#111800 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 8:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) upasaka_howard Hi again, Nina - I sent the following empty post. Sorry. (After the fact, I decided I realloy have no reply to make, so I'm leaving my response as "empty". ;-) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/12/2010 8:12:15 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, upasaka@... writes: Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/12/2010 5:43:41 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi HOward, Op 11-nov-2010, om 20:20 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > Does one just *decide* to understand? If not, does it somehow "just > happen"? I would say "No. One takes steps to foster understanding." > Does one > not take actions to foster understanding? Are intention and > planning not > involved? -------- N: The right conditions are needed for the arising of right understanding. Listening to the dhamma, considering, as we discussed before. Intention and planning, these are expressions taken from conventional language that may cause the arising of ideas of: now I intend to foster understanding. ------ Nina. #111801 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi Howard, Op 12-nov-2010, om 14:18 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I sent the following empty post. Sorry. (After the fact, I decided I > realloy have no reply to make, so I'm leaving my response as > "empty". ;-) ------ N: That is OK. There are things we discussed so many times, and sometimes I hesitate to answer. It seems like arguing back and forth, one becomes somewhat wary. Nina. #111802 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 1:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi James, Op 12-nov-2010, om 12:33 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > Can understanding occur while one is washing the dishes for > example? Sure, as long as one is calm while washing the dishes. ------- N:I think it is the other way round. When one has listened much, like: seeing is only the experience of what is visible, or hardness is a ruupa experienced through the bodysense, and it is just a reality... hearing and remembering all these things, and when they have sunk in, there may be conditions for a moment of understanding of a reality. It was not planned or anything. And while it arises it is accompanied by calm. Only, the moment is so short, one may not even know that there is calm also. Calm means: no defilements at that moment. It does not 'feel' calm. That is merely an idea one has of calm. ------ Nina. #111803 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:22 pm Subject: Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > We need to clearly differentiate between breath as object of samatha and breath as object of vipassana. > > 1. Breath as object of samatha: > > First of all, we must stress that the cittas must be kusala and arise with understanding, if it is the development of samatha (calm). When breath is the object, it is a concept of breath only, a pannatti or nimitta, not the paramattha dhamma. There can be wise reflection, sati sampajanna, on how life at this moment depends on breath. This helps us to have less attachment to other things or possessions. As I've mentioned, I find it useful to reflect on how life and all we hold dear depends on this very in and out-breath. Without breath there'd be no life at all. The moments of calm have to be understood, otherwise it doesn't make sense. I appreciate all these notes from K. Sujin. The details are very good to see, as well as some of her reflections on breath and life. I don't have much to add at the moment. I'll continue to look at the notes and see if there are some points to get into further. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #111804 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:45 pm Subject: Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. Some thoughts. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > We need to clearly differentiate between breath as object of samatha and breath as object of vipassana. Noting that in K. Sujin's way of describing it, breath as object of samatha is very different - really a completely different kind of object - than breath as object of sati/vipassana. For samatha, it is breath as concept, including wise reflection on the role of the breath in life. Could you say a bit more about this? How is "breath as concept" an object for samatha, and how does it lead to development of samatha if understood correctly? > 1. Breath as object of samatha: > > First of all, we must stress that the cittas must be kusala and arise with understanding, if it is the development of samatha (calm). When breath is the object, it is a concept of breath only, a pannatti or nimitta, not the paramattha dhamma. So the kusala cittas are both understanding the nimita or pannati/concept of breath. Is this the same as the wise reflection on the role of the breath? Or is this a more direct reflection on the presence of the breath itself, albeit as concept? > There can be wise reflection, sati sampajanna, on how life at this moment depends on breath. This helps us to have less attachment to other things or possessions. As I've mentioned, I find it useful to reflect on how life and all we hold dear depends on this very in and out-breath. Without breath there'd be no life at all. The moments of calm have to be understood, otherwise it doesn't make sense. Noting that in K. Sujin's description above, there is none of the traditional idea of calming the breath/body/fabrications directly by concentration on the breath in the moment, ie, in the meditative way we would think of calming the breath and body. In the suttas Buddha says that the meditator observes the breath and "calms fabrications." So there is a sense in the suttas that the concentration on the breath with sati brings the calming of the breath, body and mind. In this sense there is a collaboration between sati and samatha, in this case one in which the concentration and mindfulness brings about the samatha. It seems in K. Sujin's description above, that it is more a contemplating of the role of the breath in life that brings the samatha, and that the object used for sati is completely different [a rupa, not a concept.] Would you say this is a correct interpretation of what she says above? > ...It's a different kind of understanding from that which knows realities. It is not the breath which brings wise reflection, attachment or aversion, but the kind of reflection and understanding. So samatha here is developed through wise reflection and understanding, it is a result of thinking about the breath correctly, rather than observing it. ... > Breath itself (or what is taken for breath) can appear in daily life, such as during our exercise, and be the object of attachment or detachment. When it appears (i.e. what is taken for breath) and there is understanding, that understanding knows how to develop samatha with this object, just as when there is wise reflection of death or metta which is apparent, samatha can develop. Would I be correct in thinking that this kind of noticing of "what is taken for breath" during exercise or otherwise, is again an object of thought and contemplation, and this is the method here for developing samatha? What kind of contemplation would occur during daily activity? Would it again be the kind that reflects on the role of the breath in life, impermanence of the breath, etc.? > Before the Buddha's time even, anapanasati as object of samatha was developed up to the 5th (arupa) jhana without any understanding of dhammas as anatta. There was no knowledge of the reality of the very subtle rupa - the insight into this very particular dhamma is known only by certain ariyan disciples of the Buddha. However, there was the knowledghe of how to develop samatha with the concept, the nimitta of breath as it appears. This is interesting - how the breath was an object for developing samatha in ancient times, but that breath as object for vipassana was unique to the Buddha. This accords with my understanding of that history. > ...If one sits or lies down, wishing to reflect on breath or attempting to understand it, the lobha at such times can never understand wholesome states. This suggests that one can never select breath as object with kusala understanding. Given that, is K. Sujin saying that one will only reflect on the breath as an object of samatha if it happens to be noticed in the course of daily life? So there is no systematic development of samatha, no practice. Is it totally arbitrary? If so, this is quite different than the Buddha's instruction to "go to the root of a tree and practice jhana" which he said quite explicitly. Can you explain the contradiction? I don't see how breath as object can be especially useful if one waits to notice it here or there for a moment here or a moment there. > Only panna knows what the right object is at the present moment. So any series of objects could be subject of samatha an a particular moment and there is no order to the development of samatha, it is just this or that at a given moment...? > 2. Breath as object of satipatthana > > This is the very subtle rupa, the special vayu dhatu (wind element) as conditioned by citta only, which appears at the nose-tip. ... The subtle rupas of breath only appear to a few mahapurisas (ariyan disciples) about to become arahats such as Buddha, Ananda and other key disciples... Is this saying that satipatthana with breath as object at the nosetip is reserved for sotapannas? > ...Heat, cold, hardness, softness, pressure (taken for breath ordinarily) may appear, just like any other tangible object. They all fall away instantly. When there is right understanding, it grows, otherwise, there's no way to become detached, if there's any selection of objects at all. ... I am a little confused by the above. First it is suggested that the various rupas associated with breath may be a good object for the ordinary person to regard with awareness to develop satipatthana. That is the way I understand mindfulness of breathing - being aware of direct sensations/rupas of the breath. Then K. Sujin goes on to say that "...there's no way to become detached, if there's any selection of objects at all..." So can the breath be followed to develop satipatthana through the rupas taken for breath, or not? Or is that too much of an intentional selection of rupas? > So, there can be awareness of breath now, or rather, those rupas commonly taken for breath. It just depends on conditions what appears and on the understanding at what level and whether there is any samatha or satipatthana development. It's a test of panna - to have such understanding or not. Seems like she is saying that if one is developed to the point of being ready to develop satipatthana with breathing, then one will naturally start attending the rupas that are associated with/taken for the breath, and there will be a natural arising of more consistent noting of these rupas. Is that correct? > ***** > The Buddha taught us to develop satipatthana and understand different dhammas appearing in daily life, without any selection, as anatta. So in the main, satipatthana is developed through understanding the dhammas that come to attention naturally in daily life, and see them as anatta. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111805 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:47 pm Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > [Apologies for sarcasm.] > ---------------------------------------------- > [Appreciation for the well-expressed sarcasm!] ;-)) It was > good-natured, which takes the bite out. > --------------------------------------------- Thanks, Howard. I hope that is the case... :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #111806 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:50 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Something to See, ..., er, Hear epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > I liked your recent exchange with Antony on raw awareness w/o past or > future as nibbana. That sounded good! :-) > ------------------------------------------------- > I believe these were Herman's words, though I took no exception to > them. (He deserves the credit.) > ---------------------------------------------- Got it. Thanks, Howard. Best, Robert E. = = = = #111807 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 2:53 pm Subject: Re: Mara in the form of a mole epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob > > > Of course I'm not denying that the perception of anatta is at the heart of the BUddhist path, it is, of course. But I think that thinking about anatta can become a kind of game for people and in the worst cases be used to justify a lazy attitude towards the accumualation of akusala. We have to remember that the Buddha didn't teach about such deep topics to people until he knew that there minds were prepared for the teachings, but we all want to go as deep as we can as soon as we can... > > The Buddha uses his listeners sense of self-esteem at times to discourage bad deeds, saying in one sutta "this is a way for inferior people, it is not for superior people, this is not for me." People can say that sutta is about dhammas, not people, and maybe even the commentary says that, but I will not believe that that paramattha interpretation of such a sutta was the Buddha's intent...he understood that when defilements are powerful and understanding is weak, subtle, paramattha interpretations can just end up adding to the fire by discouraging the necessary remedy, doing whatever is necessary to start putting out the fire. Understanding the nature of fire won't do that. I think your theme in this area is a very good one, and that you are right. It is good to see where we really are, and see the teachings in that context as well. You can sometimes feel when a certain point of Dhamma hits you in the intellect and is sort of juicy philosophy to enjoy mental pleasantness [as you have pointed out very well,] as opposed to when it hits you in the gut and affects your way of living, or gives you something to structure your behavior. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111808 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:25 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I am walking.' When > > standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he discerns, 'I am > > sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' Or however his > > body is disposed, that is how he discerns it. > > > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or > > focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a > > monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. > > > ------------------ > It's good that you have asked that question: by listening to the answers you can learn something to your advantage. > > Any fool can know, when he is walking, that he is walking. He can? Do you know what walking is? Do you know what it consists of in minute detail, or do you see an image of walking in your mind - a concept - and say to yourself "I know what this is"? And if that is the extent of your "knowing" are you not like an even worse "fool" who doesn't question that concepts are realities and takes the concept of walking for the reality of walking? Since the Buddha - I repeat, "The Buddha," who we are generally inclined to pay some attention to - is the one who said "When walking, know you are walking," perhaps he meant something by it that is more valuable than what "any fool" can know. Since we know that Buddha was not especially focused on superficial intellectual knowledge, such as "of course I know that I'm walking," or of the sort of knowledge where one can reel off a list of terminology without really understanding what it means, but was focused on actual mindfulness, insight and direct understanding of the way in which samsara functions, one can assume that he gave this instruction to promote greater mindfulness and understanding. "When walking, know that you are walking" is a meditation instruction, it's not a check list for the intellect. It means to know you are walking *as* walking, and *as* you are actually walking, to be mindful of exactly what is happening from moment to moment, rather than think about your shopping list while you are walking, or go through the list of defilements which you plan to indulge later in the day. Focusing on the raw actuality of what you are doing in this moment takes you away from all that. It grows your understanding of what is actual, rather than indulging in reactions and proliferations, and it simplifies the mental state to one that is in touch with life as it unfolds. To understand samsara and detach from it, we have to observe and experience it. So this, in my opinion, is the instruction, given by the Buddha, which you think "any fool knows," but which the Buddha felt should be undertaken as a practice from moment to moment, every moment of the disciple's life. When walking, when standing, when sitting, when eating, even when going to the toilet, even when falling asleep. The Buddha wanted to take us away from our deluded and self-based thoughts and subject us to the discipline of "what is happening now," and fill our awareness with it, tether our awareness to it, and yoke the straying monkey that constitutes the deluded mind. One of Buddha's most profoundly simple teachings goes along with this: "In the seen, there will be only the seen,...in the cognized only the cognized..." To see everything for exactly what it is as it occurs, and not add proliferations to what is. Someone like yourself, who would like to directly see dhammas at some point as they arise, would do well to understand this teaching as just that, and not dismiss the Buddha's words as though he were himself a fool for saying them. > As the commentaries point out, Ah, but of course, now you will find justification for jeering at the Buddha's direct teachings in the words of the commentaries, which are taken as even higher teachings than those of the Buddha. Oh, I'm sorry, they represent the "real Buddha," as opposed to the one who appeared on earth for our benefit. > ...even dogs and jackals know that sort of thing. Amazing. This is a commentator who knows so little about mindfulness that he thinks the Buddha's teaching on awareness is of the level of understanding of the animals. He insults the Buddha directly by dismissing his actual teaching. Bravo! > So what is so special about this "monk" who is walking? How does he know the present reality in a way that is so amazingly different? > > I hope you will listen to the answers. :-) The answer is that he is developing mindfulness as the Buddha instructed through actually paying attention to what is in front of his nose, rather than being lost in a dream of vaunted Buddhist concepts to feed the spiritual ego and cause a constant stream of comforting proliferations that one can consider "the path." Keep feeling good! It won't last. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #111809 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Functions of citta, was: Should one try one's best ... epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > All these functions and characteristics are described using > conventional language, but we should never forget that they refer > only to momentary dhammas: just one moment of citta accompanied by > cetasikas that fall away together with the citta. > It is important to have correct understanding of vitakka; as a factor > of the eightfold Path it is sammaa-sankappa, and its function is > again momentary. It assists sammaa-di.t.thi to understand just one > naama or ruupa at a time that presents itself. It hits the present > object. Thank you, Nina, for the entire discussion on this subject. It was very clear. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111810 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 4:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Where/How is memory stored? truth_aerator Hi Herman, all, > I'm sorry, Alex, but for you to say that sexual desire could be >present when it is not manifest doesn't compute with me. Potential for Sexual desire, not active sexual desire manifesting now. Just like dry stick can potentially be burned when suitable external circumstances meet, same is here. >And if it is suppressing that is present, surely that would be known? Suppression if it is done with wisdom, can be known. Eventually, when one develops enough wisdom and cuts the fetters, no event will make it possible for that desire to arise. One will also know that one cannot ever have that desire no matter what. Thinking about eliminated desire is not the same as desire itself. You can think or remember seeing children playing with toys, but you yourself have no desire to play with toys. As for annihilation/eternalism: As I understand it, in early suttas it referred to atta views. One posits a Self. Then based on assumption of an existing Self one assumed this Self to either survive death of this body, or to perish with it. Former is eternalism, latter is annihilation ism. I don't think it applies to individual atomic particles themselves. With metta, Alex #111811 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:08 pm Subject: Re: Mara in the form of a mole truth_aerator Hello Phil, RobertE, all, Phil has nice ideas. When we check the suttas and the progressive teaching, we see that it started differently than what some super advanced teachers teach. IMHO the Buddha was an excellent teacher and His choice of teaching AND ITS ORDER is important. Putting the cart before the horse isn't a good idea. Trying to build a 2nd floor without securing the foundation will make the whole structure shaky. Sure it can go up quickly, but so can it fall down quickly. "he gave a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html I wonder on how many teachers teach in that progression. Do they know better than the Buddha? BTW, that talk resulted in stream entry. Not only that, but 4NT do not explicitly talk about anatta... Some seem to jump strait to anatta, emptiness, lack of inherent being, whatever, bypassing many steps in between. Not only that, they reject those steps leading up to those teachings. IMHO. With metta, Alex #111812 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 12:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Ken) - In a message dated 11/12/2010 11:26:03 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I am walking.' When > > standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he discerns, 'I am > > sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' Or however his > > body is disposed, that is how he discerns it. > > > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or > > focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a > > monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. > > > ------------------ > It's good that you have asked that question: by listening to the answers you can learn something to your advantage. > > Any fool can know, when he is walking, that he is walking. He can? Do you know what walking is? Do you know what it consists of in minute detail, or do you see an image of walking in your mind - a concept - and say to yourself "I know what this is"? And if that is the extent of your "knowing" are you not like an even worse "fool" who doesn't question that concepts are realities and takes the concept of walking for the reality of walking? Since the Buddha - I repeat, "The Buddha," who we are generally inclined to pay some attention to - is the one who said "When walking, know you are walking," perhaps he meant something by it that is more valuable than what "any fool" can know. ================================== Robert, I may be mistaken, but I believe that what Ken meant was that the Buddha, when saying "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I am walking.' When standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he discerns, 'I am sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it,"he was indeed referring to more than just the ordinary understanding of walking etc that all folks have. I suspect that you and Ken actually are closer rather than far apart on this matter and that you are misunderstanding him. