing. Kusala can be anytime, any objcet. Usually it's 'Self' trying to perform the function of sankhara instead of understanding. It's time to develop the right understanding of realities. Whoever is following a method is following lobha. When there is panna, there is not a method. When there's a method, there's no panna. All the Teachings are about the development of understanding. Did the Buddha teach anyone to have attachment? Attachment can be attached to anything, waiting to follow any rule or step - no understanding. 32 parts, reciting - kusala or akusala? 8. Space x2 The second is the unconditioned space, not a khandha. The kasina of space is the concept of the first conditioned akasa rupa. The object of the first arupa jhana space is the concept of the unconditioned akasa rupa. (Ken O,to me this is a clear reference. Without the realities, there couln't be the concepts about the distinctions between the 2 akasa rupas). What is there out here or there? Dhsg ref to the unconditioned dhamma, nibbana (only mentioned). But read the other texts! Reading one text is not enough! See sutta given in #101591, the Buddha explaining to Pukkusati about elements, the unconditioned space is described. Lots of refs, depending on how read. 9. Conditions for seeing, hearing - see pt's #104022 When attention is give as a condition, it's referring to pancadvaravajjana citta (the preceding citta), NOT manasikara. Light is visible object. Seeing sees that which can be seen. There can also be seeing in the dark, but without light, objects would not be taken for things and people. That's why it's sometimes given. With regard to the scientific comments in #102610, one friend mentioned (and I have no idea), that there is sound in deep space ...multiple sounds in deep space, he said. For hearing, space, the 2nd kind of akasa rupa is the medium. **** Any comments/qus most welcome. Time to get ready for today's session. More later.... Metta Sarah ======= #105567 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:35 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. jonoabb Hi pt (105556) > > J: Prior to a certain stage of insight development, there is no assurance of attainment of enlightenment; that is to say, accumulated wrong view can still assert itself and lead to the commission of akusala kamma sufficient to result in the loss of insight already attained. > > pt: Could you please clarify what kind of insight was already attained? As I understood Sarah, there's no development of insight knowledges prior to the last life. Thanks. > =============== J: As I understand it, there is the theoretical possibility of attainment of the early vipassana?nanas without there being the attainment of sotapatti-magga in the same life-time. I'm afraid I'll have to ask someone else to give the details of exactly which stages this refers to (anyone, please?). Jon #105568 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) jonoabb Hi Dieter (105548) > ' J: The sutta asks the question "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself?"> > > D: Jon , no side step please ..;-) > > =============== > > J: Just repeating a sutta quote which you posted ;-)) > > D: no , in respect to above you changed to a side line > You quoted a part of the sutta , often used to demonstrate that sitting /quite place is not a proper interpretation of satipatthana . > =============== J: A quick recap, just to clarify. My main point was that the complete answer to the question posed in the sutta stretches for 14 parts, only one of which includes mention of a quiet place. One needs to consider the whole answer rather than just a single part of it. My supplementary point was that within the part on anapanasati, the reference to a quiet place is part of the description of the particular case under discussion, namely, the person who is already well advanced in the development of samatha and vipassana, and so the reference to the quiet place is attributable to the samatha/jhana component of the situation. Dieter, I appreciate that you find this reading to be in contradiction to the plain meaning of the sutta text. I can only say that that's not the way I see it, and that I believe it is consistent with the commentarial texts. But perhaps we should rest this discussion for a while ;-)) > =============== > "And further, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, in going forwards (and) in going backwards, is a person practicing clear comprehension; ... > > Note that there is no mention here of the need for a quiet place or indeed any specific kind of setting or circumstance > > D: I wonder whether you noted that there is a difference between sati and satipatthana , the latter the training to develop (samma sati) , the former application in daily life. > =============== J: I haven't quite grasped your point here. Would you mind elaborating a little? Thanks. > =============== > J : You are referring to this one reference within the section on awareness of the body, namely, the case of the person who is already skilled in anapanasati (and awareness/insight). > > D: not already skilled .. the skill is to be developed .. as part of the three factors of the samadhi training sequence. For all you need concentration in order > to develop them towards perfection . You start with in- and outbreathing to establish it in order to remain increasingly focused e.g. on the details mentioned under the 4 frames > =============== J: Sorry, but I do not see this passage as prescribing anapanasati as the point at which to start the development of insight (if that's what you're saying). > =============== > J: I'm giving the words 'set mindfulness to the fore' and 'always mindful' a particular interpretation, one that you disagree with ;-)) > > > D: because I see your interpretation going astray from the orginal .. ;-) > =============== J: And I fear we are very much astray from each other on this one (as on the monkey simile). Perhaps we should choose something less controversial to discuss ;-)). Nice talking to you, as ever, Dieter. Jon #105569 From: Sukinder Date: Fri Feb 26, 2010 9:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sukinderpal Hi pt, (Mike, Sarah, Ken H), I expected a different reply from you, given that I just read your very good post explaining the position that some of us are at (yes, I'm very, very behind in my reading). > > > Mike: To totally oversimplify, it seems to me that the approach you > advocate is to realise anatta by considering it very carefully. The > alternative is to attempt to control stuff, and see how it goes. > Sooner or later the lack of control becomes painfully obvious... > > pt: I think this is a good description. I also have to say that it > reminds me a bit of the time when I was younger and my parents would > tell me not to do certain things as they won't lead to any good, but I > would reply "Leave me alone and let me make my own mistakes, how else > can I learn?!" And then after making the mistake, I'd of course > quietly say to myself "Damn it, should have listened to what my > parents said." It's the same neverending dilemma with control/no > control I think. E.g. as far as I can gather from KenH's posts, even > he had to go through several decades of trying to control stuff so > that he can finally begin to appreciate the no-control advice :) (I > hope I'm not misrepresenting you here KenH :). > Ken H will explain his position, but I have something to say about mine. Before DSG, my understanding of anatta was nowhere near what I later understood after I heard DSG. What I realized in fact was that had I not come to know this, I'd gone on to have understood the matter very wrongly. There was no