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111813 From: "antony272b2" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 9:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) antony272b2 Hi Howard, > > Howard: 3) Immediate results of present intending are not part of present > > experience - they are (very near-in-time) future experience, and fall > into the > > first category of experience, namely "results of past intentions". > > Intentions that come earlier, even right before, are still past > intentions at the > > time of the vipaka. Antony: I found this sutta quote from Majjhima 101: The Buddha: "So I asked them further, 'Friend Niganthas, what do you think: When there is fierce striving, fierce exertion, do you feel fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment? And when there is no fierce striving, no fierce exertion, do you feel no fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment?' "'Yes, friend...' "'... Then it's not proper for you to assert that, "Whatever a person experiences — pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain — all is caused by what was done in the past…." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html (Thanissaro's Translator's Note: As he interrogates the Niganthas, he makes the point that if all pleasure and pain experienced in the present were determined by past action, why is it that they now feel the pain of harsh treatment when they practice asceticism, and no pain of harsh treatment when they don't? If past action were the sole determining factor, then present action should have no effect on their present experience of pleasure or pain. In this way, the Buddha points to one of the most distinctive features of his own teaching on kamma: that the present experience of pleasure and pain is a combined result of both past and present actions. This seemingly small addition to the notion of kamma plays an enormous role in allowing for the exercise of free will and the possibility of putting an end to suffering before the effects of all past actions have ripened.) Antony: I suspect that we would be in agreement about Thanissaro's first paragraph but not the second. With metta / Antony. #111814 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) upasaka_howard Hi, Antony - In a message dated 11/12/2010 4:21:59 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, antony272b@... writes: Hi Howard, > > Howard: 3) Immediate results of present intending are not part of present > > experience - they are (very near-in-time) future experience, and fall > into the > > first category of experience, namely "results of past intentions". > > Intentions that come earlier, even right before, are still past > intentions at the > > time of the vipaka. Antony: I found this sutta quote from Majjhima 101: The Buddha: "So I asked them further, 'Friend Niganthas, what do you think: When there is fierce striving, fierce exertion, do you feel fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment? And when there is no fierce striving, no fierce exertion, do you feel no fierce, sharp, racking pains from harsh treatment?' "'Yes, friend...' "'... Then it's not proper for you to assert that, "Whatever a person experiences — pleasure, pain, or neither pleasure nor pain — all is caused by what was done in the past…." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html (Thanissaro's Translator's Note: As he interrogates the Niganthas, he makes the point that if all pleasure and pain experienced in the present were determined by past action, why is it that they now feel the pain of harsh treatment when they practice asceticism, and no pain of harsh treatment when they don't? If past action were the sole determining factor, then present action should have no effect on their present experience of pleasure or pain. In this way, the Buddha points to one of the most distinctive features of his own teaching on kamma: that the present experience of pleasure and pain is a combined result of both past and present actions. This seemingly small addition to the notion of kamma plays an enormous role in allowing for the exercise of free will and the possibility of putting an end to suffering before the effects of all past actions have ripened.) Antony: I suspect that we would be in agreement about Thanissaro's first paragraph but not the second. With metta / Antony. ==================================== The Buddha is using ordinary discourse here, referring to immediate result as "in the present". From a detailed perspective, I stick with what I said before. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111815 From: "philip" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:09 pm Subject: Re: Mara in the form of a mole philofillet Hi Alex, Rob E, Herman and all Thanks for your comments re the Mole. And thanks especially Alex for the below, it is the passage I often refer to without making the effort to track down the exact reference. Very important, I think. Wanting to stimulate the mind with lots of ideas about anatta etc (the deep teachings) is natural and if one is fortunate enough to be free of accumulated tendencies to do harmful deeds (and some people are, another incorrect tendency I have noted in A.S and her students is to deny that people are different and that some people have to take more care about akusala kamma patha, they say that that involves comparing, self-view etc...) it might be enough to condition proper understanding, but for people like me who are always on the verge of throwing away all the progress that has been made in developing sila (there have been periods over the last few years when I doubted the truth of kamma, that deeds have results, now *that* is the wrong view I worry about, and basically only that, for now) it is dangerous to be too attracted to deep teachings, for the reasons I got at in the Mole poem. Mara could not appear in Sarah or Nina's words to everyone, only to people like me, who cannot afford to be too fascinated by deep teachings. People will say that without understanding of anatta any progress I think I have made in developing sila is empty (A.S said "what is the use of knowing kusala from akusala if one does not know all dhammas are not self") but they can say what they want. The accumulated tendency to behave or not behave in certain ways has anatta at the heart, of course, but at the surface, in the place where the tendency is developed, self-esteem/ego are firmly and very helpfully involved, and the Buddha knew that and taught to it. Metta, PHil Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Phil, RobertE, all, > > > Phil has nice ideas. When we check the suttas and the progressive teaching, we see that it started differently than what some super advanced teachers teach. IMHO the Buddha was an excellent teacher and His choice of teaching AND ITS ORDER is important. > > Putting the cart before the horse isn't a good idea. Trying to build a 2nd floor without securing the foundation will make the whole structure shaky. Sure it can go up quickly, but so can it fall down quickly. > > > "he gave a step-by-step talk, i.e., a talk on giving, a talk on virtue, a talk on heaven; he declared the drawbacks, degradation, & corruption of sensual passions, and the rewards of renunciation. Then when he saw that Suppabuddha the leper's mind was ready, malleable, free from hindrances, elated, & bright, he then gave the Dhamma-talk peculiar to Awakened Ones, i.e., stress, origination, cessation, & path." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.5.03.than.html #111816 From: "philip" Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 11:53 pm Subject: Re: Mara in the form of a mole philofillet Hi again all I'll revise what I wrote below. I'd say self-esteem/ego can or often are involved, but not that they always are. It's case by case, depends on the strength of the defilements involved, and the available understanding. That's the beauty of the Dhamma, it helps everyone in different ways, very important to keep that in mind, urging a straight-to-anatta, straight to nama and rupa approach to all listeners is contrary to the Dhamma, it's going straight to the heartwood, the Buddha said we have to peel the leaves and tangled branches away first... Metta, Phil > The accumulated tendency to behave or not behave in certain ways has anatta at the heart, of course, but at the surface, in the place where the tendency is developed, self-esteem/ego are firmly and very helpfully involved, and the Buddha knew that and taught to it. > #111817 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:10 am Subject: Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: There is > aramm.nupnijjhaana (the meditation subjects of samatha) and > lakkhanupanijjhaana, the contemplation of the three characteristics. > The conclusions you drew from instructions: "jhana is not part of > the path," only dry insight > is, and that Buddha did not want us to practice jhana.", this may be > misunderstood, or without the context. I have concluded personally from reading sutta that jhana really is a necessary part of the path. It is possible according to Vism. to follow the path of dry insight all the way to enlightenment, but it is a much more difficult and restrictive path, and can only be achieved by those who have a very high level of wisdom developed, or have the natural propensity for extremely sharp discernment. I don't think the average person, even after many lifetimes, can attain enlightenment without jhana. Would you agree that the path with at least the lower jhanas is the most common configuration, and that it is a normal constituent of the path? It seems to me that in almost every sutta dealing with the sequence of development the Buddha recommends anapanasati leading to some samatha and sati, and that the path then leads to development of jhana, and from the "launching pad" of jhana, the higher level of satipatthana, vipassana and final path factors are developed. Would you agree with this, or do you think that the path of "insight only," the dry insight path, is more common and more accessible than I think it is? There are suttas where Buddha talks about the possibility of reaching enlightenment by ardent attention to the Dhamma which excludes all else and can bring the practitioner directly to awakening, but this requires great concentration, exclusion of all defilements and a great natural capacity for wisdom. I think in most cases the full path is required. Would you agree? > The Buddha praised jhaana of samatha as a high degree of kusala. I think most of us can agree that jhana predated the Buddha, and that it is kusala, but that it depends on the understanding of how to develop insight whether jhana functions as part of the path of awakening or not. I think the issue is that there are some who think we can dismiss jhana altogether, and that the real path is the path of insight alone, without jhana. They think jhana is kusala, but a coincidence on the path, or even a distraction. I don't think that is what the Buddha intended with regard to jhana. I think it is integral to the path at some point for most people to reach enlightenment. I don't think the path of dry insight is adequate for anyone who does not have an exceptionally strong capability in understanding and wisdom. That seems to be supported by Vism and some detailed commentaries on the different modalities of the path that I have seen. Best, Robert E. #111818 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:16 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) epsteinrob Hi James. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James" wrote: > > Hi Nina, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > > ------- > > N: At the moment of understanding, the citta is kusala and each > > kusala citta is accompanied by calm. > > ------ > > James: Right, this is the most important point. Understanding must be accompanied by calm. Can understanding occur while one is washing the dishes for example? Sure, as long as one is calm while washing the dishes. If one is angry, lonely, upset, depressed, horny, or any other numerous other other mental states that aren't calm while washing the dishes, then understanding cannot arise while washing the dishes- no matter how much one knows about the Dhamma. This is important to emphasize. Insight and tranquility go hand-in-hand. It is a lucky thing, James, that most advanced Dhamma students here demonstrate calm and equanimity almost all of the time. In discussion of Dhamma, and surely in washing the dishes, they are demonstrating a high degree of samatha in all their everyday activities, so that they can easily achieve insight without any need for meditation or other artificial means for inducing calm. Simply by wisely reading, discussing and considering Dhamma, most of us here have achieved a high degree of "natural samatha," and so washing the dishes will be sure to bring many moments of direct insight into dhammas. [Once again I apologize for the use of sarcasm, and for enjoying it a little too much.] Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111819 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:19 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi again, Nina - > > I sent the following empty post. Sorry. (After the fact, I decided I > realloy have no reply to make, so I'm leaving my response as "empty". ;-) Ah! A zen response! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111820 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:24 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Robert, I may be mistaken, but I believe that what Ken meant was that > the Buddha, when saying "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I > am walking.' When standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he > discerns, 'I am sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' > Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it,"he was indeed > referring to more than just the ordinary understanding of walking etc that > all folks have. I suspect that you and Ken actually are closer rather than > far apart on this matter and that you are misunderstanding him. Thanks for your sense of this. If Ken H. confirms it, I will be interested in seeing what his detailed take on this is. And will offer an apology if my critique was misplaced. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111821 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) egberdina Hi Rob E, On 12 November 2010 02:15, Robert E wrote: > > > Hi Herman, and All. > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, > Herman wrote: > > > Meditate, Cunda, do not > delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to you." > > > Practice jhana, Ananda. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. > > This is our message to you all." > > Wow, Herman you are good! > Thanks, Rob. Compliments are always welcome :-) Do my eyes deceive me, or is this Buddha himself clearly urging, nay, > commanding his disciples to go meditate? He must mean something else - that > couldn't be true! > > And do my eyes further hallucinate deluded akusala nimitas, or do I see > that he urged Ananda to go "practice jhana." What could he mean by this? he > couldn't actually mean "practice jhana," since both Ken H. and Sukin have > well instructed me that "jhana is not part of the path," only dry insight > is, and that Buddha did not want us to practice jhana. What could this > possibly mean? > > Not only did he command his disciples to go and "meditate," and to go and > "practice jhana," but he went on to say: "This is my message to you," and > "This is my message to you all." He couldn't possibly mean us. He must have > meant something else! Oh, Buddha is tricky in that he always says the exact > opposite of what he means when it does not accord with our own philosophy. > Tricky Buddha! > > [Apologies for sarcasm.] > > I must say that I rather enjoy witty writing, yours included :-) Cheers Herman #111822 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:18 am Subject: On Views, Snp4.5 truth_aerator Dear Nina, KenH, all, Can you please comment on this sutta? ""A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). In what is seen, heard, cognized and in ritual observances performed, he sees a profit for himself. Just by laying hold of that view he regards every other view as worthless. Those skilled (in judgment)[1] say that (a view becomes) a bond if, relying on it, one regards everything else as inferior. Therefore a bhikkhu should not depend on what is seen, heard or cognized, nor upon ritual observances. He should not present himself as equal to, nor imagine himself to be inferior, nor better than, another. Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. Among those who dispute he is certainly not one to take sides. He does not [have] recourse to a view at all. In whom there is no inclination to either extreme, for becoming or non-becoming, here or in another existence, for him there does not exist a fixed viewpoint on investigating the doctrines assumed (by others). Concerning the seen, the heard and the cognized he does not form the least notion. That brahmana[2] who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html Specifically these parts are interesting: 1) Abandoning (the views) he had (previously) held and not taking up (another), he does not seek a support even in knowledge. 2) "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views." With metta, Alex #111823 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:52 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? kenhowardau Hi Robert E and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Howard. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > Robert, I may be mistaken, but I believe that what Ken meant was that > > the Buddha, when saying "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I > > am walking.' When standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he > > discerns, 'I am sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' > > Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it,"he was indeed > > referring to more than just the ordinary understanding of walking etc that > > all folks have. I suspect that you and Ken actually are closer rather than > > far apart on this matter and that you are misunderstanding him. > > Thanks for your sense of this. If Ken H. confirms it, I will be interested in seeing what his detailed take on this is. And will offer an apology if my critique was misplaced. > --------------- Thanks for trying to find common ground, Howard, but I think I am going to disappoint. :-) According to my understanding, satipatthana is not even remotely similar to ordinary meditation. The postures and activities listed in the Satipatthan Sutta have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the actual practice. In all cases - regardless of whether the monk is walking, standing, sitting etc, - the object of his right-mindfulness is a presently arisen nama or rupa. Ken H #111824 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 12, 2010 10:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/12/2010 9:54:37 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Thanks for trying to find common ground, Howard, but I think I am going to disappoint. :-) According to my understanding, satipatthana is not even remotely similar to ordinary meditation. The postures and activities listed in the Satipatthan Sutta have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the actual practice. In all cases - regardless of whether the monk is walking, standing, sitting etc, - the object of his right-mindfulness is a presently arisen nama or rupa. ==================================== I'm not sure whether you are engaged in "disappointing" or not. ;-) The aim of meditation is to know things just as they are. One doesn't start out at that point but CAN reach it. Do you disagree with that? With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111825 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 4:53 am Subject: Re: Vis. Ch XIV on one file? ptaus1 Dear Nina, > It seems rather tiresome for people to look up each single message of > this list Larry made. Is there a quicker way, all on one file? I'm trying to figure out what would be the best thing to do: - take Larry's list of messages and expand it so that each of the message numbers becomes a link to that particular message, or - copy all the text from the messages in Larry's post into one big microsoft word file? Do you, connie, Sarah, or someone else maybe have an idea that might be more suitable? Best wishes pt #111826 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:11 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. Ch XIV on one file? sarahprocter... Dear Pt & Nina, --- On Sat, 13/11/10, ptaus1 wrote: - take Larry's list of messages and expand it so that each of the message numbers becomes a link to that particular message, or - copy all the text from the messages in Larry's post into one big microsoft word file? .... S: I think the second one is what Nina is asking you to do, but it sounds like a lot of work! It could be put in the files. ... >Do you, connie, Sarah, or someone else maybe have an idea that might be more suitable? .... S: Most the sections have been saved in 'useful posts' under various headings, such as "khandhas' and so on. Once we 'crack the code' and are able to scroll through the links, of course it'll be easier to see them at a glance, along with the rest of the UP under various headings. Metta Sarah ======= #111827 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On Views, Snp4.5 sarahprocter... Hi Alex, In these suttas in Sn, the views (di.t.thi) referred to are all to wrong views. As I wrote before: "the Paramatthaka sutta, specifically refers in the translation I have to 'dogmatic view' and how the 'brahmin is not led by rule and rite'. These are wrong views or wrong understandings (i.e. the opposite of samma ditthi, the first factor of the noble 8fold Path) that are referred to." If you look in Nyantiloka's dictionary, you'll see it tells you under ditthi: "(lit. 'sight'; dis, to see): view, belief, speculative opinion, insight. If not qualified by sammaa, 'right', it mostly refers to wrong and evil view or opinion" Metta Sarah >A:Can you please comment on this sutta? ""A person who associates himself with certain views, considering them as best and making them supreme in the world, he says, because of that, that all other views are inferior; therefore he is not free from contention (with others). <...> "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html ======== #111828 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Vis. Ch XIV on one file? egberdina Dear pt, On 13 November 2010 15:53, ptaus1 wrote: > > > > You are indeed a very helpful person, and I sincerely appreciate that. > Dear Nina, > > > > It seems rather tiresome for people to look up each single message of > > this list Larry made. Is there a quicker way, all on one file? > > I'm trying to figure out what would be the best thing to do: > > - take Larry's list of messages and expand it so that each of the message > numbers becomes a link to that particular message, or > > - copy all the text from the messages in Larry's post into one big > microsoft word file? > > Do you, connie, Sarah, or someone else maybe have an idea that might be > more suitable? > > In the long run, I think that it would be more beneficial for people to confront their particular versions of "tiresomeness" rather than having you organise things to their liking. Cheers, with some mud cake included :-) Herman #111829 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? kenhowardau Hi Howard, > I'm not sure whether you are engaged in "disappointing" or not. ;-) > The aim of meditation is to know things just as they are. One doesn't start > out at that point but CAN reach it. Do you disagree with that? You know I would never want to be difficult, Howard. :-) As I see it, the beginner starts out with the theoretical knowledge that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that nibbana is anatta. The learner and the arahant know exactly the same thing, except they know it in practice as well as in theory. So in that respect one *does* start-out at the same point as one finishes. Doesn't one? Ken H #111830 From: Herman Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? egberdina Hey Ken H, On 13 November 2010 16:46, Ken H wrote: > > > Hi Howard, > > > > I'm not sure whether you are engaged in "disappointing" or not. ;-) > > The aim of meditation is to know things just as they are. One doesn't > start > > out at that point but CAN reach it. Do you disagree with that? > > You know I would never want to be difficult, Howard. :-) > > As I see it, the beginner starts out with the theoretical knowledge that > all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that nibbana is > anatta. > The learner would be well advised to learn how to read before they try to understand, let alone teach. Dhammas are anatta, but is sankharas that are anicca and dukkha. Shouldn't one? Cheers Herman > The learner and the arahant know exactly the same thing, except they know > it in practice as well as in theory. > > So in that respect one *does* start-out at the same point as one finishes. > Doesn't one? > > Ken H > > > #111831 From: "James" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:30 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 12-nov-2010, om 12:33 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > > > Can understanding occur while one is washing the dishes for > > example? Sure, as long as one is calm while washing the dishes. > ------- > N:I think it is the other way round. James: What textual support do you have that it is the other way around? What textual support do you have that it is the condition of insight which leads to calm instead of the condition of calm which leads to insight? When one has listened much, > like: seeing is only the experience of what is visible, or hardness > is a ruupa experienced through the bodysense, and it is just a > reality... hearing and remembering all these things, and when they > have sunk in, there may be conditions for a moment of understanding > of a reality. It was not planned or anything. And while it arises it > is accompanied by calm. Only, the moment is so short, one may not > even know that there is calm also. Calm means: no defilements at that > moment. It does not 'feel' calm. That is merely an idea one has of calm. James: What you describe here sounds nothing at all like the moments of insight the Buddha describes in the texts. The Buddha describes moments of insight which are deep and profound and accompanied by all-body feeling of calm and equanimity. What you describe seems to be more like conventional moments of just "thinking" about the Dhamma. Moments of thinking about the Dhamma can be very intense, it can even give you goosebumps and make your hair stand on end, but it isn't insight. Insight is much more profound and much more noticeable than what you describe. Metta, James #111832 From: "James" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:39 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Robert, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > It is a lucky thing, James, that most advanced Dhamma students here demonstrate calm and equanimity almost all of the time. James: Yes, it is very lucky for them. Unfortunately, I am just a dullard beginning student so I must sit and try to cultivate calm and equanimity. :-) Metta, James #111833 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: hot Asian girls in violent movies: part of path? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- On Mon, 8/11/10, philip wrote: >Do you know what I mean by a kind of screen of thinking? Everything I see, hear, taste, touch, smell, it's all experienced through thinking, not directly. So the idea of awareness of dhammas seems very distant and unrelated to me. Anyways, that's probably another topic. ... S: I know what you mean, but at least you reflect and consider whether it's true that there are only these different kinds of experiencing of objects, not anyone who does so. The understanding has to begin with considering, reflecting on the realities which make up our lives now and there are good reasons that the Buddha's teachings on such truths, on such dhammas as anatta make sense to you at some level. Understanding that there's ignorance of these dhammas also shows a level of understanding. People with no interest in the Buddha's teachings think they already know what life is. The awareness has to develop until it is aware of the reality now, but of course this is a gradual path, beginning with hearing and considering what realities are. I think you do consider carefully, but maybe there's too much impatience when there isn't any direct understanding. The thinking and impatience can be known too - all conditioned dhammas. Patience, courage and good cheer, as Azita reminds us! metta Sarah ======= #111834 From: "antony272b2" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:56 am Subject: MN131 & The 3 Characteristics in Context antony272b2 Hello Sarah, all, I'm beginning to understand Majjhima 131 and 133. I prefer Nanananda's translations: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanananda/wheel188.html I used to worry that most of my mental life thinking about past, present and future was being criticized by the Buddha and Ven Mahakaccana. Then I noticed that they focus on the five clinging-aggregates and six sense bases respectively which are different ways of classifying dukkha or suffering. What I think they are telling us is not to feed on and identify with the dukkha of the past, present and future. We can't stop feeding straightaway, first we need to eat more healthy food, taking the Three Characteristics in context i.e. thinking about past, present and future of things that are relatively long-term (vs. anicca), satisfying (vs. dukkha) and under our control (vs. anatta) e.g. faith, generosity, virtue, samadhi and discernment. See: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/change.html The Buddha taught Recollection of Generosity (caganussati), Recollection of Virtue (silanussati) and Recollection of Peace. The Recollection of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha are recommended to arouse long-term, satisfying and stable faith. In Majjhima 61 the Buddha taught Rahula to reflect on his bodily, verbal and mental actions past, present and future. I suspect that the main criticism of the above will be that faith, generosity, virtue, samadhi and discernment are completely anicca, dukkha and anatta. I look forward to constructive criticism. With metta / Antony. #111835 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Cutting off at feeling ( was Re: Present Moment...) sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Mon, 8/11/10, Herman wrote: > > S: They are real - all kinds of thinking with various > mental states. > > However, the ideas or labels thought about are just > concepts. For example, > > now there may be thinking about squiggles or ideas > about what is read. The > > thinking is very real. The squiggles or ideas are > just, well, ideas. ... >H: This is an interesting perspective. You seem to be saying > that seeing is > real, seen object is real, hearing is real, heard object is > real, thinking > is real, but thought object is not real?? ... S: Yes ... > > That does not reconcile easily with, say, MN28 > > "Now if internally the intellect is intact but externally > ideas do not come > into range, nor is there a corresponding engagement, then > there is no > appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness.<...> ... S: Ven Thanissaro gives intellect as a translation of mano and ideas as a translation of dhammaa. i don't have my texts with me, but I think you'll find that the passage is referring to the coming together of the internal and external ayatanas - manayatana and dhammayatana - all realities, all khandhas. The text continues to discuss the khandhas. Ideas or concepts are not included in the khandhas. They can only be thought about. Metta Sarah ========> #111836 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Tue, 9/11/10, Robert E wrote: >> S: If we understand the practice to be the understanding of dhammas now, then ideas of posture or situation don't apply. Anytime. >R:Except that posture and situation are made up of particular rupas and namas. Isn't it possible that one configuration is different from another? If not, how do you explain the beneficial effect of studying Dhamma, even though this is a conventional concept-based activity? Can't meditation factors generate an equivalent sort of effect on accumulations and conditions? .... S: So, yes, there is no 'posture' except in our imaginations, just rupas and namas that can be known. And, yes, each rupa is different from each other rupa, each nama is different, so of course they condition different kinds of thinking about different concepts. Studying dhamma, if beneficial, comes down to the present understanding on account of these sense experiences. In the end, it's not the 'book' or the 'posture', but the accumulated wisdom which appreciates there is no book or posture in reality. .... >>S:...satipatthana only refers to the direct knowing of namas and rupas, paramattha dhammas. R:>Okay, so it is sati which has reached the level of direct discernment. Does that apply to anyone prior to stream-entry? .... S: Satipatthana - sati, panna and supporting factors. Without a direct discernment of namas and rupas, there will never be the attainment of stream-entry, so it has to begin now:-) ... **** >> S: The question is whether those "certain things" have anything to do with the path! R:> If one experiences calm and peacefulness, some softening or putting aside of defilements, a greater sense of peace with some hints of contentment or bliss tending towards equilibrium and detachment, some greater discernment of nama and rupa, one would conclude that there is some kusala there and that these "certain things" are supporting the path, .... S: The main cause of kusala is the accumulation for such, not a particular posture or book. .... > even if there is only a higher level of awareness towards conventional objects at first. Those sorts of things that are generated by meditation seem kusala to me. I can tell, because some other stuff always comes up eventually that really is difficult, painful, distracting, etc., and it is clearly akusala. So at least on a gross level, it's not impossible to tell the difference. .... S: So conditions for both kusala and akusala, just like now, by accumulations, i.e natural decisive support condition, the widest of the 24 paccaya (conditions). Just as we think that eating an ice-cream will be a condition for good vipaka, good results (completely ignoring kamma), so we think that performing certain activities will be a condition for kusala/akusala, (completely ignoring this major condition). Of course, this is because we're used to thinking about concepts, such as situations, as causes. Metta Sarah ======== #111837 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) sarahprocter... Hi Antony, I'm enjoying our discussions of suttas. --- On Tue, 9/11/10, antony272b2 wrote: >Bhikkhu Nyanamoli wrote: "When the seen, heard, sensed, and cognized (see Udana I, 10), are misperceived to //be// (this that I see, . . . that //I// think about, //is// that //man//, so-and-so, that //thing// of //mine//), to have temporal endurance and reality, it is because the three periods of time, these three modes by which we subjectively process our raw world in perceiving it, have been projected outwards by ignorance on the raw world and misapprehended along with that as objectively real. That is how we in our ignorance come to perceive things and persons and action." http://www.bps.lk/olib/wh/wh052-p.html .... S: I take him to be meaning that when there's an idea of what is seen and so on as "some thing", as atta, in other words, there is an idea of 'lastingness', of permanence. There is no understanding of the impermanence of realities. When the wrong view of atta is eradicated (at the stage of sotapanna), so is the idea of vipallassa which takes the impermanent for permanent. ... >Antony: Thanissaro Bhikkhu says that there is no role for "bare" attention in the Buddha's teachings at all, as attention is conditioned by fabrications (sankharas) and consciousness. He focuses on appropriate attention (yonisomanasikara) instead. http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writings/DependentCo-arising.pdf .... S: Whatever attention (manasikara) exists, it is conditioned, accumulated by pakatu-upanissaya paccaya (natural decisive support condition), predominantly. It is sankhara khandha. No one can make it arise. Manasikara is a universal cetasika arising with every single citta. When there are conditions for kusala cittas to arise, there is yonisomanasikara. .... >Do you think there is a "raw world" without real past, present and future? .... S: There is only ever a present world, a world experienced through one of the 6 doorways. What is experienced now will be past immediately, the future will now be present. Only the present reality appearing can ever be known. Present dhammas fall away as soon as they've arisen. If there's thinking now about the past or future or even present, that present thinking can also be known as yet another conditioned dhamma. There's no rule at all about what should be experienced. Understanding, not 'doing'! Does that help? Metta Sarah ====== #111838 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting) sarahprocter... Dear Friends, A couple of corrections/amendments to avoid misunderstanding: --- On Tue, 9/11/10, sarah abbott wrote: 2. Breath as object of satipatthana >This is the very subtle rupa, the special vayu dhatu (wind element)... .... S:.. or tejo dhatu (heat element) or patavi dhatu (earth element), depending ... > as conditioned by citta only, which appears at the nose-tip. There are many different groups of rupas, but other groups are conditioned by other causes (such as kamma or temperature). If we try to pinpoint such rupas and call them breath, there will be no understanding. Likewise, when we read texts such as the Visuddhimagga, it's just our own ideas about breath which we follow. The subtle rupas of breath only appear to a few mahapurisas (ariyan disciples) about to become arahats such as Buddha, Ananda and other key disciples, because almost all attachment has been eradicated, there is no attachment to results and panna is so great for these particular ariyans. .... S: The "subtle rupas of breath" only appear to these mahapurisas as highly skilfully developed objects of insight at this level. However, the tangible objects of breath are still considered as 'gross objects', even though not appearing as frequently as other tangible objects, like now as we read messages. Therefore, there's no reason at all why there cannot be awareness of any of the tangible objects of breath as realities, when exercising or when breath is apparent. Metta Sarah p.s Rob E, delighted to see your detailed and considered messages - I'm rather behind for a change (ha!!) ========= #111839 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Wed, 10/11/10, truth_aerator wrote: >> S: I wouldn't be so concerned about "excuses to be lazy", so much >as not understanding the truth of dhammas as anatta as apparent when >we think in ways as you helpfully outline above. >A:Do you say that purity comes in connection with, and holding the right views? ... S: Yes ... > >Here is a list of other unhelpful questions from the suttas, followed by helpful questions based on the Four Noble Truths: > "Was I in the past?" > "What was I in the past?" > "How was I in the past?" > "Shall I be in the future?" > "What shall I be in the future?" > "How shall I be in the future?" > "Am I?" > "What am I?" > "How am I?" > (Majjhima 2) > .... > S: Yes, just the same kind of "self-loaded" questions as the ones in the examples you gave at the top. > .... A:>And there is a very peculiar ommision ""Also as regards the present, uncertainty arises in him thus: 'Do I exist? Do I not exist? Who am I? How am I ? From where has this soul come? Where will this soul go?' 19. "In a person who thus considers improperly there arises one of the six [wrong] views. The view 'I have self'[16] arises in him really and firmly. Or, the view 'I have no self' arises in him really and firmly. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.002.bpit.html >Note: "Do I not exist" and "the view 'I have no self'" are considered to be unbeneficial... ... S: Yes, because they are all sakkaya ditthi. No ommision. .... >Please explain to me exactly what is meant by "understanding". Does on mentally analyze the experience and think that "these are just namarupas, no self is found"? .... S: That's just thinking, with or without any level of understanding. It may still be conditioned by di.t.thi. There are different kinds and levels of understanding - only panna can know it when it arises. Pls see "U.P." under "understanding -right" for more! ... >Or what? How should understanding manifest itself? >Is awakening found in connection with understanding? ... S: Awakening only occurs when the enlightenment factors have been fully developed. Right understanding of realities is essential from the start. It is the knowing, the direct knowing of a reality which appears. Instead of trying to work it out, there can be understanding right now of what appears - seeing, thinking, confusion, whatever that might be. Metta Sarah ============ #111840 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Herman wrote: > >S: The references to "having gone to the foot of the > tree" etc, are describing > > that one who has already gone there. > > > > Your explanation does not hold water, IMO, Sarah. > > MN 8 <.... > 18. "What can be done for his disciples by a Master who > seeks their welfare > and has compassion and pity on them, that I have done for > you, Cunda. There > are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, > Cunda, do not > delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to > you." <...> S: So go without delay to some roots of trees, to some empty places, meditate (as you understand the word) and stay until you're enlightened or for as long as you understand the instructions to be for. Then come back and tell us whether "the roots of trees" were the answer to eradicating all defilements:-) Metta Sarah p.s you might like to encourage Alex and any other "roots of trees" devotees to go along with you too! ======= #111841 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) sarahprocter... Hi James, --- On Thu, 11/11/10, James wrote: >I can't believe that KS is still teaching this nonsense. .... S: :-) I'm glad to see you too! ..... >No one is going to automatically and/or naturally go to the foot of a tree, sit, and start practicing anapanasati unless that person is a bodhisatta on the path to sammabuddha!! ... S: Or has developed anapanasati as an object of jhana, for example. All according to our tendencies, just like we see here:) Hope life's going well for you in Taiwan! Seems like a long time ago that we met up in Hong Kong, doesn't it? Metta Sarah ======= #111842 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Mara in the form of a mole sarahprocter... Hi Phil, If you changed "Mara saw an opportunity" to "right understanding" it would be a great zany post:) enjoyed it all the same. --- On Thu, 11/11/10, philip wrote: >I'll just add that yes, there is place for reflection on the anattnaness, conditioned natured etc of harmful deeds, but the place for that is after the deed, to free oneself from excessive remorse. ... S: No, the time is always now for any right understanding. If there is just thinking about "anattaness, conditoned nature etc of harmful deeds" but not understanding the reality now, such as the lobha now as being harmful, then it's not right understanding. For example, if there is gross lobha arising, how could it be any right understanding or reflection if there isn't an understanding of how very perverse and unwholesome such lobha is? Why do you think that a sotapanna would not have such thoughts for a moment? Because, such lobha has been completely understood and eradicated. .... >It would be terrible to have to carry around the weight of all one's deeds (though we do, in a subtler sense) and reflecting on the conditioned, non-self nature of the things we are sometimes propelled by inherited tendencies to do is very valuable. But not during the deed. When one resorts to reflection on anatta during a harmful deed, it is a gross exploitation of the Buddha's teaching for the purpose of accumulating suffering, I think. ... S: Because it's just thinking, not understanding the harm of the tendencies at that time because of being overwhelmed by lobha. We may seem to lead very good, pure lives whilst living in temples, for example, but sooner or later, such tendencies have to be known when they arise in order to really be understood and eradicated. I know we don't agree. Will look forward to reading more of your theragatha poems in the meantime:-) Metta Sarah p.s thx for attributing the wise words to me:) ======= #111843 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:56 am Subject: Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: in Ayutthaya sarahprocter... Dear Friends, On Wednesday, we went with a few other friends including Rob K and Azita to spend the day with K.Sujin, her sister and K.Duangduen (our host) in Ayutthaya, the old capital of Thailand. Here are my notes from the discussions: ***** 1. Breath as tangible object, not one of the 18 subtle rupas - hardness/softness/heat/cold. It can appear now, as conditioned by citta, but doesn't usually appear unless breathing heavily, or in yoga, for example. Therefore, said to be more subtle than other tangible objects only. 2. Anything can be object of understanding. "Moderate eating", "less sleeping" - thinking about anything. Everything can be the object of clinging until there are conditions for more understanding. 3. Nimitta. Nina's message #111313 - the first quote on nimitta and the comments. It depends on understanding, we don't need to think of nimitta - it's so very short. Instead of paying attention to nimitta, there can be awareness of reality. No time to consider whether there's nimitta or not, and no use trying to see the rising and falling away with an idea of self. It seems like there's a "trying to do", more than understanding. Understanding works its way with detachment. Trying is attachment. 4. Trying, effort By knowing/seeing the benefit of understanding with detachment, otherwise there won't be less attachment. Lobha motivates. Understanding sees the value. If we read over and need someone's explanation for understanding, it's not just wanting to have more and more understanding. 5. Jatakas Academic points when there's lots to consider about realities, such as in one small phrase. One who talks about a story - useless chatter about dhamma again, "delirious". Anything we think about and talk about, we think it's all Dhamma, but actually, it's only the story of dhamma without understanding the nautre. We think it's trying to motivate - on and on and on...being delirious, thinking about the people and talking about it. There's a little understanding only to see different realities in different lives. No need to think over and over again, having a lot in mind, instad of talking about the truth. Jatakas - for understanding the truth of life, know how life keeps going, avijja from life to life until panna develops. "I" always there, trying, thinking, getting something for oneself. Lobha as the cause of life, birth and death. Only panna can see the details, the fine lobha. 