indication that any corrective mechanism would have come into play to correct any misunderstanding, but rather that the illusion of result would have only lead to being further and further deluded. Does it not come to what the understanding is at this very moment? When someone like Ken H says that 'there is only the present moment, conditioned, fleeting and beyond control', this is a statement of fact in line with the truth and as taught by the Buddha. When someone else proposes that one must sit and meditate, what truth is being revealed here? Ken would say that sati and panna can't be made to arise, this is fact. But when someone says that certain things can and must be done in order that conditions are created for sati and panna to arise, is this in accordance with the kind of truth? When Ken talks about panna as the one dhamma which understands the present moment and therefore we can't just decide to observe and expect this to be the kind of 'knowing' which is useful, he is making a statement of fact about the particular role of panna in the development of the Path. When someone thinks that he must meditate is he not forgetting that it is panna which 'understands', and instead takes what is not the Path to being so? On seeing that there is no satipatthana now, Ken would to this extent, be having some intellectual understanding about the present moment. Consequently he knows also not to take what is not sati for sati. On the other hand, when someone fails at having any level of right consideration about the present moment, and goes on to then think to meditate, would this not be placing oneself to be fooled by illusions of result? In conclusion, from where I am, when you and Mike insists on 'learning from experience', this does not seem to be in line with the way things are and instead is wishful thinking. In other words, you can't be making a statement in the moment, one which is not in line with the truth and expect that this will some how lead to the truth being seen. Besides one must ask, when the truth has been seen, why insist on continuing to follow the projected practice? Can we then safely infer from the fact that one is motivated to continue such practices, that one has not yet come to understand the truth.......? Hope this makes sense. Metta, Sukin #105570 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (4) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Cryptic Notes in the van on the way to lunch (by the lake) on Wednesday: 1. People think they are just texts, but they have a very deep meaning. They just think about them, but they are not about theory. They don't understand dhamma. 2. 3 gocara (objects for understanding) - a) upanissaya gocara: listening, after hearing, accumulates by upanissaya, to change from akusala, conditions for kusala, until strong and the moment of understanding reality. Sankhara khandha for awareness to arise. b) aaraka gocara: awareness, not yet satipatthana, protecting (samvara)from akusala c) upanipanda (sp?) gocara: direct understanding of reality now. Doesn't let go of reality. [Gocara refers to the object of citta and these stages refer to a better and better understanding of what one has heard or read. The Teachings are about the objects of understanding. See Psm transl p.232] 3. Not doing - Sariputta didn'tknow he would meet Assaji or what he'd hear. The most important thing is understanding thinking (and any other realities) as no self. More important than details. It depends on upanissaya gocara whether there is instantly awareness that it's only a moment of thinking. It seems like one understands the texts, but lobha and attachment are there cheating again. 4. The best thing in life - is to help people understand the Teachings. ***** Metta Sarah ======= #105571 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (5a) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Cryptic Notes from the Wednesday afternoon discussion in KK in the garden: 1. More on sadness and the roof of lobha - It seems that we'd like to know a lot. What about before we heard the Teachings? Thinking about the past, clinging to self, trying to think and think about realities - ignorance. Don't mind whether it's sadness or what. This moment - now - what about not knowing anything? What is seen? Then can understand sadness when it arises. Otherwise, there's no way to eliminate ignorance,no hole in the roof of lobha. Again, the roof of lobha,mana and ditthi. Dosa - hurt by the cetasika, feeling. When there's an idea of self, clinging to different feelings When dosa, no ditthi. Sadness only a reality. Example given of helping the sick and dying, sensitivity and compassion or sadness - different realities, whether helping or crying. What's important is the development of understanding of anatta. 2. The meeting of the 4 ayatanas to see ( eye-sense, visible object, citta and cetasikas). The right conditions for each moment. 3. Purpose of study of realities - To understand anattaness. Impermanent realities falling away. Not self trying to understand how many cetasikas, sadness. 4. Alone - We are born alone, live alone, see alone. Seeing alone - and then conditions for the idea of someone or something all the time. Citta alone anytime, one at a time, with many stories, until the last moment. Death at the end of life, conditions the next birth citta. - no reality of any story, forgetting all about this life. Born to hear, to think, to live with ignorance if no understanding. Pleasant moments, calm are not the most precious things. Understanding of reality until the true nature of reality is discerned with detachemnt. Understand any reality including attachment as not self. Right understanding never brings sorrow. Panna can understand attachment. Living alone, seeing alone, thinking alone about many situations. Live in this world until more understanding. 5. Anupassana - following Sati begins to develop, not just theoretically. Visible object is appearing. 6. Dukkha Only vipassana nana can penetrate at the moment of rising and falling away. 7. Sitting - not understanding. How can there be understanding of not self? What is calm? Seeing a corpse - usually akusala. From the beginning, when kusala arises, there must be understanding of what conditions understanding. Anatta - what is it? Wanting to have calm - anatta? Each word (understood) will bring more understanding with detachment. **** Metta Sarah ======= #105572 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (4) scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Regarding: S: "2. 3 gocara (objects for understanding) - a) upanissaya gocara...b) aaraka gocara...c) upanipanda (sp?) gocara: direct understanding of reality now. Doesn't let go of reality. [Gocara refers to the object of citta and these stages refer to a better and better understanding of what one has heard or read. The Teachings are about the objects of understanding. See Psm transl p.232]" Scott: Pa.tisambhidaamagga, pp.232-233: "Because of [an object of contemplation] having been adverted to: through skill in establishing the supporting object he combines the faculties, understands their domain and penetrates the meaning of sameness, he combines powers,...he combines the enlightenment factors,...he combines [other] ideas, understands their domain and penetrates the meaning of sameness; 'He combines the faculties', how does he combine the faculties? He combines the faith faculty in the sense of resolution, [he combines the energy faculty in the sense of exertion, he combines the mindfulness faculty in the sense of establishment, he combines the concentration faculty in the sense of non-distraction, he combines the understanding faculty in the sense of seeing;] through skill in establishing the sign of serenity [he combines the faculties,]... through skill in establishing the sign of exertion 'he]... through skill in establishing the sign of non-distraction... through skill in establishing illumination... through skill in establishing encouragement... through skill in establishing equanimity... through skill in establishing unity... through skill in establishing difference... through skill in establishing deliverance... through skill in establishment as impermanent... through skill in non-establishment as permanent... through...