6. Kamma and vipaka in Jatakas or daily life Most difficult - attachment to self, atta ditthi. Anything can happen, any citta, depends on conditions whether sati and understanding arise. Jatakas like any story in one's life or any story one reads about in the newspaper - different accumulations. If we have expectations from a particular reading, lobha again. Upanissaya gocara - that object which frequently turned towards. Talking about Dhamma can be meaningless, "delirious" chatter, if it's just more stories about dhammas. No detachment at such times. KS mentioned that sometimes Thai friends just have delirious chatter about Dhamma, such as about the results of kamma and the poor people in Ayutthaya affected by the flooding. Not really understanding anything about kamma. 7. Science person. Some believe in no past lives, only chemicals, can they appreciate hardness now? No rule at all - all depends on conditions, otherwise expectations again. Whether reading Jatakas or Science or the paper, anytime there can be understanding. Otherwise wanting and delirious again. We don't have to name anything. 9. Stages of insight, understanding of kamma. We don't have to name "1st" or "3rd", the understanding of kamma depends on the level of understanding now, while seeing and thinking. Nothing can be understood about kamma/vipaka without understanding present dhammas. This is the beginning. It depends on developed panna, no matter what level. In accordance with Tipitaka? What about now? When talking about people, the benefit is seeing everything is conditioned only. 10. Pt's Qus #102522 on rupa kalapas, such as "if we see a patch of dirt, does that mean that that particular kalaapa that's in contact with our eyes has more color ruupa?" It depends on the intensity/quality/variety, not on having more. No understanding of realities - much better to have an understanding now of realities, otherwise we keep further away by unpanissaya gocara (object decisively adhered to). *** Metta Sarah p.s in Hong Kong now... ======== #111844 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:45 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Alex (111637) > > J: In the suttas in question, I do not read the Buddha as >prescribing specific intentional activities to be undertaken. > > Here is the biggest disagreement. The suttas, and even the commentaries do talk about deliberate and strong effort. While I agree that it is fully conditioned, the deliberate and strong effort does occur. > =============== J: To my understanding, the references to 4 kinds of right effort are to the momentary mental factor of effort that arises with each kusala citta. The conventional notion of deliberate effort is in fact a combination of various mental factors (including, for example, chanda). > =============== > > And that effort leads to > > >Rather I think he was explaining the different stages in the >development of the path. > > different stages of development of the path. > =============== J: Each moment of mundane path consciousness is accompanied by the mental factor of right effort. Jon #111845 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! jonoabb Hi Alex (111638) > > As regards support, the factors specifically mentioned in the >suttas include a/ hearing the true dhamma and b/ reflecting on what >has been thus heard and understood. > > > And you've left a 4th item: > "practice of dhamma in accordance with the dhamma". > > > 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 > =============== J: Yes, I've quoted this passage many times myself. The reference to "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" here is a reference to the actual arising of satipatthana (as I've been explaining in a thread with Robert E), and not to practice of the 'approximation of the real thing' kind. Jon #111846 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:56 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! jonoabb Hi Herman (111643) > > To my understanding, specific intentional activities (whether regarded in > > conventional terms as 'good', 'bad' or 'neutral') are neither a support nor > > a hindrance for the development of the path. Those supports and hindrances > > are other factors (mainly mental states) but not intentional activities per > > se. > > > > > I infer from what you say above that theme-less awareness release is not > related to the path, in your view. > > MN43 > "There are three conditions for the persistence of the theme-less > awareness-release: lack of attention to all themes, attention to the > theme-less property, and a prior act of will. These are the three conditions > for the persistence of the theme-less awareness-release." > > It is clear from the text above that an act of will is a pre-requisite in > this instance. > =============== J: I'd have to check the sutta and possibly the Pali too, neither of which is readily available to me at the moment. Specifically, I'm not sure what "theme-less awareness-release" refers to (I doubt however that it refers to the bare development of awareness). I know that, for example, in the case of nirodha-samapatti (attainment of extinction) the pre-requisites include a resolution as to the time of emerging from the state. That would be an instance of a 'prior act of will' as mentioned in your sutta text, while in no way conflicting with the notion that specific intentional activities are neither a support for nor a hindrance to the development of the path. Jon #111847 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Herman (111677) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi Jon, > ... > Thanks for the heads-up. I accept that we cannot say anything about heard > sound, only about listened-to sound. > =============== J: I'm not familiar with the terminology 'heard sound' and 'listened-to sound'. To my understanding, the teachings contemplate there being audible data ('sound') that is experienced by hearing consciousness followed by the processing of that audible data/sound, this latter being performed through the mind-door. For each moment of sound that is the object of hearing consciousness there are multiple moments of processing by which the sound is recognised and given meaning. (However, the object of those moments of subsequent processing is no longer the actual audible object but a remembered concept of it.) > =============== > What I meant was that all we know of the Buddha is from listening to the > Buddha. We know nothing from the Buddha from hearing him. If listening is a > perversion of the way things really are ie hearing, then I'm afraid that in > daily life we're stuck with perversion :-) > =============== J: I'm not sure I'm with you here. Are you saying that the remembered concept of the audible data is a perversion? If so, then so would be the remembered concepts of the rupas experienced through the other sense-doors. Is that how you see it? Jon #111848 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/13/2010 12:46:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, > I'm not sure whether you are engaged in "disappointing" or not. ;-) > The aim of meditation is to know things just as they are. One doesn't start > out at that point but CAN reach it. Do you disagree with that? You know I would never want to be difficult, Howard. :-) As I see it, the beginner starts out with the theoretical knowledge that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that nibbana is anatta. The learner and the arahant know exactly the same thing, except they know it in practice as well as in theory. So in that respect one *does* start-out at the same point as one finishes. Doesn't one? ---------------------------------------------------- Actually, no - for three reasons: 1) The difference between intellectual knowledge and direct, knowing via wisdom is unbelievably vast, 2) The chances of our correctly understanding even theoretical knowledge of Dhamma, of our actually properly grasping it, is slim due to our being sunk in in the three poisons, and 3) The Buddha never taught that mere thinking and mental regurgitating suffices to lead to awakening. To enlarge on item 3: The Buddha did not just attempt to convey intellectually what he had come to know by awakening, but, most essentially, taught a complex process of cultivation of the mind leading to awakening and liberation. That last claim, of course, I know you reject. ----------------------------------------------------- Ken H =============================== With metta, Howard Path to Full Awakening /Skillful virtues have freedom from remorse as their purpose and reward. Freedom from remorse has joy as its purpose and reward. Joy has rapture as its purpose and reward. Rapture has serenity as its purpose and reward. Serenity has pleasure as its purpose and reward. Pleasure has concentration as its purpose and reward. Concentration has knowledge & vision of things as they actually are as its purpose and reward. Knowledge & vision of things as they actually are has disenchantment as its purpose and reward. Disenchantment has dispassion as its purpose and reward. Dispassion has knowledge & vision of release as its purpose and reward./ (From the Kimattha Sutta) ________________ /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) #111849 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:16 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111678) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: To my understanding, the terms kusala and akusala refer the ethical quality of mental states, not of conventional deeds or activities. Do you see it differently? > > Yes, I see both conventional and non-conventional kusala and akusala to be of import. > =============== J: I've not previously heard of a conventional/non-conventional distinction when it comes to kusala and akusala. I had always understood the meaning of the term to be fairly well settled in the Theravada world. See for example the extracts of definitions of the terms 'kusala', 'mula' and 'cetasika' from Nyanatiloka's Dictionary at the end of this message. > =============== The path is developed conventionally until such time as unconventional discernment arises and becomes relevant. Building up conventional sati in relation to that which is experienced and conventional understanding, etc., accumulates the concentration, mindfulness and samatha to go further. That's my view. And that's the way the Buddha taught in sutta. > =============== J: An example from the suttas would help me understand better what you're saying here (as mentioned already, the notion of conventional development of the path is a new one to me). > =============== > That is not so, Jon. Buddha constantly talks about the conventional factors of life and how they are anatta and anicca. He does so in countless suttas, so it is not fair to say he always does so in some pure form of understanding of dhammas. He finds it valuable to tell people to detach from conventional objects, so I think it is valuable too. > =============== J: Again, if you have a particular sutta or suttas in mind, a reference would be helpful. > =============== > > The Buddha did not teach about 'understanding of our relationship to concepts'. He taught about understanding dhammas as they truly are. > > Well sutta is full of references to conventional objects. You can second-guess the Buddha and decide he was really talking about something else. I'd rather not second-guess the Buddha. I understand that it is useful to detach from conventional objects as long as that is what we are seeing and clinging to. It is also useful to look into them with mindfulness and develop pariyatti and panna to see what they really are, then the detachment may be more complete, but there is no reason to wait. > =============== J: The idea that there can be the detaching from objects (conventional or absolute) or the looking into objects with mindfulness by virtue of an act of will is not one that I find supported by the suttas (except perhaps for the person in whom such kusala qualities have been developed to the extent that they become 'faculties' (indriya) or 'powers' (bala)). To my understanding, such kusala consciousness can only arise when the conditions for it are all present, and when it does arise it will be at a time and with an object that is not of our choosing. Jon Extracts of definitions of the terms 'kusala', 'mula' and 'cetasika' from Nyanatiloka's Dictionary: 1. Kusala 'karmically wholesome' or 'profitable', salutary, morally good, (skillful). ... It is defined in M.9 as the 10 wholesome courses of action (s. kammapatha). In psychological terms, 'karmically wholesome' are all those karmical volitions (kamma-cetanā) and the consciousness and mental factors associated therewith, which are accompanied by 2 or 3 wholesome roots (s. mūla), i.e. by greedlessness (alobha) and hatelessness (adosa), and in some cases also by non-delusion (amoha: wisdom, understanding). ... ... the moral criterion in Buddhism is the presence or absence of the 3 wholesome or moral roots (s. mūla). 2. Mūla 'roots', also called hetu (q.v.; s. paccaya, 1), are those conditions which through their presence determine the actual moral quality of a volitional state (cetanā), and the consciousness and mental factors associated therewith, in other words, the quality of karma. There are 6 such roots, 3 karmically wholesome and 3 unwholesome roots, viz.,: greed, hate, delusion (lobha, dosa, moha), and greedlessness, hatelessness, undeludedness (alobha, adosa, amoha). The 3 wholesome (kusala) roots, greedlessness, etc., though expressed in negative terms, nevertheless possess a distinctly positive character ... Thus, - greedlessness (alobha) is a name for unselfishness, liberality, etc., - hatelessness (adosa) for kindness or goodwill (mettā), - undeludedness (amoha) for wisdom (pańńā). 3. Cetasika 'mental things, mental factors', are those mental concomitants which are bound up with the simultaneously arising consciousness (citta = vińńāna) and conditioned by its presence. the mental factors (cetasika) comprise feeling, perception and the 50 mental formations, altogether 52 mental concomitants. Of these, - 25 are lofty qualities (either karmically wholesome or neutral), - 14 karmically unwholesome, while - 13 are as such karmically neutral, their karmical quality depending on whether they are associated with wholesome, unwholesome or neutral consciousness. #111850 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:18 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Khun Bong’s Diary, no 1. jonoabb Hi Herman (111703) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi Jon, > ... > It seems to me that the reality of the present moment is always an intended > object, it is not a given object. To be aware of anything is always an act. > =============== J: Not sure what you mean by the terms 'intended object' and 'given object'. To my understanding, the 'reality of the present moment' in the context of the Dhamma, refers to whatever dhammas are present at that moment. Jon #111851 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:27 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Herman) - In a message dated 11/13/2010 5:13:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Herman, --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Herman wrote: > >S: The references to "having gone to the foot of the > tree" etc, are describing > > that one who has already gone there. > > > > Your explanation does not hold water, IMO, Sarah. > > MN 8 <.... > 18. "What can be done for his disciples by a Master who > seeks their welfare > and has compassion and pity on them, that I have done for > you, Cunda. There > are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, > Cunda, do not > delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to > you." <...> S: So go without delay to some roots of trees, to some empty places, meditate (as you understand the word) and stay until you're enlightened or for as long as you understand the instructions to be for. Then come back and tell us whether "the roots of trees" were the answer to eradicating all defilements:-) ----------------------------------------------------- Sounds to me like you are as much making fun of the Buddha (when he says "There are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, Cunda, do not delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to you.") as you are of Herman. What do YOU think the Buddha was saying to Cunda? I read it as crystal clear urging to get busy meditating! (Sorry to use the M-word!! I know it holds all sorts of unwholesome connotations for you. :-) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah p.s you might like to encourage Alex and any other "roots of trees" devotees to go along with you too! ----------------------------------------------------------- Sarah, what's up with this? =============================== With metta, Howard Hindrances /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) #111852 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:27 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Alex (111724) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > ... > In AN9.36 the Buddha DID USE THE PRACTICE SIMILE OF DEVELOPING A SKILL so what you say contradicts the sutta. > =============== J: In the passage you've quoted, there is indeed reference to the developing of a conventional skill, but not in the context of describing the development of the path. The comparison being made is between the person who is highly skilled in archery and the monk with highly developed samatha and insight. Jon > =============== > "Suppose that an archer or archer's apprentice were to practice on a straw man or mound of clay, so that after a while he would become able to shoot long distances, to fire accurate shots in rapid succession, and to pierce great masses. In the same way, there is the case where a monk... enters & remains in the first jhana: rapture & pleasure born of withdrawal, accompanied by directed thought & evaluation. He regards whatever phenomena there that are connected with form, feeling, perception, fabrications, & consciousness, as inconstant, stressful, a disease, a cancer, an arrow, painful, an affliction, alien, a disintegration, an emptiness, not-self. He turns his mind away from those phenomena, and having done so, inclines his mind to the property of deathlessness: 'This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications; the relinquishment of all acquisitions; the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Unbinding.' > > "Staying right there, he reaches the ending of the mental fermentations. Or, if not, then — through this very dhamma-passion, this very dhamma-delight, and from the total wasting away of the first five of the fetters[1] — he is due to be reborn [in the Pure Abodes], there to be totally unbound, never again to return from that world. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.036.than.html > #111853 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: science vs dhamma2 jonoabb Hi Howard (111725) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Jon (and Robert, and also Ken) - > > J: The understanding that all dhammas are anatta does not imply the > denial of individual streams of cittas and cetasikas which, together with the > rupas that are conditioned by the same kamma that supports those cittas and > cetasikas, are conventionally known as beings. > -------------------------------------------- > Ahh! So, you admit the existence (in a sense) of "streams," i.e., of > flows of psychophysical phenomena that, due to kamma, are interrelated and > "hang together"! > =============== J: Well, sort of ;-)). Any 2 cittas that are related by contiguity condition can be said to be cittas of the same stream. But the teachings don't speak of rupas occurring in streams. > =============== > Unwholesome intention (i.e., akusala kamma) within a given stream of namas > conditions unpleasant result (including akusala vipaka consciousness) > within that same stream. > --------------------------------------------- > Again, ahh! You speak of things occurring within a given stream of > namas. This is just as I see the matter, and, IMO, as the Buddha taught it. > Ken, for example, however, does not so view the matter. Right, Ken? > Of course, Jon, neither you nor I consider a namarupic stream to be an > individual reality, but merely a trans-temporal collection of interrelated > phenomena and spoken of as a "thing" only as a matter of convention and > convenience of speech. Are we, indeed, on the same page on this, Jon? If yes, > this may be a first. ;-)) > --------------------------------------------- > =============== J: On the same page or very close to it ;-)) Jon #111854 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: science vs dhamma2 upasaka_howard WOW! :-) In a message dated 11/13/2010 8:30:26 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, jonabbott@... writes: J: On the same page or very close to it ;-)) ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111855 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:40 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: in Ayutthaya nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you. Understanding will know when time comes, that is right. Detachment is most important. Nina. Op 13-nov-2010, om 12:56 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Nimitta. Nina's message #111313 - the first quote on nimitta and > the comments. > It depends on understanding, we don't need to think of nimitta - > it's so very short. Instead of paying attention to nimitta, there > can be awareness of reality. No time to consider whether there's > nimitta or not, and no use trying to see the rising and falling > away with an idea of self. It seems like there's a "trying to do", > more than understanding. Understanding works its way with > detachment. Trying is attachment. #111856 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 1:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Functions of citta, was: Should one try one's best ... nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 12-nov-2010, om 17:36 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > It is important to have correct understanding of vitakka; as a factor > > of the eightfold Path it is sammaa-sankappa, and its function is > > again momentary. It assists sammaa-di.t.thi to understand just one > > naama or ruupa at a time that presents itself. It hits the present > > object. > > Thank you, Nina, for the entire discussion on this subject. It was > very clear. ------ N: Just adding: the Path development is momentary. Some people believe that they should develop factor by factor separately. When kusala citta with pa~n~naa arises when the Path is being developed, usually the Path (when mundane) is with five or six factors (six in the case of one of the three abstinences arising) and each of these perform their function, just for a moment. Citta and cetasikas that arise together do so having the same physical base, experiencing the same object and they fall away together. ----- Nina. #111857 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 13-nov-2010, om 1:10 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I think the issue is that there are some who think we can dismiss > jhana altogether, and that the real path is the path of insight > alone, without jhana. They think jhana is kusala, but a coincidence > on the path, or even a distraction. I don't think that is what the > Buddha intended with regard to jhana. I think it is integral to the > path at some point for most people to reach enlightenment. I don't > think the path of dry insight is adequate for anyone who does not > have an exceptionally strong capability in understanding and > wisdom. That seems to be supported by Vism and some detailed > commentaries on the different modalities of the path that I have seen. ------- N: When reading suttas, I understand that one may come to the conclusion that jhaana seems to be necessary for enlightenment. On the other hand, I never saw that there was any rule and I also understand that people have different inclinations. We also read in the suttas that the Buddha spoke about people's different inclinations. The Buddha would include all those people who had practised jhaana and he would tell them not to take jhaana for self. When reading the Vis. jhaana seems very difficult to me, and there is also a danger that people take some kind of trance for jhaana. Reading the Puggala pa~n~natti (human types), one of the Abhidhamma Books, and its commentary, reading other parts of commentary, I found that dry insight was explained and that with dry insight enlightenment can be reached. Dry insight is just the development of insight, nothing special about a strong capability in wisdom. One can begin, and we know that many lives are needed. The same is true for jhaana, this also would need an endlessly long time, and special conditions, difficult to observe, a special life style, difficult for lay people. I am not thinking of the long, long time ahead of me, this is thinking that is not so helpful. Each moment of a beginning understanding is good, and it is so relevant to my daily life now. I feel that it is good to have a little more understanding of my life now, and good to have less clinging to such understanding and to realise when there is clinging. It is good to understand more that not a person sees, thinks, clings, that there are different cittas accompanied by different cetasikas, even if there is mostly intellectual understanding. This is my own feeling about the whole matter. Nina. #111858 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi James, Op 13-nov-2010, om 7:30 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > What you describe seems to be more like conventional moments of > just "thinking" about the Dhamma. Moments of thinking about the > Dhamma can be very intense, it can even give you goosebumps and > make your hair stand on end, but it isn't insight. Insight is much > more profound and much more noticeable than what you describe. ----- N: I do not quite know how to answer. So I leave it for now, Nina. #111859 From: "James" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:25 pm Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, > > --- On Thu, 11/11/10, James wrote: > >I can't believe that KS is still teaching this nonsense. > .... > S: :-) I'm glad to see you too! > ..... > >No one is going to automatically and/or naturally go to the foot of a tree, sit, and start practicing anapanasati unless that person is a bodhisatta on the path to sammabuddha!! > ... > S: Or has developed anapanasati as an object of jhana, for example. > > All according to our tendencies, just like we see here:) > James: What I meant is that the Buddha wasn't "describing" a monk who has the natural tendencies to go to the foot of a tree, sit cross-legged, and develop anapanasati. Why? Because there is only one monk in existence who has the natural tendency to do that- the Buddha himself!! Only a sammabuddha, a self-awakened one, has the natural tendency to sit in a secluded spot and develop anapanasati to jhana and then to enlightenment. All others must be taught by the Buddha how to do it; they don't have the natural tendency to do it. They must purposefully follow the Buddha's example. Don't you agree with this? This is basic Buddhism. > Hope life's going well for you in Taiwan! Seems like a long time ago that we met up in Hong Kong, doesn't it? > James: Life is fine with me here in Taiwan. Yeah, it has been a long time since we met up. Where in the world are you guys now? > Metta > > Sarah > ======= > Metta, James #111860 From: "philip" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mara in the form of a mole philofillet Hi Sarah and all > If you changed "Mara saw an opportunity" to "right understanding" it would be a great zany post:) enjoyed it all the same. Ph: Zany? My purpose was to write about my battle against powerful defilements. It was a bit odd to pick on you, but maybe it's suitable. You are such a nice person, so it would be very tricky and effective of Mara to come in the form of your words. > ... > S: No, the time is always now for any right understanding. If there is just thinking about "anattaness, conditoned nature etc of harmful deeds" but not understanding the reality now, such as the lobha now as being harmful, then it's not right understanding. Ph: Well, sorry, but I'm afraid you folks (who listen a lot to A.S) are not in the position to talk about right understanding of dhammas, and insight, because you do not follow the Buddha's way to create the conditions for insight. (There is not right concentration for you.) Neither do I, but I don't have an aspiration to do so at this time, nor do I have circumstances for doing so. And I suspect that my defilements are so strong that there will not be conditions for doing so in this lifetime. But I can still be a good and faithful follower of the Buddha's teaching for householders. The greatest happiness of the four kinds of happiness available to householders is freedom from remorse, that's what he teaches people like me, and I'm happy to be experiencing it these days. Metta, Phil #111861 From: "philip" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Mara in the form of a mole philofillet Hi again > The greatest happiness of the four kinds of happiness available to householders is freedom from remorse, that's what he teaches people like me, and I'm happy to be experiencing it these days. More specifically, it's what B.B translates as "blamelessness", I guess that could be freedom from remorse. Or perhaps its the happiness of following the precepts in a very firm way, I feel a lot of happiness about that these days! And guess what? There are tons and tons of attachment to it, and self-esteem. Metta, Phil #111862 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:09 pm Subject: Re: On Views, Snp4.5 truth_aerator Hi Sarah, all, So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on. "...he does not seek a support even in knowledge" "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html This part seems to refer to an Arahant if not a sekha. With metta, Alex #111863 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) truth_aerator Hello Sarah, KenH, Jon, all, >A:Do you say that purity comes in connection with, and holding the >right views? > ... > S: Yes "Not on account of his views, learning, or knowledge do the skilled here, Nanda, call one a sage. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.07.than.html An attainer-of-wisdom isn't measured made proud by views or what's thought, for he isn't fashioned of them. He wouldn't be led by action, learning; doesn't reach a conclusion in any entrenchments. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.09.than.html#fn-1 "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html >A: Note: "Do I not exist" and "the view 'I have no self'" are >considered to be unbeneficial... > ... > S: Yes, because they are all sakkaya ditthi. No ommision. So "self doesn't exist" (what 'I have no self' boils down to) is a sakkaya ditthi? With metta, Alex #111864 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:34 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, > J: In the passage you've quoted, there is indeed reference to the >developing of a conventional skill, but not in the context of >describing the development of the path. The comparison being made is >between the person who is highly skilled in archery and the monk with >highly developed samatha and insight. The passage IS connected with the development of path, that in this sutta ends with Anagami or Arhaship. The Buddha compares one to the other. If the talk of developing skill in archery was totally unrelated to developing of the path up to Arhatship, then why include it? With metta, Alex #111865 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 2:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Sarah, Ken, and Jon) - In a message dated 11/13/2010 1:19:24 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Sarah, KenH, Jon, all, >A:Do you say that purity comes in connection with, and holding the >right views? > ... > S: Yes "Not on account of his views, learning, or knowledge do the skilled here, Nanda, call one a sage. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.07.than.html An attainer-of-wisdom isn't measured made proud by views or what's thought, for he isn't fashioned of them. He wouldn't be led by action, learning; doesn't reach a conclusion in any entrenchments. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.09.than.html#fn-1 "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html >A: Note: "Do I not exist" and "the view 'I have no self'" are >considered to be unbeneficial... > ... > S: Yes, because they are all sakkaya ditthi. No ommision. So "self doesn't exist" (what 'I have no self' boils down to) is a sakkaya ditthi? -------------------------------------------------------- As I view the matter, the assertion "There are no selves" is not ditthi but truth. However, "I am not self" and "I have no self" are instances of self-view for the "I" that is mentioned is likely taken as more than just a locution, and in that case such sentences not only express self-view but are also also self-contradicting! To say "I am NOT this" or "I am NOT that" is still to presume an "I". To say that there is no "I" (i.e., no self) is to speak truly, but to say "I don't exist" is to speak with atta-view and also to speak nonsense, for the sentence presupposes a self (expressing wrong view) and then immediately contradicts itself. (Of course, one cannot embellish every statement, hedging it about with a thousand disclaimers! ;-)) ------------------------------------------------------ With metta, Alex ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111866 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:09 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi James, Op 13-nov-2010, om 15:25 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > James: Life is fine with me here in Taiwan. ------ N: I am glad. Still teaching? Do you have Budhist contacts? When in the kitchen (dishes, soucepans etc.) I thought of your remarks. Calm and insight: as pa~n~naa develops also the Path factor of concentration develops and as stages of insight are reached there will be more calm, also calm grows together with pa~n~naa. But I only have this from hearsay, therefore I cannot say much about this subject. Nina. #111867 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 10:05 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? kenhowardau Hi Herman, ------ KH: >> As I see it, the beginner starts out with the theoretical knowledge that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that nibbana is anatta. >> H: > The learner would be well advised to learn how to read before they try to understand, let alone teach. Dhammas are anatta, but is sankharas that are anicca and dukkha. > Shouldn't one? -------------- Thanks for teaching me that, Herman, but the word 'sankharas' has been explained many times at DSG as a being synonym for conditioned dhammas. BTW, I wonder if you meant to say 'beginner' rather than 'learner.' In the texts, a learner is an ariyan who is not yet an arahant. Ken H #111868 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 5:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? upasaka_howard Hi, Guys - In a message dated 11/13/2010 5:05:14 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Herman, ------ KH: >> As I see it, the beginner starts out with the theoretical knowledge that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that nibbana is anatta. >> H: > The learner would be well advised to learn how to read before they try to understand, let alone teach. Dhammas are anatta, but is sankharas that are anicca and dukkha. > Shouldn't one? -------------- Thanks for teaching me that, Herman, but the word 'sankharas' has been explained many times at DSG as a being synonym for conditioned dhammas. BTW, I wonder if you meant to say 'beginner' rather than 'learner.' In the texts, a learner is an ariyan who is not yet an arahant. Ken H ============================= Yes, you both know the same thing. LOL! Your "friendly jousting" aside (I'm sure that's all it is! ;-), I am reminded by it of something. I recall that at one time I read a very different interpretation (by David Kalupahana, it happens) of the tilakkhana that, though I believe it to be incorrect, is interesting in its novelty: He interpreted 'sankhara' in this context to mean "inclination" or "tendency" or "disposition". So he took the tilakkhana to mean the following: 1) All dispositions are sorrowful, 2) All dispositions are impermanent, and 3) All phenomena are non-self. Rendering 'dukkha' as "sorrowful" above was my choice in this case, not Kalupahana's. Don't read any significance into it. I don't recall how he translated it. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111869 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:39 pm Subject: Apology Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 ... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - The following post to you was a bit "rough," and I regret how I wrote it. I'm sorry, Sarah, and I apologize for it. With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/13/2010 8:27:06 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Upasaka@... writes: Hi, Sarah (and Herman) - In a message dated 11/13/2010 5:13:05 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Herman, --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Herman wrote: > >S: The references to "having gone to the foot of the > tree" etc, are describing > > that one who has already gone there. > > > > Your explanation does not hold water, IMO, Sarah. > > MN 8 <.... > 18. "What can be done for his disciples by a Master who > seeks their welfare > and has compassion and pity on them, that I have done for > you, Cunda. There > are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, > Cunda, do not > delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to > you." <...> S: So go without delay to some roots of trees, to some empty places, meditate (as you understand the word) and stay until you're enlightened or for as long as you understand the instructions to be for. Then come back and tell us whether "the roots of trees" were the answer to eradicating all defilements:-) ----------------------------------------------------- Sounds to me like you are as much making fun of the Buddha (when he says "There are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, Cunda, do not delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to you.") as you are of Herman. What do YOU think the Buddha was saying to Cunda? I read it as crystal clear urging to get busy meditating! (Sorry to use the M-word!! I know it holds all sorts of unwholesome connotations for you. :-) ----------------------------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah p.s you might like to encourage Alex and any other "roots of trees" devotees to go along with you too! ----------------------------------------------------------- Sarah, what's up with this? =============================== With metta, Howard Hindrances /Suppose there were a river, flowing down from the mountains — going far, its current swift, carrying everything with it — and a man would open channels leading away from it on both sides, so that the current in the middle of the river would be dispersed, diffused, & dissipated; it wouldn't go far, its current wouldn't be swift, and it wouldn't carry everything with it. In the same way, when a seeker has not abandoned these five obstacles, hindrances that overwhelm awareness and weaken discernment, i.e., sensual desire, ill will, sloth & torpor, restlessness & anxiety, and sceptical doubt, when s/he is without strength and too weak in discernment to understand what is for one's own benefit, to understand what is for the benefit of others, to understand what is for the benefit of both, then to realize a superior human state, a truly noble distinction in knowledge & vision: that is impossible/ (From the Avarana Sutta) #111870 From: "philip" Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 11:44 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: hot Asian girls in violent movies: part of path? philofillet Hi Sarah and all > --- On Mon, 8/11/10, philip wrote: > >Do you know what I mean by a kind of screen of thinking? Everything I see, hear, taste, touch, smell, it's all experienced through thinking, not directly. So the idea of awareness of dhammas seems very distant and unrelated to me. Anyways, that's probably another topic. > ... > S: I know what you mean, but at least you reflect and consider whether it's true that there are only these different kinds of experiencing of objects, not anyone who does so. Ph: Yes, that's true, the nature of the self-view is becoming clearer, the all prevailing nature of it. The notion of seeing etc without self involved is very foreign to me, that at least is a beginning. > > The understanding has to begin with considering, reflecting on the realities which make up our lives now and there are good reasons that the Buddha's teachings on such truths, on such dhammas as anatta make sense to you at some level. Ph: Yes, that is true. > > Understanding that there's ignorance of these dhammas also shows a level of understanding. People with no interest in the Buddha's teachings think they already know what life is. Ph: Yes, this sense that there is a screen of thinking, a subject and object process in everything, that at least is coming closer to understanding the nature of the mind, the nature of the atta view. > The awareness has to develop until it is aware of the reality now, but of course this is a gradual path, beginning with hearing and considering what realities are. Ph: "Awareness of the reality now" still has no meaning for me, only thinking about the reality now, perhaps thinking about paramattha topics related to the reality now. But no "reality now." > I think you do consider carefully, but maybe there's too much impatience when there isn't any direct understanding. The thinking and impatience can be known too - all conditioned dhammas. Ph: I persponally think there is more patience at work for me than for people who are interested in perceiving the reality now in daily life, there is patience for me because there are conditions for me to be fully devoted to the Buddha's teaching without having much interest in deep, paramattha topics. To be honest, I think having an interest in a paramattha understanding of reality in daily life is akin to having one's cake and insighting it too. I would rather not mix paramattha topics with my comfortable householder's life, it is a kind of corruption of the deep teachings, in my opinion. But that might change. I am approaching my 50th birthday next week, and there is a sense of how solidly grounded my sila is becoming. I may have earned some time with the deep teachings, we'll see. > Patience, courage and good cheer, as Azita reminds us! Ph: Yes, please keep this in mind the next time A.S encourages you to be aware of the present reality in daily life! And remember A.S's wise words, that there is lobha involved in all shortcuts. Metta, Phil p.s I will be taking another break from DSG, too much repeating the same thing over and over.....it's good to take breaks, like James did, and like Herman and Rob E do periodically... #111871 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 12:19 am Subject: Re: Apology Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 ... sarahprocter... Hi Howard, That's very kind of you, but I thought your comments were very fair. You're always a good friend. I also apologise for anything I said inappropriately! Of course, when I suggested that Herman & Alex go to the roots of the trees, I was partly joking (in poor taste, I'm sure!). The other 'partly' was that if one really believes this is what should be done, I wonder why it isn't being done. Why would someone who thinks that they should be, literally, "at the roots of the tree", be sitting at the computer in their comfortable home instead? There was a time when I thought the best place to follow the Buddha's Path was to live in a remote forest temple, so that's where I went and lived, until I realised, imho, that that wasn't a correct understanding of the Path. As far as I understand, the Buddha never told any lay people to go to "the roots of the tree" or into physical seclusion of any kind. If this was an integral part of the path, he would have told everyone to do it. When we are at Jetavana in Savatthi, or in Lumbini Park or Sarnath or Bodh Gaya or other Holy Places, we sit under lovely large trees, often "at the roots". These were the places that the bhikkhus lived, where they spent their time. Sometimes I think we make the Teachings too complicated, forgetting about life which can be understood at this very moment, wherever we find ourselves. It's for this reason that the Buddha's Teachings are universal, applicable to all, no matter the circumstances. Time to go off to the beach now to see our friends and swim.... Metta Sarah --- On Sun, 14/11/10, upasaka@... wrote: > 18. "What can be done for his disciples by a Master who > seeks their welfare > and has compassion and pity on them, that I have done for > you, Cunda. There > are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, > Cunda, do not > delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to > you." <...