[and so on with the rest of the pairs in 111 up to]... through skill in establishment of cessation... through skill in non-establishment of formations he combines the faculties,...[he combines [other] ideas,] understands their domain and penetrates the meaning of sameness; ['he combines the faculties', how does he combine the faculties? He combines the faith faculty in the sense of resolution...he combines the understanding faculty in the sense of seeing]." Aavajjitatta aaramma.nuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena indriyaani samodhaaneti, gocara~nca pajaanaati, samattha~nca pa.tivijjhati ... dhamme samodhaaneti, gocara~nca pajaanaati, samattha~nca pa.tivijjhati. Indriyaani samodhaanetiiti katha.m indriyaani samodhaaneti? Adhimokkha.t.thena saddhindriya.m samodhaaneti ... samathanimittuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, paggahanimittuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, avikkhepuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, obhaasuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, sampaham.sanuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, upekkhuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena , ekattuupa.t.tha-nakusalavasena, ~naa.nuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, vimuttuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena. Aniccato upa.t.thaanakusalavasena, niccato anupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, dukkhato upa.t.thaanakusalavasena, sukhato anupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, anattato upa.t.thaanakusalavasena, attato anupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, khayato upa.t.thaanakusalavasena, ghanato anupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, vayato upa.t.thaanakusalavasena, aayuuhanaanupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, vipari.naamuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, dhuvato anupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, animittuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, nimittaanupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, appa.nihituupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, pa.nidhianupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, su~n~natuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, abhinivesaanupat..t.thaanakusalavasena, ~naa.nuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, a~naa.naanupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, visa~n~noguupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, sa~n~nogaanupa.t.thaanakusalavasena , nirodhuupa.t.thaanakusalavasena, sa"nkhaaraanupa.t.thaanakusalavasena indriyaani samodhaaneti, gocara~nca pajaanaati, samattha~nca pa.tivijjhati. Sincerely, Scott. #105573 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:47 am Subject: Re: Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) moellerdieter Hi Jon (KenH), you wrote : J: I understand what you are suggesting. As I see it, however, even in the part on anapanasati, the reference to the quiet place relates to the development of jhana rather than of insight. We may have to agree to disagree on this for now ;-)) D: well that is ok, Jon ... a recent exchange with Ken H comes into my mind : 'K: I commiserate with you when you try so patiently to show various DSG people the conventional meaning of the Dhamma. It's a bit like flogging a dead horse, isn't it? D: what you call 'conventional ' meaning of the Dhamma I call the 4 Noble Truths , Ken. ' no bad feelings .. ;-)) with Metta Dieter #105574 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:18 am Subject: satipatthana and kayagatasati truth_aerator Hello Jon, Dieter, all, >dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > > (105544) > > > J: I'd be interested to know what part(s) of the sutta convey to you the idea that awareness of feeling, mind and dhammas can only be developed after mindfulness of the body has been developed (and to what stage would that mindfulness of the body have to be developed?). > > > > Example, the Anapanasati sutta. There the steps progress from kaya to dhammanupassana. > > =============== > > J: Well we could discuss the Anapanasati Sutta (separately, perhaps). For now, we are discussing the Satipatthana Sutta. Any indication in that sutta that body must come before the others? > A) It is mentioned first. b) There is NO awakening even till stream entry without Kayagatasati. 574. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, ignorance fades, knowledge arises, self-conceit fades, latent tendencies get completely destroyed and bonds fade. 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream of the Teaching, fruits of returning once, fruits of not returning, and fruits of worthiness 600. Bhikkhus, they that do not partake mindfulness of the body,[1] do not partake deathlessness and they that partake mindfulness of the body, partake deathlessness. There are dozens of such statements. In AN Book 1s, Kayagatasativaggo and Amatavagga. http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara1/1-ekanipata/\ 016-Ekadhammapali-e.html > > =============== > > Furthermore the kaya->dhammanupassana is arranged from lesser to more difficult steps. > > =============== > > J: I agree that rupas are grosser and easier to comprehend intellectually than namas. However, while this may well explain the order of presentation, it doesn't mean that the first-mentioned must be developed before the development of the others can begin. > See the above. No awakening even to stream entry without kayagatasati. > > =============== > > >J: If as you say (rightly, I think) kamachanda is due to a lack of >understanding, then the 'cure' should be the development of >understanding (rather than seclusion). > > > > And one of the prerequisites IS physical seclusion. This is both in the suttas (such as 3rd requirement for panna). > > =============== > > J: Yes, I understand this to be your interpretation ;-)) And Buddha's. "Indeed, Ananda, it is impossible that a monk who delights in company, enjoys company, is committed to delighting in company; who delights in a group, enjoys a group, rejoices in a group, will obtain at will ? without difficulty, without trouble ? the pleasure of renunciation, the pleasure of seclusion, the pleasure of peace, the pleasure of self-awakening. But it is possible that a monk who lives alone, withdrawn from the group, can expect to obtain at will ? without difficulty, without trouble ? the pleasure of renunciation, the pleasure of seclusion, the pleasure of peace, the pleasure of self-awakening. "Indeed, Ananda, it is impossible that a monk who delights in company, enjoys company, is committed to delighting in company; who delights in a group, enjoys a group, rejoices in a group, will enter & remain in the awareness-release that is temporary and pleasing, or in the awareness-release that is not-temporary and beyond provocation. But it is possible that a monk who lives alone, withdrawn from the group, can expect to enter & remain in the awareness-release that is temporary and pleasing, or in the awareness-release that is not-temporary and beyond provocation. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.122.than.html > > =============== > > "Having heard the Dhamma, he achieves a twofold seclusion: seclusion in body & seclusion in mind. This is the third cause, the third requisite condition... > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.002.than.html > > =============== > > J: But this passage is merely descriptive. Yes, it describes one of the causes for panna. In Satipatthana sutta, on Kayagatasati there are references to "And how does a monk remain focused on the body in & of itself? [1] "There is the case where a monk ? having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building ? sits down folding his legs crosswise, holding his body erect and setting mindfulness to the fore [lit: the front of the chest]. Always mindful, he breathes in; mindful he breathes out. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html The satipatthana starts with physical seclusion! 580-583. Bhikkhus, when mindfulness of the body is developed and made much, it conduces to realizing the fruits of the entry into the stream of the Teaching. AN Kayagatasativaggo. With metta, Alex #105575 From: Vince Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: >> My question is about knowing what's the first in the arising: >> consciousness or nama&rupa. >> > S: She also replied that consciousness(citta) and nama (cetasika) arise together. > I wrote down an exact quote which I can't find at the moment, but > there was not much more said. (Will let you know when I come across it). many thanks Sarah :) Vince. #105576 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Hello Pt1, KenH, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi KenH, Alex, > > > KenH: I haven't worked out yet whether "practise jhana" is a correct translation that could mean different things - including "practice vipassana" - or whether the translation itself should be something else, such as "practice vipassana" or just "practise" (meditate). > > pt: Same here. In particular regarding Robert's note: > > > RobK: The Dhammapada 371 :"Meditate, o bhikkhu and be not heedless." (same pali phrase as the sutta you quoted above. The atthakatha says "o bhikkhus meditate by the two kinds of meditative absorptions" > And the tika notes that this is twofold in "the sense of meditative absorption that arises depending on an object and meditative absorption that arises dependent on characteristics" The tika later explains this by saying that the first is (p506 note 6 of carter and palihawadana) "the eight attainments (jhanas) to be obtained by training the mind in concentrating on one of the thirty eight objects such as kasina [or metta, or Buddha or Dhamma or breath etc] and the second means 'insight wisdom, path and fruit'..to be obtained by reflecting on the three characteristics'" > > > pt: My understanding of this is that "practice jhana" or "Jhaayatha" can mean any of those things (i.e. develop just samatha, just vipassana, develop both, just develop as in "meditate"). > > So, I think it would depend on the sutta context in every >particular instance what exactly is meant by jhaayatha. In MN108 the Arahant Ananda, well versed in the suttas said that Jhanas is what the Buddha has praised. Ananda: ""And what sort of mental absorption did he praise? There is the case where a monk ? quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful (mental) qualities ? enters & remains in the first jhana...he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is the sort of mental absorption that the Blessed One praised." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html So maybe when the Buddha kept telling Ananda "Meditate Ananda don't be heedless!" it was the above?! > So, in case of Kamma sutta SN 35.145 that we were discussing, I >think that your (KenH) analysis was right that it deals with the >ultimates and insight, and hence, You mean http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html Sutta? It ends with "Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi. Also it is generally (or always?) after the 4th Jhana that one can see one's and other's previous lives and workings of kamma. So to really see "old kamma" could be after 4th Jhana, which is part of N8P. Considering that Buddha praised Jhana, I don't see how He has meant anything else by saying "practice jhana!" With metta, Alex #105577 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "...Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi." Scott: Um hm. You may wish to consult with your jhaana-enthusiast colleagues about this one, Alex. Sincerely, Scott. #105578 From: A T Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 11:29 am Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator Dear Scott, all, > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "...Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi." > >Scott: Um hm. You may wish to consult with your jhaana-enthusiast >colleagues about this one, Alex. > > Sincerely, > > Scott. The middle path discovered by the Buddha is neither indulging in bodily mortification (attakilamatha-nuyogo), nor in sensual pleasures (ka-mesu ka-masukhallika-nuyogo). The middle path of the Buddha that he has discovered leads to "...leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding." In DN29 PTS DN 3.131 Jhanas are also said to “...upasama-ya abhińńa-ya sambodha-ya nibba-na-ya sam.vattanti” "...leads to calm, to direct knowledge, to self-awakening, to Unbinding." The phrasing used to Describe N8P in that part is the same as the phrase to describe Jhana. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.011.nymo.html In MN108, Jhanas are also the only meditation that the Buddha has praised. So “jha-yatha-nanda, ma- pama-dattha” does mean following that which leads to Nibbana. Jhanas the unique and profound states of letting-go. Jhana as part of N8P was unknown before the Buddha, and the Buddha awoke or 'rediscovered' Jhana as said in Pańca-lacan.d.asuttam.. In the suttas such as DN29 what leads to Nibbana are the 4 Jhanas that are pleasures leading to awakening. Also in MN66: "Now, there is the case where a monk — quite withdrawn from sensuality, withdrawn from unskillful mental qualities — enters & remains in the first jhana: ... he enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness, neither pleasure nor pain. This is called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html Jhanas are "called renunciation-pleasure, seclusion-pleasure, calm-pleasure, self-awakening-pleasure. And of this pleasure I say that it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.066.than.html "it is to be cultivated, to be developed, to be pursued, that it is not to be feared" !!! With metta, Alex #105579 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 4:17 pm Subject: Truth always Triumphs! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Honest Truth is the 7th Mental Perfection: Honesty is Trust Honesty is Truthful Honesty is Guarantee Honesty is Confidence Honesty is Consistence Honesty is Convincing Honesty is Certainty Honesty is Credibility Honesty is Reliability Honesty is Authenticity Honesty is Integrity Honesty is Accuracy Honesty is Commitment Honesty is Sincerity Honesty is Security Honesty is Reality Honesty is a Must! Honesty characteristically never deceives, it's function is to verify what is actual and factual. Honesty's manifestation is sheer excellence... Sincere and exact truthfulness is the proximate cause of honesty! All evil states and crimes converge upon transgression of Truth... Devotion to Truth is the only reliable foundation of all Nobility! Like The Buddha demand of your own mind: You have to give me an honest answer, understand! I won't accept anything phony. And once you've answered, you have to stick to that very answer and not slide or glide around. Don't be a traitor to yourself! Be sober & straight! Therefore: Accept now this 4th training rule of avoiding all false speech! If one is not true to the Buddha's teachings, the Buddha's teachings will not be true to oneself, either! That Dhamma, which is used as a costume, surface, uniform or alibi, does not bear fruit, as it's intention is not true! True Honesty, however, makes you quite worthy of respect! If one is painstakingly honest towards oneself, one thereby also becomes meticulously honest towards others. If one on the contrary deceives oneself, believing own lies, one automatically also deceives others, betraying them. Honesty, however, always makes you quite worthy of respect... Make an island of yourself, be your own light and illumination, make yourself your only safe haven; there is no other protection. Make Truth your only island, make Truth your sole refuge; Make Truth your only lamp; there is no other luminosity. Digha Nik aya, 16 The straight person, self-controlled, keeping precepts, open and honest, is both worthy and fit for the yellow robe. The hiding person, imposting, immoral, keeping secrets, not honest, is neither worthy, nor fit for the yellow robe. Dhammapada 9+10 Overcome the furious by friendship. Overcome the evil one by goodness. Overcome the miser by generosity; Overcome the liar by truth. Dhammapada 223 The one who destroys life; The one who speaks false; The one who takes what is not given; The one who mates with another's partner; The one who is addicted to drugs or alcohol; Such one - even in this world - digs up his own root! Dhammapada 246-47 They who falsely declare: "That happened" about what did not happen, or: "I did not do that" about what they actually did, they earn themselves a ticket to grilling in Hell. Dhammapada 306 When the Blessed One heard about the king?s spies, who for money stole information from others, he explained: One should not take just any job. One should not be another?s man. One should not depend on any other. One should not sell the truth for money? Udana VI - 2 The Bodhisatta was once caught by a man-eater, which sat him free on the condition that he returned the next day. He kept his word and did so... Much later remembered: Protecting this way of truth, having given up my life and kingdom, I thereby set free 100 captured nobles, as the man-eater lost his nerve. In honesty I thereby reached the ultimate perfection! Mahasutasoma-Jataka no. 537 More of the 10 mental perfections (paramis): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/The_Ten_Perfections.htm Have a nice, honest, and noble day!! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ Sri <...> #105580 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 5:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "...Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi." Scott: Poke you and you offer the same message. I'd be interested in whether your jhaana-enthusiast confreres agree with you. I don't buy all the jhaana-excitement but do they buy your version of it? Sincerely, Scott. #105581 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:14 pm Subject: Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ptaus1 Hi Jon, Thanks for your reply. > J: The ekaggata cetasika is one of the 'universal' cetasikas, that is to say, that arises with every citta. When the citta is kusala, so is the ekaggata, when the citta is akusala, so is the ekaggata. It has no particular moral/ethical quality of its own. > > Likewise, when the citta is of path level (mundane or supramundane), the ekaggata is of the appropriate level/strength. > > J: As I understand it, the reference to jhana is illustrative of the intensity of the concentration that occurs at magga citta level. pt: Sorry, I guess I'm not forming my question precisely enough: - when jhana/samatha is happening, the citta is kusala, the ekagatta is kusala and panna is kusala. - when vipassana is happening, the citta is kusala, the ekagatta is kusala and panna is kusala. So they are all kusala. However, panna in samatha is of different kind/grade than panna in vipassana (or at least that's what I've read here many times). So my questions is - is ekaggata also of different kind/grade? Or is it of the same kind, which is why you might say that "the reference to jhana is illustrative of the intensity of the concentration that occurs at magga citta level". Still in other words, if ekaggata is kusala (in both samatha and vipassana), is intensity its only other distinguishing factor, or is it also distinguished by something else (like the kind/grade of panna is said to be another distinguishing factor in case of samatha/vipassana)? Best wishes pt #105582 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:17 pm Subject: Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ptaus1 Hi Jon, Thanks for the discussion. Best wishes pt > J: The function of sati is to not be forgetful of the characteristic of a presently arising dhamma. Thus, what appears when there is direct awareness is a characteristic of a dhamma, that is to say, in the case of, say, seeing consciousness, that it is the (mere) experiencing of an object (namely, of visible object). > > That's why it's helpful to consider more about dhammas, their characteristics and functions. There needs to be a good appreciation at the intellectual level of namas and rupas, the nature of sati, and how moments of sati differ from non-sati moments (which is of course exactly your question!) #105583 From: "kenhowardau" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:13 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Mike (KenH, Sarah), > > > Mike: To totally oversimplify, it seems to me that the approach you advocate is to realise anatta by considering it very carefully. The alternative is to attempt to control stuff, and see how it goes. Sooner or later the lack of control becomes painfully obvious... > > pt: I think this is a good description. I also have to say that it reminds me a bit of the time when I was younger and my parents would tell me not to do certain things as they won't lead to any good, but I would reply "Leave me alone and let me make my own mistakes, how else can I learn?!" And then after making the mistake, I'd of course quietly say to myself "Damn it, should have listened to what my parents said." It's the same neverending dilemma with control/no control I think. > ---------- Hi pt, Mike and Sukin, It would be the same thing if, as Mike has asserted, the meditation teachers were teaching no-control. But I don't believe they are. The only kind of 'no-control' teachings I can remember from my meditation days were things like, "You can't have enlightenment until you no longer want it." Mike might argue that was a teaching of no-control, but I understood it to mean, 'Sit in meditation and allow your desires for enlightenment to slip away. Then you can have it!' (Hooray!) What those teachers should have been telling me was to understand the theory of ultimate realities - namas and rupas that, right now, are arising and falling away without any controlling agent. --------------------- pt: > E.g. as far as I can gather from KenH's posts, even he had to go through several decades of trying to control stuff so that he can finally begin to appreciate the no-control advice :) (I hope I'm not misrepresenting you here KenH :). ---------------------- I liked Sukin's explanation. I think he is saying that wrong practice can only take a person further away from right practice, not closer to it. Ken H #105584 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 6:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) truth_aerator >"scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Alex, > > Regarding: > > A: "...Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi." > >Scott: Poke you and you offer the same message. I'd be interested >in whether your jhaana-enthusiast confreres agree with you. I don't >buy all the jhaana-excitement but do they buy your version of it? Dear Scott, all, It is up to them whether they agree with the Buddha. Like it or not, the N8P contains Samma-Samadhi that includes 4 Jhanas. The Jhanas DO lead to nibbana (DN29) and Jhana IS the path to Awakening (MN36). It is also the only meditative absorption that Buddha has praised according to Ananda in MN108. Thus, verily, monks, concentration is the way, non-concentration the no-whither way. Samadhi Maggo, asamadhi kummaggo AN6.64 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 that sounds well at a coffee table but is impotent to actually remove Dukkha. 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 permanently. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.036.than.html http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.108.than.html With metta, Alex #105586 From: si-la-nanda Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 1:36 am Subject: Stream Entry ... How? silananda_t Dear Dhammafarers, Sole dominion over the earth, going to heaven, lordship over all worlds: the fruit of stream-entry excels them. *(Dhp 178)* ** *The practices leading to stream entry are encapsulated in four factors:* *Association with people of integrity is a factor for stream-entry. Listening to the true Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry. Appropriate attention is a factor for stream-entry. Practice in accordance with the Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry.* * (SN 55.5)* ** more: Stream Entry Part 1by Thanissaro Stream Entry Part 2by Thanissaro mahakaruna, silananda *Thus have i heard: One is genuinely only a Buddhist when one is at least a stream-enterer, Sotapanna. * #105587 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:28 pm Subject: Re: On Accumulations. ptaus1 Hi Jon, > J: As I understand it, there is the theoretical possibility of attainment of the early vipassana?nanas without there being the attainment of sotapatti-magga in the same life-time. I'm afraid I'll have to ask someone else to give the details of exactly which stages this refers to (anyone, please?). pt: Hm, that would be interesting to hear about, considering Sarah's comments in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/105307 : > S: Or, as I'd suggest, *not develop to even the first stage of insight" until the last life. > >The way KS explains it -- and this will be a poor summary -- all the 'ingredients' have to be ready and in place for such insight to develop and all defilements to be eradicated by the Samma Sambuddha. > ... > Likewise, for other key disciples, such as Sariputta -- he had accumulated great wisdom and had attained to the highest jhanas in his last life as taught by other teachers. However, until he heard the verse of the Dhamma, no vipassana nanas. > > Only when he heard the following from Assaji did all the insights up to sotapatti magga arise (as I understand) Best wishes pt #105588 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:37 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) scottduncan2 Dear Alex, Regarding: A: "...Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi...It is up to them..." Scott: Let's wait and see if any of your fellow jhaana-seekers come to your support in this. I'm not sure they would agree with some of your statements. Sincerely, Scott. #105589 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) ptaus1 Hi Sukin, It's good to see you posting again. I remember when just starting to lurk here I really used to enjoy your long and well-reasoned posts. Thanks for your comments regarding the dsg position. I'm not sure how exactly to answer your questions constructively since they seem more rhetorical in nature and represent the dsg position quite well, so not much more I can add there. I wish though that someone would make an attempt to actually try to understand what Mike is saying on his own terms (because to me it seems he tried to understand what dsg folks are saying using dsg terms, so it'd be nice to show the same courtesy), rather than dismissing his position as wrong from the outset. Perhaps you could be the man for the job, perhaps not. Either way, my opinion on the whole argument is that it's all just down to our fascination with semantics, so not sure I can add anything constructive at the moment. E.g. I could say that everything you (or KenH) did prior to encountering dsg was exactly what was needed so that you could understand the dsg position on anatta at the right moment. So, you might call all that you learned before dsg wrong, but I might call it right precisely because it offered a vantage point for appreciating the dsg position... Still just more semantics, so not very helpful in either case... Best wishes pt > Before DSG, my understanding of anatta was nowhere near what I later > understood after I heard DSG. What I realized in fact was that had I not > come to know this, I'd gone on to have understood the matter very > wrongly. There was no indication that any corrective mechanism would > have come into play to correct any misunderstanding, but rather that the > illusion of result would have only lead to being further and further > deluded. #105590 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 7:18 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (3) ptaus1 Dear Sarah, Thanks for raising this question. > S: 9. Conditions for seeing, hearing - see pt's #104022 > When attention is give as a condition, it's referring to pancadvaravajjana citta (the preceding citta), NOT manasikara. Light is visible object. Seeing sees that which can be seen. There can also be seeing in the dark, but without light, objects would not be taken for things and people. That's why it's sometimes given. pt: Thanks, these are very interesting details. > S: With regard to the scientific comments in #102610, one friend mentioned (and I have no idea), that there is sound in deep space ...multiple sounds in deep space, he said. pt: 102610? That seems like a wrong reference post. Regarding sound in deep space, I believe that's not correct from a scientific point of view - I've tried to explain a bit on that in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/102774 > S: For hearing, space, the 2nd kind of akasa rupa is the medium. pt: Okay, so basically, there is no air or any other medium mentioned aside from space, right? Also, by the 2nd kind of akasa rupa, you mean the unconditioned one or the tiny conditioned one between kalapas? I've been thinking about this, and the conditioned one could actually make sense in a manner comparative to scientific understanding of sound propagation. Thanks. Best wishes pt #105591 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (3) sarahprocter... Dear pt, --- On Sun, 28/2/10, ptaus1 wrote: > S: With regard to the scientific comments in #102610, one friend mentioned (and I have no idea), that there is sound in deep space ...multiple sounds in deep space, he said. pt: 102610? That seems like a wrong reference post. .... S: Yes, that's not correct - it was a message of yours to me as I recall. I can't easily re-check the # as I haven't kept the paper I was referring to - maybe your summary of points to be