> #111872 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Nov 13, 2010 7:48 pm Subject: Re: Apology Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 ... upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/13/2010 7:19:42 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, That's very kind of you, but I thought your comments were very fair. You're always a good friend. I also apologise for anything I said inappropriately! ------------------------------------------------------ I really appreciate you, Sarah! :-) ------------------------------------------------- Of course, when I suggested that Herman & Alex go to the roots of the trees, I was partly joking (in poor taste, I'm sure!). The other 'partly' was that if one really believes this is what should be done, I wonder why it isn't being done. Why would someone who thinks that they should be, literally, "at the roots of the tree", be sitting at the computer in their comfortable home instead? ------------------------------------------------------ I'm sure no one thinks they should be literally sitting at roots of trees. The point is to be in relative comfort and in relative isolation; i.e., conditions conducive to heightened calm and attention. At the Buddha's time and place, in the shade of a tree in a forest, or in a cave, etc were suitable. --------------------------------------------------- There was a time when I thought the best place to follow the Buddha's Path was to live in a remote forest temple, so that's where I went and lived, until I realised, imho, that that wasn't a correct understanding of the Path. -------------------------------------------------- These days for many people, one can use a room in one's house or lots of other places for deep meditation. Of course, one can also practice being attentive to whatever arises in the moment much of the time and most everywhere, but the mind state will be more superficial for that, of course. No jhana then.) What some like to call "formal meditation" is different in depth and power. --------------------------------------------- As far as I understand, the Buddha never told any lay people to go to "the roots of the tree" or into physical seclusion of any kind. If this was an integral part of the path, he would have told everyone to do it. ----------------------------------------------- The Buddha dealt mainly with the monks and nuns as regards meditation, most others lacking the needed leisure. Things are different here and now, at least for the fortunate among us. ----------------------------------------------- When we are at Jetavana in Savatthi, or in Lumbini Park or Sarnath or Bodh Gaya or other Holy Places, we sit under lovely large trees, often "at the roots". These were the places that the bhikkhus lived, where they spent their time. ------------------------------------------------ Okay. ----------------------------------------------- Sometimes I think we make the Teachings too complicated, forgetting about life which can be understood at this very moment, wherever we find ourselves. ------------------------------------------------ That's a very important part of the practice that I take very seriously. As much as I can I remain aware of whatever arises in the moment, and, as possible, I guard the senses. Sometimes I'm slow, of course, and it's after the fact that I catch things, but better late than never! ;-) ------------------------------------------------ It's for this reason that the Buddha's Teachings are universal, applicable to all, no matter the circumstances. Time to go off to the beach now to see our friends and swim.... ------------------------------------------------- Not exactly the life of a typical layperson circa 500 BCE, hmmm? ;-)) ------------------------------------------------ Metta Sarah ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111873 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 2:39 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Ken H., and Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E and Howard, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Howard. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > > > Robert, I may be mistaken, but I believe that what Ken meant was that > > > the Buddha, when saying "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I > > > am walking.' When standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he > > > discerns, 'I am sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' > > > Or however his body is disposed, that is how he discerns it,"he was indeed > > > referring to more than just the ordinary understanding of walking etc that > > > all folks have. I suspect that you and Ken actually are closer rather than > > > far apart on this matter and that you are misunderstanding him. > > > > Thanks for your sense of this. If Ken H. confirms it, I will be interested in seeing what his detailed take on this is. And will offer an apology if my critique was misplaced. > > > --------------- > > Thanks for trying to find common ground, Howard, but I think I am going to disappoint. :-) According to my understanding, satipatthana is not even remotely similar to ordinary meditation. The postures and activities listed in the Satipatthan Sutta have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the actual practice. In all cases - regardless of whether the monk is walking, standing, sitting etc, - the object of his right-mindfulness is a presently arisen nama or rupa. What do you think was Buddha's purpose in mentioning all those positions and instructing the monk to be mindful of the body in all those situations? In saying that such practice has nothing to do with satipatthana, don't you feel that you are dismissing the Buddha's own teachings in this area? How do you explain or justify this? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #111874 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 2:44 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) epsteinrob Hi James. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "James" wrote: > > Hi Robert, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > It is a lucky thing, James, that most advanced Dhamma students here demonstrate calm and equanimity almost all of the time. > > James: Yes, it is very lucky for them. Unfortunately, I am just a dullard beginning student so I must sit and try to cultivate calm and equanimity. :-) I also feel quite dull. I have to keep starting over again from scratch, every day. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111875 From: "antony272b2" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 2:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) antony272b2 Hi Sarah, (& Howard, Herman), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Antony, > > I'm enjoying our discussions of suttas. > > --- On Tue, 9/11/10, antony272b2 wrote: > >Bhikkhu Nyanamoli wrote: > "When the seen, heard, sensed, and cognized (see Udana I, 10), are misperceived to //be// (this that I see, . . . that //I// think about, //is// that //man//, so-and-so, that //thing// of //mine//), to have temporal endurance and reality, it is because the three periods of time, these three modes by which we subjectively process our raw world in perceiving it, have been projected outwards by ignorance on the raw world and misapprehended along with that as objectively real. That is how we in our ignorance come to perceive things and persons and action." > http://www.bps.lk/olib/wh/wh052-p.html > >Antony: Do you think there is a "raw world" without real past, present and future? > .... > S: There is only ever a present world, a world experienced through one of the 6 doorways. What is experienced now will be past immediately, the future will now be present. Only the present reality appearing can ever be known. Present dhammas fall away as soon as they've arisen. > > If there's thinking now about the past or future or even present, that present thinking can also be known as yet another conditioned dhamma. There's no rule at all about what should be experienced. Understanding, not 'doing'! > Antony: Regarding the "raw world" idea, another Ven Thanissaro quote: "The Buddha's teachings on time are interesting in that even though they do talk about time, they don't talk about a beginning point in time. The beginning point for your experience is right here in the present moment. It all comes springing out of right here; so instead of trying to trace things back to first causes someplace way back in the past, the Buddha has you look for first causes right here and right now. Dig down deep inside into the area of the mind where intention and attention and perception play against each other, for that's the point from which all things are born." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/meditations2.html#sublime Antony: I'm finding that quote helpful following my long 2005-2007 "flashbacks and guilt" thread where you wrote:. S: "The seeing is real, the thinking is real, but the images and concepts are purely imagined. Let them go." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/40852 > Does that help? > > Metta > > Sarah > ====== Yes, thankyou, I am finding this discussion very helpful. With metta / Antony. #111876 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 2:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: So conditions for both kusala and akusala, just like now, by accumulations, i.e natural decisive support condition, the widest of the 24 paccaya (conditions). Just as we think that eating an ice-cream will be a condition for good vipaka, good results (completely ignoring kamma), so we think that performing certain activities will be a condition for kusala/akusala, (completely ignoring this major condition). Of course, this is because we're used to thinking about concepts, such as situations, as causes. At present I guess, that is just a difference in philosophy. I am interested in understanding conditionality and the way in which past kamma and present conditions combine to support one or another experience, but I cannot accept a situation in which such combinations and the arising of such are arbitrary and not accumulated in a fashion that someone can understand. It seems that a lot of the conditionality discussed regards past conditions of like kind, eg, that present kusala is the kammic result of past kusala. The question of how kusala is created now to become the past condition for future kusala is not discussed, it seems to me. Somehow the conditionality is always in the past, never being formed up in the present. But of course kamma exists now as well, not just in the past - it is being created by current action, not just by past action. So how is kamma formed now? Current kamma cannot merely be the continuation of past kamma, it is a recurrent process. To say that none of the systematic things that we do create conditions does not make sense to me. To say that what does create conditions for awakening are not only uncontrollable, but also arbitrary and not understandable or sensible, does also not make sense to me. Just because we have a conceptual understanding of why sitting and following breath may condition samatha, as the Buddha explicitly taught, does not mean that on the level of dhammas this is not the case, even though we are not in control of it. The way I understand it, what we do creates kamma, so the activities we do and how we do them creates the conditions that cause skill, sati, samatha, enlightenment factors to arise or not to arise, even though in truth this is happening on the level of dhammas and is not being controlled. When someone sits down to read sutta or commentary, or sits down to meditate on the breath, they are doing this because of conditions, not because of will, and so there is no self involved. The thought "there is self" is itself wrong thinking, because the activities are also conditionally based. Even though there are only namas and rupas and these need to be discerned, the namas and rupas associated with those activities will still have their effects. I guess this is a different way of seeing "non control and non self," but I don't think it is promoting self-view. I just don't see accumulations as forming in a vaccuum, or the factors that lead to enlightenment hitting like lightning out of the blue because of accumulations that had no reason to form in the first place. There are reasons why the path factors arise and develop or fail to arise and develop and those reasons are embedded in the way that we think and live. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111877 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:03 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > p.s Rob E, delighted to see your detailed and considered messages - I'm rather behind for a change (ha!!) :-) I know the feeling! Whenever you get to them, that is great. I don't think these subjects are going away any time soon! I am very happy to talk about satipatthana and samatha and I'm still grateful that you brought up my questions and had such a good discussion with K. Sujin. I'll look forward to your responses to my ruminations whenever you have the chance. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111878 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Practice in accordance with the Dhamma is a factor for stream-entry. > > — SN 55.5 > > =============== > > J: Yes, I've quoted this passage many times myself. The reference to "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" here is a reference to the actual arising of satipatthana (as I've been explaining in a thread with Robert E), and not to practice of the 'approximation of the real thing' kind. Can you explain again how practice is something that arises by itself without any doing? "Practice" is inherently doing, not arising. To "practice" means to "do," even if it is the kind of practice you cited, such as "a practicing lawyer," it is still a "doing." How can "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" be "the arising of satipatthana," rather than its development through practice? You have managed to delete the "practice" out of "practice." How do you explain or justify this? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111879 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Howard, and Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > The Buddha did not just attempt to convey intellectually what he had come to > know by awakening, but, most essentially, taught a complex process of > cultivation of the mind leading to awakening and liberation. That last claim, of > course, I know you reject. I think it is fair to say that this philosophy that Right View from the level of pariyatti not only leads, but suffices as the whole of the path, leading inevitably to the arising of all the path factors in a passive way, is based on a rejection of the literal words of the Buddha, and a reinterpretation of those words as pointing to other meanings than what the Buddha actually said. Likewise, the idea that there are no wholes in operation, such as cars, people and trees, and that those are wholly fictional concepts rather than gross realities seen through delusion, and that there are no actions, only single arising dhammas that appear to the deluded mind as actions of people and bodies, is also based on a rejection of the literal word of the Buddha, and a reinterpretation of his words through an alternate system of thought. It is a legitimate spiritual philosophy that the world of complex forms and actions is wholly illusory, and that there are only single moments of consciousness contacting simple objects of consciousness with no larger realities in existence, but it does not seem to me to be the philosophy that the Buddha laid out in sutta, or resemble it very closely in most areas. As you say, the Buddha laid out a path to awakening that included understanding the true nature of people and objects, but that also involved definite practices of meditation, contemplation and consideration at every stage. There is no indication in sutta that one was only to consider the Dhamma and refrain from the rest of the path. The path the Buddha gave is systematic and active and involved effort and activity of various kinds, which develops insight leading to enlightenment step by step. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111880 From: "James" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 4:01 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 13-nov-2010, om 15:25 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > > > James: Life is fine with me here in Taiwan. > ------ > N: I am glad. Still teaching? Do you have Budhist contacts? > When in the kitchen (dishes, soucepans etc.) I thought of your > remarks. Calm and insight: as pa~n~naa develops also the Path factor > of concentration develops and as stages of insight are reached there > will be more calm, also calm grows together with pa~n~naa. But I only > have this from hearsay, therefore I cannot say much about this subject. > James: Yeah, I am still teaching. I don't have any Buddhist contacts yet. I am not sure about what you mean by "hearsay". Your whole approach to the Buddhadhamma is based on this interpretation and yet you can't pinpoint any support for it. That seems a little scary to me. My understanding, based on the Vism. and the suttas, is that the path is: morality leads to concentration/tranquility which leads to insight/wisdom. Nina, you seem to have the Path of Purification entirely backwards. Insight doesn't lead to calm and it doesn't lead to concentration. Insight is a neutral result, with no kamma attached, which doesn't 'cause' anything. One can achieve insight while washing the dishes but one must be calm while washing the dishes for this to occur. The only way for one to be calm while washing the dishes is to concentrate on washing the dishes and to not let mental proliferation overtake the mind. It is easier to develop concentration while sitting as there are less distractions, but it can also be developed during any daily activity. The goal is to develop concentration leading to calm leading to insight, not the other way around. Metta, James #111881 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 6:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep egberdina Hi Sukin, On 12 November 2010 01:48, Sukinderpal wrote: > What I do believe however, is that what > ever that goes on now in terms of reaction to any sense experience, this > must have a cause in the past and at the same time accumulates as tendency. > > Yes, it is clear that you believe this. Your belief is contradicted by eg SN 56:48 "It would be a sheer coincidence, lord, that the blind sea-turtle, coming to the surface once every one hundred years, would stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole." "It's likewise a sheer coincidence that one obtains the human state. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, arises in the world. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Now, this human state has been obtained. A Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, has arisen in the world. A doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Cheers Herman #111882 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 6:40 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (111678) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: To my understanding, the terms kusala and akusala refer the ethical quality of mental states, not of conventional deeds or activities. Do you see it differently? > > > > Yes, I see both conventional and non-conventional kusala and akusala to be of import. > > =============== > > J: I've not previously heard of a conventional/non-conventional distinction when it comes to kusala and akusala. I am using the terms you used above, but when I use them you say you don't understand them. That is frustrating, and I don't quite see what the problem is. You said above: "To my understanding, the terms kusala and akusala refer the ethical quality of mental states, not of conventional deeds or activities. Do you see it differently?" So I answered you to say that I saw both conventional [deeds and activities as you said above,] and non-conventional [for lack of a better word, ie, "ethical qualities of mental states"] to be of import. I am feeding your own terms back to you and saying I think they are both important. I am disagreeing that only ethical qualities of mental states is important, and saying that conventional deeds and activities is also important. So you say back to me: "I've not previously heard of a conventional/non-conventional distinction when it comes to kusala and akusala." Well, I got it from you, Jon! You were the one that just made the distinction. You distinguished the conventional action-level of kusala from the ethical-mental-level kusala and asked if I agreed that the latter was the real meaning of kusala, and I said that no, I did not agree. Is that any clearer? > > =============== > The path is developed conventionally until such time as unconventional discernment arises and becomes relevant. Building up conventional sati in relation to that which is experienced and conventional understanding, etc., accumulates the concentration, mindfulness and samatha to go further. That's my view. And that's the way the Buddha taught in sutta. > > =============== > > J: An example from the suttas would help me understand better what you're saying here (as mentioned already, the notion of conventional development of the path is a new one to me). It's pretty simple John. I'm talking about Right Livelihood as what kind of job you have, and Right Action as how you behave and do things, ie Conventional. I'm sure you're familiar with countless suttas on this "conventional" form of what is kusala. Buddha says it is kusala to keep good company, but akusala to play dice. That is "conventional kusala." When you talk about the ethical quality of mental states you are restricting kusala to namas, and denying the import of worldly activities. I don't agree with that, and the Buddha did not agree with that either. If you really want a sutta quote, here's one: from: The Agganna Sutta: "And sometimes a Khattiya takes life, takes what is not given, commits sexual misconduct, tells lies, indulges in slander, harsh speech or idle chatter, is grasping, malicious, or of wrong views. Thus such things as are immoral and considered so, blameworthy and considered so, to be avoided and considered so, ways unbefitting an Ariyan and considered so, black with black result and blamed by the wise, are sometimes to be found among the Khattiyas, and the same applies to Brahmins, merchants, and artisans. 'Sometimes too, a Khattiya refrains from taking life, does not take what is not given, refrains from sexual misconduct, speaks truth, shuns slander, harsh speech or idle chatter, is not grasping, malicious, or of wrong views. Thus such things are moral and considered so, blameless and considered so, to be followed and considered so, ways befitting an Ariyan and considered so, bright with bright results and praised by the wise..." You can see above that "taking life and telling lies," not mental qualities but ethically akusala *actions,* are within the definition of akusala, of unwholesomeness, and refraining from taking life, lying and sexual misconduct, the speaking of truth and other moral *actions* are considered kusala wholesome *actions.* So I would not agree that Buddha has restricted the definition of what is kusala or akusala to "ethical or unethical mental states." It is clear from such suttas that this is *not* the case. I mean, I know that you know that the Buddha has outlined what is wholesome and unwholesome activity in hundreds of suttas, so I'm not sure why you are feigning ignorance in this area. It's Dhamma kindergarten, isn't it? Do you play dice regularly? > > =============== > > That is not so, Jon. Buddha constantly talks about the conventional factors of life and how they are anatta and anicca. He does so in countless suttas, so it is not fair to say he always does so in some pure form of understanding of dhammas. He finds it valuable to tell people to detach from conventional objects, so I think it is valuable too. > > =============== > > J: Again, if you have a particular sutta or suttas in mind, a reference would be helpful. First, a relevant quote from A. Sujin, as reported and commented on by Nina in a past book printed on Abhidhamma.org: "Acharn Sujin said: "When you go to select food, what conditions the selection? When an object is so very pleasant, you will not let go of it, you want to have it more than anything else. When you see many different things and you select something in particular, this is because of the object predominance-condition, the object conditions one to cling to it. Lobha is so attached to that object." When we like an object, we may want to have it again and again, not merely once. We accumulate clinging to that particular object. That object conditions clinging by way of object strong dependence-condition, arammanupanissaya-paccaya 3; it has become a powerful inducement, a cogent reason for lobha. Acharn Sujin said: "You may like a special kind of fruit, and it will happen again that you like it. That object becomes your strong dependence-condition for continuing to like it; you like it not just once. You want to have it again and again, and this becomes a habit. That is why we like different things." I will note that A. Sujin and Nina appear to be talking about food, fruits, and other conventional objects as objects of clinging. More later... Best Robert E = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #111883 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 6:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep egberdina Hi Sukin, On 12 November 2010 01:48, Sukinderpal wrote: > > But I am guessing that you have a different understanding about how any > of this takes place, and your objections towards my ideas is actually an > objection to what the Abhidhamma and the commentaries say, is this correct? > My objection is to your method of investigation. If your method is flawed, whatever you are going to arrive at will be flawed. Given our collective ignorance, one cannot know if what is being heard is Dhamma or rubbish. One therefore can't know if the theoretical understanding one is developing is understanding of Dhamma, or rubbish. What one can know is if there is suffering or not. One can only know if it was Dhamma that was heard and considered, if suffering is in abeyance. Given that you deliberately limit your intake of Dhamma/rubbish to a very select and narrow interpretation of mainly commentarial material, and that you proudly refuse to consider any material that is at odds with the theoretical view you have already adopted, or to take the steps such material might advise one to take, I feel I have considerable justification in believing your method is seriously flawed. Cheers Herman #111884 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 6:53 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > I am not thinking of the long, long time ahead of me, this is > thinking that is not so helpful. Each moment of a beginning > understanding is good, and it is so relevant to my daily life now. I > feel that it is good to have a little more understanding of my life > now, and good to have less clinging to such understanding and to > realise when there is clinging. It is good to understand more that > not a person sees, thinks, clings, that there are different cittas > accompanied by different cetasikas, even if there is mostly > intellectual understanding. > This is my own feeling about the whole matter. I appreciate reading this, and thanks for your notes on jhana. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111885 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? egberdina Hi Ken H, On 14 November 2010 09:05, Ken H wrote: > > > > Hi Herman, > ------ > KH: >> As I see it, the beginner starts out with the theoretical knowledge > that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that nibbana > is anatta. > >> > > H: > The learner would be well advised to learn how to read before they try > to understand, let alone teach. Dhammas are anatta, but is sankharas that > are anicca and dukkha. > > > Shouldn't one? > -------------- > > Thanks for teaching me that, Herman, but the word 'sankharas' has been > explained many times at DSG as a being synonym for conditioned dhammas. > Ooops, my bad. I forget sometimes that some here at dsg treat the Buddha like he was dyslexic, and that he didn't actually know how to say what he meant :-) [Sarcasm intended :-)] BTW, I wonder if you meant to say 'beginner' rather than 'learner.' In the > texts, a learner is an ariyan who is not yet an arahant. > Aren't you one of them? :-) (There is never anything in what you write that suggests the possibility of being mistaken) Anyways, dhammas and sankharas are not synonyms, and the Buddha was not dyslexic. Cheers Herman #111886 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? egberdina Hi Howard, On 14 November 2010 09:52, wrote: > > ============================= > Yes, you both know the same thing. LOL! > Your "friendly jousting" aside (I'm sure that's all it is! ;-), I am > reminded by it of something. I recall that at one time I read a very > different interpretation (by David Kalupahana, it happens) of the > tilakkhana that, > though I believe it to be incorrect, is interesting in its novelty: He > interpreted 'sankhara' in this context to mean "inclination" or "tendency" > or > "disposition". So he took the tilakkhana to mean the following: > > 1) All dispositions are sorrowful, > 2) All dispositions are impermanent, and > 3) All phenomena are non-self. > Thanks for bringing this up. Looks like my respect for David Kalupahana just went up a few notches (if that were possible). I also favor this approach. It is, after all, what the words say :-) Cheers Herman > Rendering 'dukkha' as "sorrowful" above was my choice in this case, > not Kalupahana's. Don't read any significance into it. I don't recall how > he > translated it. > > #111887 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) egberdina Hi Sarah, On 13 November 2010 21:13, sarah abbott wrote: > > > Hi Herman, > > --- On Thu, 11/11/10, Herman > > wrote: > > >S: The references to "having gone to the foot of the > > > tree" etc, are describing > > > that one who has already gone there. > > > > > > Your explanation does not hold water, IMO, Sarah. > > > > MN 8 > <.... > > > 18. "What can be done for his disciples by a Master who > > seeks their welfare > > and has compassion and pity on them, that I have done for > > you, Cunda. There > > are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, > > Cunda, do not > > delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to > > you." > <...> > S: So go without delay to some roots of trees, to some empty places, > meditate (as you understand the word) and stay until you're enlightened or > for as long as you understand the instructions to be for. > > Then come back and tell us whether "the roots of trees" were the answer to > eradicating all defilements:-) > You wrote: >The references to "having gone to the foot of the tree" etc, are describing that one who >has already gone there. I wrote what I wrote to point out to you that your explanation is not supported by the texts. That remains the case. Take it or leave it, it is neither here or there for me :-) I don't say that indifferently, you and Jon are the nicest people anyone could hope to meet. Seriously. Having said that, I nevertheless will cordially but vehemently argue against your view that setting is not an important factor in what is experienced from time to time. Or that it was not also the Buddha's view. Metta > > Sarah > p.s you might like to encourage Alex and any other "roots of trees" > devotees to go along with you too! > Neither Alex or I need your encouragement in that respect. As you know, I've got 15 hectares of trees. My dilemma is which tree to select, yours is that there is only one foundation, and it is in Bangkok :-) Cheers Herman #111888 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 7:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) egberdina Hi Howard, On 14 November 2010 00:27, wrote: > > S: So go without delay to some roots of trees, to some empty places, > meditate (as you understand the word) and stay until you're enlightened or > for > as long as you understand the instructions to be for. > > Then come back and tell us whether "the roots of trees" were the answer to > eradicating all defilements:-) > ----------------------------------------------------- > Sounds to me like you are as much making fun of the Buddha (when he > says "There are these roots of trees, there are empty places. Meditate, > Cunda, do not delay, lest you later regret it. 'This is my message to > you.") as you are of Herman. What do YOU think the Buddha was saying to > Cunda? I read it as crystal clear urging to get busy meditating! (Sorry to > use the M-word!! I know it holds all sorts of unwholesome connotations for > you. :-) > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > Metta > > Sarah > p.s you might like to encourage Alex and any other "roots of trees" > devotees to go along with you too! > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Sarah, what's up with this? > =============================== > Thanks for coming in on this, Howard. You make good points. Cheers Herman #111889 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:03 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? kenhowardau Hi Howard, ------------------ <. . .> KH: >> So in that respect one *does* start-out at the same point as one finishes. Doesn't one? >> H: > Actually, no - for three reasons: 1) The difference between intellectual knowledge and direct, knowing via wisdom is unbelievably vast, ------------------- Wouldn't that depend on the degree of each? I imagine that strong intellectual right-understanding would be quite close to weak, direct right-understanding. ---------------------------- H: > 2) The chances of our correctly understanding even theoretical knowledge of Dhamma, of our actually properly grasping it, is slim due to our being sunk in in the three poisons, ----------------------------- Yes, but we were talking about someone who did "start out" not someone who did not. --------------- H: > and 3) The Buddha never taught that mere thinking and mental regurgitating suffices to lead to awakening. --------------- Are you talking about 'hearing the true Dhamma' and 'wisely considering it'? Seems rather uncomplimentary language! :-) ------------------------- H: > To enlarge on item 3: The Buddha did not just attempt to convey intellectually what he had come to know by awakening, but, most essentially, taught a complex process of cultivation of the mind leading to awakening and liberation. That last claim, of course, I know you reject. -------------------------- Thanks for saving me the trouble of rejecting that, now I won't have to say anything about rites and rituals. :-) Ken H #111890 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ----- <. . .> KH: >> The postures and activities listed in the Satipatthan Sutta have absolutely no bearing whatsoever on the actual practice. In all cases - regardless of whether the monk is walking, standing, sitting etc,- the object of his right-mindfulness is a presently arisen nama or rupa. >> RE: > What do you think was Buddha's purpose in mentioning all those positions and instructing the monk to be mindful of the body in all those situations? ----- The Buddha's purpose in mentioning postures and daily-life situations was to teach us the right place and time for practising satipatthana. The practice itself was to have right-mindfulness of a conditioned dhamma that was arising at that place and time. ------------- RE: > In saying that such practice has nothing to do with satipatthana, don't you feel that you are dismissing the Buddha's own teachings in this area? ------------- I am saying that the popular practice of concentrating on postures and situations is due to a misreading of the Buddha's teaching. ------------------------ RE: > How do you explain or justify this? ------------------------- With great difficulty! :-) Ken H #111891 From: "Lukas" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:32 am Subject: How to give up smoking? szmicio Dear friends How to give up smoking? Best wishes Lukas #111892 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:50 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 14-nov-2010, om 7:40 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > "You may like a special kind of fruit, and it will happen again > that you like it. That object becomes your strong dependence- > condition for continuing to like it; you like it not just once. You > want to have it again and again, and this becomes a habit. That is > why we like different things." > > I will note that A. Sujin and Nina appear to be talking about food, > fruits, and other conventional objects as objects of clinging. --------- N: Fruit: a way to explain about paramattha dhammas with an example from daily life. With all these examples, and also your discussions on 'conventional actions', do not forget that in reality there are just momentary dhammas: citta, cetasika and ruupa. The citta that motivates an action is what is pointed to in the suttas. The term 'conventional actions' is not so clear. It is the same with calm: this is the citta without defilements. Cultivating calm: right understanding is indispensable: it must be known whether at this very moment the citta is kusala or akusala. Calm is not feeling relaxed, feeling calm. That kind of calm is likely to be with lobha. The moment of citta has to be known precisely. Nina. #111893 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 10:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: in Ayutthaya sarahprocter... Dear All,(esp. Sukin & Azita) --- On Sat, 13/11/10, sarah abbott wrote: >On Wednesday, we went with a few other friends including Rob K and Azita .... S: oops! We thought of Azita, but it was Sukin rather than Azita who we spent time with on this trip! Sarah ====== #111894 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:27 am Subject: Re: Vis. Ch XIV on one file? ptaus1 Hi Sarah, Nina, Herman, RobE, > S: I think the second one is what Nina is asking you to do, but it sounds like a lot of work! It could be put in the files. pt: Nina emailed me her word files that already contain a lot of stuff that's in the Larry's list as far as I can tell. So I'll join Nina's files in the next few days and upload it in the files section as one big word file. Later on when I eventually find some time to go through it carefully, I'll add whatever is missing from Larry's list in there. > S: Most the sections have been saved in 'useful posts' under various headings, such as "khandhas' and so on. Once we 'crack the code' and are able to scroll through the links, of course it'll be easier to see them at a glance, along with the rest of the UP under various headings. pt: Ah yes, the code, sorry I've had no time lately, and am also really behind with replies to people's posts here, hopefully from December i'll get some spare time. > H: Cheers, with some mud cake included :-) pt: On that topic very dear to me, and in case you didn't know already, i just found out recently that Coles makes an excellent chocolate mud cake. It's like $4 on special for 500g, but it's really good. So, though I've been slacking off on dsg lately, at least I've been working properly on getting diabetes :) Best wishes pt #111895 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep upasaka_howard Hi, Herman (and Sukin) - In a message dated 11/14/2010 1:23:39 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Hi Sukin, On 12 November 2010 01:48, Sukinderpal wrote: > What I do believe however, is that what > ever that goes on now in terms of reaction to any sense experience, this > must have a cause in the past and at the same time accumulates as tendency. > > Yes, it is clear that you believe this. Your belief is contradicted by eg SN 56:48 "It would be a sheer coincidence, lord, that the blind sea-turtle, coming to the surface once every one hundred years, would stick his neck into the yoke with a single hole." "It's likewise a sheer coincidence that one obtains the human state. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, arises in the world. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that a doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Now, this human state has been obtained. A Tathagata, worthy & rightly self-awakened, has arisen in the world. A doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Cheers Herman ============================ Herman, do you think that by "sheer coincidence" the Buddha actually means "without cause or condition" rather than simply "very rare and improbable"? (I don't think so. If there is one thing besides anatta the Buddha is known for, it is his teaching on conditionality, isn't it?) With metta, Howard Conditionality /"When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that."/ (From the Bodhi Sutta, Udana 1.1) #111896 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 11/14/2010 3:03:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ------------------ <. . .> KH: >> So in that respect one *does* start-out at the same point as one finishes. Doesn't one? >> H: > Actually, no - for three reasons: 1) The difference between intellectual knowledge and direct, knowing via wisdom is unbelievably vast, ------------------- Wouldn't that depend on the degree of each? I imagine that strong intellectual right-understanding would be quite close to weak, direct right-understanding. ----------------------------------------------- I think they are radically different sorts of things. ----------------------------------------------- ---------------------------- H: > 2) The chances of our correctly understanding even theoretical knowledge of Dhamma, of our actually properly grasping it, is slim due to our being sunk in in the three poisons, ----------------------------- Yes, but we were talking about someone who did "start out" not someone who did not. --------------- H: > and 3) The Buddha never taught that mere thinking and mental regurgitating suffices to lead to awakening. --------------- Are you talking about 'hearing the true Dhamma' and 'wisely considering it'? Seems rather uncomplimentary language! :-) ----------------------------------------------------------- Wise consideration does not come about just by repeated thinking. The arising of wisdom requires far more than that. -------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------- H: > To enlarge on item 3: The Buddha did not just attempt to convey intellectually what he had come to know by awakening, but, most essentially, taught a complex process of cultivation of the mind leading to awakening and liberation. That last claim, of course, I know you reject. -------------------------- Thanks for saving me the trouble of rejecting that, now I won't have to say anything about rites and rituals. :-) --------------------------------------------------------- Your notion of what constitutes rite and ritual is not to be found in the tipitaka. -------------------------------------------------------- Ken H =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111897 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 9:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How to give up smoking? upasaka_howard Hi, Lukas - In a message dated 11/14/2010 3:32:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, szmicio@... writes: Dear friends How to give up smoking? -------------------------------------- By "cold turkey." That is what worked for me years ago in stopping smoking, and only that. Likewise for ceasing alcohol consumption. I used to love good beer and good wine and Drambouie (sp?) and white russians and Long Island ice teas, and Southern Comfort, etc, but I "stopped cold" years ago and never started again, because I saw the value in abstention. Some things need to be done AT ONCE. ------------------------------------- Best wishes Lukas ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111898 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 8:55 pm Subject: Re: Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: in Ayutthaya glenjohnann Hello Sarah Sounds as if you have had a very good trip to Bkk. Thank you so very much for the summaries of points raised in your discussions there. You have obviously taken a lot of time and care to synthisize the talks and present them in very understandable and cogent form. Very helpful indeed. A few questions / comments about this most recent in the series: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > 3. Nimitta. Nina's message #111313 - the first quote on nimitta and the comments. > It depends on understanding, we don't need to think of nimitta - it's so very short. Instead of paying attention to nimitta, there can be awareness of reality. No time to consider whether there's nimitta or not, and no use trying to see the rising and falling away with an idea of self. It seems like there's a "trying to do", more than understanding. Understanding works its way with detachment. Trying is attachment. A: Often when thinking about nimitta, I find myself grappling with the idea of it and when I either settle on something acceptable to my thinking at the moment or leave it alone because nothing suitable comes to mind or understanding, I often think back to Achan Sujin's comments about not focusing on ideas of nimitta because what is important is the awareness / understanding of the present reality (as you have restated above). > 4. Trying, effort > By knowing/seeing the benefit of understanding with detachment, otherwise there won't be less attachment. Lobha motivates. Understanding sees the value. If we read over and need someone's explanation for understanding, it's not just wanting to have more and more understanding. A: Can you discuss the last sentence in (4) above. Wanting an explanation in order to understand - sounds like it could both motivated by lobha and seeing the value of understanding - different moments, of course. > 6. Kamma and vipaka in Jatakas or daily life > Most difficult - attachment to self, atta ditthi. Anything can happen, any citta, depends on conditions whether sati and understanding arise. Jatakas like any story in one's life or any story one reads about in the newspaper - different accumulations. If we have expectations from a particular reading, lobha again. Upanissaya gocara - that object which frequently turned towards. Talking about Dhamma can be meaningless, "delirious" chatter, if it's just more stories about dhammas. No detachment at such times. KS mentioned that sometimes Thai friends just have delirious chatter about Dhamma, such as about the results of kamma and the poor people in Ayutthaya affected by the flooding. Not really understanding anything about kamma. > 10. Pt's Qus #102522 on rupa kalapas, such as "if we see a patch of dirt, does that mean that that particular kalaapa that's in contact with our eyes has more color ruupa?" It depends on the intensity/quality/variety, not on having more. No understanding of realities - much better to have an understanding now of realities, otherwise we keep further away by unpanissaya gocara (object decisively adhered to). A: You have mentioned upanissaya gocara twice in this post - object decisively adhered to and object frequently turned towards. Do I understand correctly that this refers to the continuous (and overwhelming) tendency to lobha - the desire or expectation for something? Without panna developed through intellectual understanding and beyond (patipatti, pativeda), this tendency predominates until there is more understanding of realities now? Are you able to elaborate - or correct me if I have misunderstood? Metta Ann ps - any more thoughts / plans re your spending time in Bkk in January or March? We are going to be booking tickets etc soon. If you are going to be there - would love to coincide. #111899 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 3:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How to give up smoking? dhammasanna Hi Lukas, I totally agree with Howard. "cold turkey" is in the final analysis the easier way and I believe the surest way. As to alcohol it happened in '85 and as to smoking it happened in '91.  