addressed. Apologies. .... >Regarding sound in deep space, I believe that's not correct from a scientific point of view - I've tried to explain a bit on that in http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/dhammastud ygroup/message/ 102774 > S: For hearing, space, the 2nd kind of akasa rupa is the medium. pt: Okay, so basically, there is no air or any other medium mentioned aside from space, right? .... S: Right, only space for hearing. .... >Also, by the 2nd kind of akasa rupa, you mean the unconditioned one or the tiny conditioned one between kalapas? ... S: The unconditioned one as in cavities or open areas, such as between 2 posts. ... >I've been thinking about this, and the conditioned one could actually make sense in a manner comparative to scientific understanding of sound propagation. Thanks. ... S: I'll leave aside the scientific understanding for others... Metta Sarah ======= #105592 From: "Mike" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:38 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) mikenz66 Hi KenH, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "kenhowardau" wrote: > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > > Hi Mike (KenH, Sarah), > > > > > Mike: To totally oversimplify, it seems to me that the approach you advocate is to realise anatta by considering it very carefully. The alternative is to attempt to control stuff, and see how it goes. Sooner or later the lack of control becomes painfully obvious... > > > > pt: I think this is a good description. I also have to say that it reminds me a bit of the time when I was younger and my parents would tell me not to do certain things as they won't lead to any good, but I would reply "Leave me alone and let me make my own mistakes, how else can I learn?!" And then after making the mistake, I'd of course quietly say to myself "Damn it, should have listened to what my parents said." It's the same neverending dilemma with control/no control I think. > > > ---------- > > KH: Hi pt, Mike and Sukin, > > KH: It would be the same thing if, as Mike has asserted, the >meditation teachers were teaching no-control. But I don't believe >they are. Mike: Presumably some are and some aren't. Although perhaps one should distinguish control of ultimate realities and the mundane stuff that we "control". One can obviously exercise mundane "control" in the sense of learning to eat, read, type, ride a bicycle, become calm by following an object like the breath, learn about Dhamma, discuss it on DSG. Mike: How best to see though that mundane stuff to see that the ultimate reality behind it is not controllable? That's the important question. > KH: The only kind of 'no-control' teachings I can remember from my > meditation days were things like, "You can't have enlightenment > until you no longer want it." Mike: Hmm, sounds like a Western Zen sort of thing... > KH: Mike might argue that was a teaching of no-control, but I > understood it to mean, 'Sit in meditation and allow your desires > for enlightenment to slip away. Then you can have it!' (Hooray!) > > KH: What those teachers should have been telling me was to > understand > the theory of ultimate realities - namas and rupas that, right > now, are arising and falling away without any controlling agent. Hmm, you want to control your teachers now? :) Metta Mike #105593 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re:Monkey simile (was, Re: Nyanatiloka ...) ptaus1 Hi Alex, > > pt: So, in case of Kamma sutta SN 35.145 that we were discussing, I >think that your (KenH) analysis was right that it deals with the >ultimates and insight, and hence, > A: You mean > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html > Sutta? pt: Yes. > A: It ends with "Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." pt: Yes it does. So the issue is whether "practice jhana" was the accurate translation of jhaayatha or not. After reading through UP topic mentioned, my understanding is that it's not very accurate. E.g. see the first post int he UP topic Jhana 16 by Jim Anderson for the definition of the verb, and then see Robert's comment on the commentary and subcommentary on this that I already quoted (second post in the same UP topic). So my understanding is that in Kamma sutta jhaayatha would mean something like develop/contemplate on the characteristics, which is insight, because the context of the sutta is insight. Sure, in other suttas jhaayatha might mean develop/contemplate on the object, which is samatha. We'd need to examine the context in each case if we want to be accurate. > A: Again the path is described as culminating in Samma-Samadhi. pt: Not sure about this, my impresssion was that path factors arise together (whether in group of 5 or more - 7 during path consciousness), with the right view as the forerunner, i.e. it would not happen without right view. Thus, to say that the path culminates in samma-samadhi sounds like partial truth to me, because other 4-7 factors arise at the same time, so it would be kind of like saying that the path culminates in the right livelihood for example, which is also true, but still only partially true. > A: Also it is generally (or always?) after the 4th Jhana that one can see one's and other's previous lives and workings of kamma. So to really see "old kamma" could be after 4th Jhana, which is part of N8P. pt: Yes, I think this is a stock sutta description of how it happens (when the awakening happens through the three direct knowledges). I'm not sure that it always happens like that though in terms of seeing past lives, etc, i.e. I thought that seeing past lives etc is not a direct consequence of jhanas, but of developed divine eye, which can awaken without jhanas thanks to accumulations. However, all this I think is a bit irrelevant because the Kamma sutta is speaking about insight in the present moment, not about exploring past lives. E.g. see KenH's rendering of the sutta in his post to Dieter http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/105522 > A: Considering that Buddha praised Jhana, I don't see how He has meant anything else by saying "practice jhana!" pt: I hope I explained this above re the context of the sutta. Best wishes pt #105594 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (5b) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Cryptic Notes from the Wednesday afternoon discussion in KK in the garden (contd): 8. Kayanupassana and meditation - No posture, only one object appears. "iriyapatha (posture)" - doesn't mean just follow what is taken for the body when sitting. Not just one rupa when we sit or stand. No posture, no one. Posture cannot appear to any doorway. So long as it's "posture", it's self who sits, self who walks. Actually, there are only realities arising and falling away. We think of the whole body, but softness cannot be body. 9. 40 objects, (kammatthana), samatha - Do they support kusala? Why think of samatha? When listening to Dhamma, calm already When there's understanding of a reality, calm already. A friend, V. suggested that one must abide one way or another, so might as well do so in samadhi. KS:Self thinking about abiding! V. mentioned lay affairs such as going to work and so on. KS: Understanding, understand to know anatta. Practice? KS: Only the development of understanding by conditions. V. repeated that people have to spend their day somehow KS: Citta and cetasikas arising. V. referred to 2 levels of truth - conventional and ultimate KS: Can there be the experience of samatha without understanding samatha? There must be awareness, awareness not concentration. This is the only way to understand Dhamma. We will never see the Buddha if no understanding of realities now - just use his name. What did he teach? We cannot see his virtue by our own thought, not really understanding the profundity of reality. Thinking thinks a lot about what is seen. What is left is only the memory of past experience, clinging to nimitta. 10. Ayatanas - not objects referred to. 11. Sutta reading V. we read about the 40 objects and the monks' life. KS: We read about anything. What about understanding citta now? The innermost. What is real at this moment? There's always an idea of "I" reading about monks' life, reading about ...., not understanding. Can the teachings be understood by reading? Ayatanas, innermost etc - cannot be understood by reading. Those who could understand, listened to suttas. So start from 'dhamma'. Those who understand Abhidhamma can understand suttas. 12. Metta & Karuna Development. Once not enough. We don't need another time to develop metta. No one, only kusala and akusala. V. texts about metta and karuna... KS: understand realities - this leads to metta and compassion. Do you like or hate seeing? Useless, only visible object. Being friendly, do you have to call it metta? V. Interested in developing metta and karuna... KS: For whose sake? V. for consideration, for the others' sake.. KS: For one's own sake. No need to practise calm because already calm when intention to help. KO gave example of Angulimala.....conditioned dhammas, not Self. V. Contemplation of dhamma v.useful KS: For your own sake. V. Very useful... KS: Because the idea of self is very deep-rooted. How can there be less attachment to the idea of self? V. How? KS: More understanding of realities, direct awareness and understanding, not just contemplating. Understand anattaness. 13. Factors of Enlightenment, trying to do.... Understanding, sati, viriya.... With right understanding. Without viriya, panna cannot develop. "I'll do something", not understanding what appears by conditions. Trying to understand. What about the reality appearing? Lobha moves one away from understanding reality. Develop understanding until lobha cannot move away from reality. Deep-rooted habits, but panna not deep-rooted. Forget about 'Do' because no self that can do! Doesn't mean no reality appears.... 14. Reading cittas... qu about reading cittas to KO! If no understanding, accumulate wrong view. Choosing - you! Reading anything, already conditioned. **** Metta Sarah ======= #105595 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 8:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (1) sarahprocter... Dear Vince, I just found my note: --- On Sun, 28/2/10, Vince wrote: >> My question is about knowing what's the first in the arising: >> consciousness or nama&rupa. ... KS: "Can he know that?....Citta and cetasikas come together" Metta Sarah ===== #105596 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 9:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (6) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, KS: "Samatha bhavana needs sati sampajanna, otherwise it's only theoretical. (Samatha bhavana) is more than conceptual understanding." "Even now, who doesn't know what is kusala, what is akusala? But it's only thinking." ***** Cryptic Notes from the Thursday morning discussion in KK in the garden: 1. Anatta, atta - Atta as illusion. Clinging to aggregates as atta, an idea of self who'd like this or that and to attain anything. 2. Thinking - And believing one's thinking is right. One word, 'sati' - what is it? Not just from one's own thinking. 3. Sound and concept - Whatever is not real is concept. 4. Samatha, monk's life, samadhi contd - Some thought KS hadn't answered the qus yest... N: personal inclinations KS: Wrong view, deeply-rooted anusaya. What we take for samatha is not samatha. Punna kiriya vatthu (deeds of merit) - if citta is not kusala, how can samatha grow? kammathana (samatha object) - KS: what is it? Must be object of citta The Buddha talked about that which people can understand. He didn't teach about being attached, but an understanding of samatha. If no understanding now, not samatha. Samatha, the beginning - start by studying calm now when it appears. Real vs wrong samatha. Real has to be with understanding. Why do we want to develop samatha? Sit and listen without understanding is useless. Lobha leads to sitting, thinking. Panna sees the danger of akusala as soon as objects are experienced throught the senses. Only desire, wanting, not seeing the danger... Panna knows the difference between moments with and without calm and the right objects of calm - enough to condition moments of tranquillity. What are the cittas at the moment of seeing a corpse? Calm at this moment? Opposite of attachment. 5. Innermost - Without the core of experience, nothing can arise. Without an understanding of citta, no eradication of defilements. **** Metta Sarah ======= #105597 From: "Lukas" Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (4) szmicio Dear Sarah and all, > 3. Not doing - > Sariputta didn'tknow he would meet Assaji or what he'd hear. > The most important thing is understanding thinking (and any other realities) as no self. More important than details. L: Thanks for that Sarah I have forgotten this. This is so nice to hear that, I forget this is of the most imoprtant to learn in life all is conditioned and not mine. I am greateful to Ajahn that she explained this with such braveness. Even akusala we can learn this is not mine, conditioned. This is true, very according How Dhamma is. Best wishes Lukas #105598 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Study and practice Dhp 19-20 ashkenn2k Dear Jon J: Thanks for quoting a specific passage. It makes the discussion so much more meaningful ;-)) The reason why I don't consider this to be a method is because, as you point out above, the main ingredient of samatha development, namely the panna, is assumed. So there is nothing here that can be followed, because panna is the prerequisite. On the other hand, the person who has the necessary panna probably doesn't need to be told 'first verbally, then mentally'. KO: 'first verbally, then mentally'. - that you have to discuss with the commentators because there are the ones who wrote as it is, not me :-). J: I think what you’re saying is that it's a method for the person of already well-developed panna. But for us, the only relevant question is how the panna of samatha comes to be well-developed. Do you know of any 'method' given in the texts for this? KO: You did not answer my questions, you are diverting again. Now you are coming back to the original questions, how panna is develop for samantha which I have make my position very clear, it is after that develop panna and not before it. The issue is not before a developed panna but after a developed panna. Samantha bhavana before any developed panna is a very precarious thing, could be full of lobha. I have showed you the method by Visud, it is time for you to tell me which part of the text that this is not a method as described by Visud . As I told in the mini-bus, I am not interested in Samantha bhavana, it is not useful and full of dangers of wrong development. Stick to right understanding is the better way. I just wish to make it clear on this method issue which I find a very unneccessary discussion which does not help in the understanding of dhamma. Cheers Ken O #105599 From: Lukas Date: Sat Feb 27, 2010 10:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bangkok discussions with A.Sujin February 2010 (5b) szmicio Dear Sarah, very very helpful. >14. Reading cittas... >qu about reading cittas to KO! >If no understanding, accumulate wrong view. >Choosing - you! >Reading anything, already conditioned.