May you be well and happy and always smiling,  Sarah #111900 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep egberdina Hi Howard, On 15 November 2010 00:51, wrote: > > > What I do believe however, is that what > > ever that goes on now in terms of reaction to any sense experience, this > > must have a cause in the past and at the same time accumulates as > tendency. > > > > > Yes, it is clear that you believe this. > > Your belief is contradicted by eg SN 56:48 > > "It would be a sheer coincidence, lord, that the blind sea-turtle, coming > to > the surface once every one hundred years, would stick his neck into the > yoke > with a single hole." > > "It's likewise a sheer coincidence that one obtains the human state. It's > likewise a sheer coincidence that a Tathagata, worthy & rightly > self-awakened, arises in the world. It's likewise a sheer coincidence that > a > doctrine & discipline expounded by a Tathagata appears in the world. Now, > this human state has been obtained. A Tathagata, worthy & rightly > self-awakened, has arisen in the world. A doctrine & discipline expounded > by > a Tathagata appears in the world. > Cheers > > Herman > > ============================ > Herman, do you think that by "sheer coincidence" the Buddha actually > means "without cause or condition" rather than simply "very rare and > improbable"? (I don't think so. If there is one thing besides anatta the > Buddha is > known for, it is his teaching on conditionality, isn't it?) > On the face of it, the Buddha, with the above, pours a rather large bucket of cold water on what Sukin recently wrote in this thread: -And the Buddha was one who achieved samma-sambodhi by virtue of having accumulated the perfections over incalculable lifetimes. He taught us about this and told us of his aspiration to do so 20 + Buddha sasanas ago- I agree with you that the Buddha is known for his teachings on conditionality. But I think those teachings limited themselves to the scope of suffering. Just out of interest, what do you understand by spontaneous, in the context of the following from MN12 What is spontaneous generation? There are gods and denizens of hell and certain human beings and some beings in the lower worlds; this is called spontaneous generation. Cheers Herman #111901 From: Herman Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How to give up smoking? egberdina Hi Lukas, On 14 November 2010 19:32, Lukas wrote: > > > Dear friends > How to give up smoking? > > I would agree with what Howard and Sarah have said. I would just add that you need to be totally convinced that giving up is what you want. There can not be any doubt if you wish to succeed. Also, nicotine patches or gum will take the edge of the cravings. Cheers Herman #111902 From: Herman Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep egberdina Hi Rob E, On 11 November 2010 12:35, Robert E wrote: > > > Thank you for again repeating that you believe kamma is vipaka. > > I'm a little confused here myself, Herman. Kamma is not the only factor > that causes various situations to arise - there are also conditions and > accumulations that are apart from kamma, is that not so? Or do you give > kamma - the emotional/intentional/action causes that you yourself put into > play - the credit for all future results and conditions? In other words, is > there nothing in your view but kamma leading to vipaka, or are there other > conditions and accumulations at play? > What I am trying to say is that all and any situations, no matter how they have come about, cannot determine kamma. The past is not a valid excuse or a sufficient explanation for what I am doing now. And I don't mean to suggest that only kamma creates future results. Also, I have been suggesting to Sukin, that if he wants to justify any kamma on the basis of conditions or accumulations, he needs to be specific, and not just refer to accumulations or conditions in general. For if that approach were of any value at all, we may as well explain things away by saying God did it. I hope that clarifies Cheers Herman #111903 From: Herman Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep egberdina Hi Rob E, On 11 November 2010 12:41, Robert E wrote: > > > Hi Herman. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, > Herman wrote: > > > If you do not understand that this present moment is constituted by the > > doing of something very specific and known, but instead "understand" that > > whatever you are doing at any time has very definite, but unknown > > conditions, you understand nothing. > > > > > > > > > But of course you may be right and I do feel quite muddle headed, but > > > you'll have to explain what in all this is a case of turning kamma into > > > vipaka? > > > > > > > > Well, what is the known reality of the present moment, Sukin, is it known > > kamma, or unknown accumulations and unknown conditions? > > Is it not the case that dependent origination is a series of interrelated > causes and effects? It is my understanding that there is no independent > cause that arises for no reason, but that every cause is the result of > earlier and/or co-arising conditions. This is not your view? > Some versions of DO have consciousness conditioning name and form, and name and form conditioning consciousness as their foundation. Others have ignorance as their root. So, neither of these types of formulation specify some reason for the fact that DO occurs at all. Cheers Herman #111904 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:38 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? glenjohnann Hello Jonothan I like the way you have expressed this, although I am asking for a little clarification. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > To my understanding, the teachings contemplate there being audible data ('sound') that is experienced by hearing consciousness followed by the processing of that audible data/sound, this latter being performed through the mind-door. > > For each moment of sound that is the object of hearing consciousness there are multiple moments of processing by which the sound is recognised and given meaning. (However, the object of those moments of subsequent processing is no longer the actual audible object but a remembered concept of it.) A: Your last sentence in parentheses above - when you say remembered concept of it, are you talking about the nimitta of it or the memory of what was heard, now a concept and not reality of the sound itself? Ann #111905 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 12:58 am Subject: The Warrior: Conquering what & why? bhikkhu5 Friends: Fight the Defilements & not the World! CONQUEROR Even after having defeated a million men, one is better off by conquering oneself. Dhammapada background Story 102_103 VICTORY Victory over self is superior to victory over others. Winning self-control & you are forever in power! Dhammapada background Story 104_105 UNDEFEATABLE Neither a God, nor a Demon, nor a Devil, nor even Maha-Brahma can undo the victory of one who has won self-control .... Dhammapada background Story 104_105 More on the mental Defilements (Kilesa ): The Proximate_Causes_of_the_Root_Defilements Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net The Warrior! #111906 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Nov 14, 2010 11:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep upasaka_howard Hi, Herman - In a message dated 11/14/2010 6:37:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, hhofmeister@... writes: Just out of interest, what do you understand by spontaneous, in the context of the following from MN12 What is spontaneous generation? There are gods and denizens of hell and certain human beings and some beings in the lower worlds; this is called spontaneous generation. ============================== Well, first of all, I think it has nothing to do with false beliefs about microbes and maggots! ;-)) I suspect this refers to beings who are thought to appear instantaneously in their new realm, without gestation or some such gradual process. (I wonder what sorts of humans are included.) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111907 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:09 am Subject: Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 3, no. 2. sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Han), You mentioned that you found the following difficult: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Han and friends, > > Latent tendencies. > Ch 3. no 2. <...> > Evenso in the case of manĺyatana (the ayatana including all cittas) > and dhammĺyatana (subtle rúpas, cetasikas and nibbĺna), and > kĺyasa.nkhĺra (bodily function of breathing) and vaccisa.n > khĺra (verbal function), it is asked : `When manĺyatana arises for > someone, does also dhammĺyatana arise for him?' and the answer is > `Yes'. .... [S: without cetasikas, cittas cannot arise] ... >The same is asked in the case of breathing with regard to > bodily function, kĺyasa.nkhĺra and verbal function, vaccisa.nkhĺra: > when for the person who is breathing in and out this bodily function > arises, does also the verbal function arises? [2] ..... S: If we translate vaccisa.nkhaara as "verbal function", it may not be clear. However, if we understand kaayasa.nkhaara as breath (which maintains the body) and vaciisa.nkhaara as vitakka and vicara specifically (without these, there cannot be speech), it may be clearer. What do you think? just my two cents! Metta Sarah ======= #111908 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 9:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[a] sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, [a] I greatly appreciate your detailed and thoughtful reflections and further good questions. Again, I repeat, it was my own summary from what I understand/understood, rather than a quote. Any errors are mine and I picked up a couple I found later. --- On Fri, 12/11/10, Robert E wrote: S:> We need to clearly differentiate between breath as object of samatha and breath as object of vipassana. .... R:Noting that in K. Sujin's way of describing it, breath as object of samatha is very different - really a completely different kind of object - than breath as object of sati/vipassana. For samatha, it is breath as concept, including wise reflection on the role of the breath in life. Could you say a bit more about this? How is "breath as concept" an object for samatha, and how does it lead to development of samatha if understood correctly? .... S: Like now, there may (by conditions, not by selection, I stress!) be wise reflection on death, breath, the Buddhas's virtues, even colour (actually, could be any object in the beginning). We find our lives, our bodies, our friends, our houses, everything really, to be so important, but life can come to an end at any moment. It just depends on this very in and out breath and life lasts just for this instant - that's all there is to life, just a momentary citta depending on breath. Isn't it sobering, calming, when we reflect wisely? As I mentioned to Pt, I find this kind of reflection very natural during the day. Some people said they never, ever reflected on breath - so just depends on accumumulations. When there is more and more wise reflection on an object, such as breath or death, it is the development of samatha, more than just the occasional momentary wise reflection. Just like the occasional touching of the piano keys is not piano playing, but if there are conditions to play more so that one begins to play melodies, then it is piano playing. It's the panna that is the key (no pun intended!) in the case of the development of samatha. Metta Sarah ======== #111909 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[b] sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, [b] ... >S: 1. Breath as object of samatha: > > First of all, we must stress that the cittas must be kusala and arise with understanding, if it is the development of samatha (calm). When breath is the object, it is a concept of breath only, a pannatti or nimitta, not the paramattha dhamma. ... R:>So the kusala cittas are both understanding the nimita or pannati/concept of breath. Is this the same as the wise reflection on the role of the breath? Or is this a more direct reflection on the presence of the breath itself, albeit as concept? .... S: It doesn't matter - more likely to be wise reflection when breath is apparent, but really, just depends on conditions and rt understanding as to when there is wise reflection. Most people who do lots of yoga or jogging, with lots of breath apparent, don't have any/much wise reflection at all. In any case, it's always a concept of breath as object. .... >S: There can be wise reflection, sati sampajanna, on how life at this moment depends on breath. This helps us to have less attachment to other things or possessions. As I've mentioned, I find it useful to reflect on how life and all we hold dear depends on this very in and out-breath. Without breath there'd be no life at all. The moments of calm have to be understood, otherwise it doesn't make sense. ... R:> Noting that in K. Sujin's description above, there is none of the traditional idea of calming the breath/body/fabrications directly by concentration on the breath in the moment, ie, in the meditative way we would think of calming the breath and body. In the suttas Buddha says that the meditator observes the breath and "calms fabrications." So there is a sense in the suttas that the concentration on the breath with sati brings the calming of the breath, body and mind. .... S: When we concentrate on the breath and it slows down, for example, I think the predominant factor is lobha, which seems very pleasant and peaceful at such a time. This is why people would like to continue such a practice. I don't hear of much wise consideration or understanding at such times, but of course, we can only know for ourselves. Trying to concentrate, trying to calm the breath would definitely be lobha. As for the suttas, we need to know again whether the Buddha is referring to samatha or satipatthana development. In either case, there is panna at such moments of "observing the breath" as you put it and the citta is calm, i.e accompanied by passaddhi cetasika. To change your last sentence around, when there is sati, there is kusala concentration and kusala calm at such a time, i.e. whenever the citta is kusala. Usually when we concentrate on breath, it is akusala concentration, akusala calm and akusala awareness that arise. As for the "calming of the breath, body and mind", there are two factors of calmness, often translated as calmness of body (kaya passaddhi) and calmness of mind (citta passaddhi). We need to be clear that kaya passaddhi is calmness of the mental body, the cetasikas - these are two cetasikas. Metta Sarah ======== #111910 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[c] sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, [c] ... >R: In this sense there is a collaboration between sati and samatha, in this case one in which the concentration and mindfulness brings about the samatha. It seems in K. Sujin's description above, that it is more a contemplating of the role of the breath in life that brings the samatha, and that the object used for sati is completely different [a rupa, not a concept.] Would you say this is a correct interpretation of what she says above? .... S: It is the panna, the wise reflection on the object (in this case breath) that conditions the calm, samatha. Focussing on concentration doesn't bring calm. It is a concept about rupas taken to be the breath. ... >S: ...It's a different kind of understanding from that which knows realities. It is not the breath which brings wise reflection, attachment or aversion, but the kind of reflection and understanding. ... >R:So samatha here is developed through wise reflection and understanding, it is a result of thinking about the breath correctly, rather than observing it. ... S: Yes, exactly right. ... >S: Breath itself (or what is taken for breath) can appear in daily life, such as during our exercise, and be the object of attachment or detachment. When it appears (i.e. what is taken for breath) and there is understanding, that understanding knows how to develop samatha with this object, just as when there is wise reflection of death or metta which is apparent, samatha can develop. ... R:>Would I be correct in thinking that this kind of noticing of "what is taken for breath" during exercise or otherwise, is again an object of thought and contemplation, and this is the method here for developing samatha? What kind of contemplation would occur during daily activity? Would it again be the kind that reflects on the role of the breath in life, impermanence of the breath, etc.? .... S: I'm a bit of wary of the introduction of "method" here. If you're doing your yoga or running hard, it's impossible not to notice breath. It depends how it's thought about, that's all. Usually, it's with ignorance and attachment. I find the same when I'm swimming in the sea, but Rob said he never notices or thinks about breath, so it all just depends on our tendencies. Most precious of all are the moments of right understanding of a reality - whether that be the thinking, attachment, a tangible object or any other dhamma at this or any other time. ... R:>This is interesting - how the breath was an object for developing samatha in ancient times, but that breath as object for vipassana was unique to the Buddha. This accords with my understanding of that history. .... S: Yes. It's an important point to be clear on, otherwise some people think that anapanasati as object of samatha only developed with the Buddha's teachings. Metta Sarah ======== #111911 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[d] sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, [d] ... >S: ...If one sits or lies down, wishing to reflect on breath or attempting to understand it, the lobha at such times can never understand wholesome states. ... R:> This suggests that one can never select breath as object with kusala understanding. .... S: anatta - no dhamma can ever be selected fullstop! Conditioned cittas only. ... >R:Given that, is K. Sujin saying that one will only reflect on the breath as an object of samatha if it happens to be noticed in the course of daily life? So there is no systematic development of samatha, no practice. Is it totally arbitrary? .... S: Nothing is arbitrary. Conditions again. Like the piano playing - there's a 'systematic development", but only by conditioned cittas, cetasikas and rupas. Just forget the idea of Self doing anything. If one tries to notice the breath of tries to think about breath or death in order to develop samatha, definitely it's lobha, atttachment to certain results, conditioned by the latent tendency of di.t.thi, as I understand. ... >R:If so, this is quite different than the Buddha's instruction to "go to the root of a tree and practice jhana" which he said quite explicitly. Can you explain the contradiction? I don't see how breath as object can be especially useful if one waits to notice it here or there for a moment here or a moment there. .... S: As has been explained, the monks were already at the roots of the trees and the Buddha was encouraging the development of samatha and satipatthana up to full enlightenment. He praised what was kusala. He didn't say that any Self should do anything. If there isn't patience to understand what is conditioned now, there will never be any development of either kind of bhavana! .... >S: Only panna knows what the right object is at the present moment. ... R:> So any series of objects could be subject of samatha an a particular moment and there is no order to the development of samatha, it is just this or that at a given moment...? .... S: Yes, it all depends on conditions and accumulations. We don't know what there might be wise reflection on next: it may be some aspect of the Dhamma teachings, it may be on one's attachment to colour, it may be on the foulness of the body, the hardness of the computer. It just depends. I never think about what it "should" be. ... Metta Sarah ======== #111912 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 3, no. 2. nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 15-nov-2010, om 9:09 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > The same is asked in the case of breathing with regard to > > bodily function, kĺyasa.nkhĺra and verbal function, vaccisa.nkhĺra: > > when for the person who is breathing in and out this bodily function > > arises, does also the verbal function arises? [2] > ..... > S: If we translate vaccisa.nkhaara as "verbal function", it may not > be clear. However, if we understand kaayasa.nkhaara as breath > (which maintains the body) and vaciisa.nkhaara as vitakka and > vicara specifically (without these, there cannot be speech), it may > be clearer. What do you think? ------ N: Yes, I also took this to be vitakka and vicara. There is also breathing when seeing which is without vitakka and vicara, but I still have to think about this. Nina. #111913 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[e] sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, [e] .... >S: 2. Breath as object of satipatthana ... R:>Is this saying that satipatthana with breath as object at the nosetip is reserved for sotapannas? ... S: Very skilfully as referred to in the texts, reserved for anagamis and arahats without attachment. Even worldlings can develop satipatthana with rupas of breath as object as I just wrote. If there's any intention, wish or trying to be aware of this object, no detachment, no satipatthana for sure. ... >S: ...Heat, cold, hardness, softness, pressure (taken for breath ordinarily) may appear, just like any other tangible object. They all fall away instantly. When there is right understanding, it grows, otherwise, there's no way to become detached, if there's any selection of objects at all. ... ... R:>I am a little confused by the above. First it is suggested that the various rupas associated with breath may be a good object for the ordinary person to regard with awareness to develop satipatthana. That is the way I understand mindfulness of breathing - being aware of direct sensations/rupas of the breath. Then K. Sujin goes on to say that "...there's no way to become detached, if there's any selection of objects at all..." So can the breath be followed to develop satipatthana through the rupas taken for breath, or not? Or is that too much of an intentional selection of rupas? ... S: No, the breath cannot be followed to develop any satipatthana. As you this, this is intentional selection, no kusala at all. It's 'wishing to have' a particular object. ... >S: So, there can be awareness of breath now, or rather, those rupas commonly taken for breath. It just depends on conditions what appears and on the understanding at what level and whether there is any samatha or satipatthana development. It's a test of panna - to have such understanding or not. ... R:>Seems like she is saying that if one is developed to the point of being ready to develop satipatthana with breathing, then one will naturally start attending the rupas that are associated with/taken for the breath, and there will be a natural arising of more consistent noting of these rupas. Is that correct? ... S: More or less, but no "noting" involved. It's just the direct understanding of what appears, whether it be any tangible object or any other dhamma. If temperature appears now as an object of satipatthana, there's no concern, interest or thought about whether it's breath, computer or anything else. There is complete detachment from what appears. > ***** >S: The Buddha taught us to develop satipatthana and understand different dhammas appearing in daily life, without any selection, as anatta. ... R:> So in the main, satipatthana is developed through understanding the dhammas that come to attention naturally in daily life, and see them as anatta. ... S: Yes, whatever appears - just a dhamma, no 'thing', no 'breath', no 'atta' in it. No selection at all. This is the only path the Buddha taught that leads to enlightenment and the eradication of defilements. ... Metta Sarah p.s I'll look forward to reading any of your or anyone else's comments, but as we're travelling and I have a huge backlog of unanswered posts, I may not be able to discuss further for now. ======== #111914 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] MN131 & The 3 Characteristics in Context sarahprocter... Hi Antony, --- On Sat, 13/11/10, antony272b2 wrote: >I'm beginning to understand Majjhima 131 and 133. I prefer Nanananda's translations: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanananda/wheel188.html ... [S: you need to quote any short extracts if you want me to look at them!) ... >I used to worry that most of my mental life thinking about past, present and future was being criticized by the Buddha and Ven Mahakaccana. .... S: They helped us to understand the realities of life - understanding, not criticizing! Isn't it true that most of the day we're lost in ideas about what's gone, what may come and what's occurring now? ... >Then I noticed that they focus on the five clinging-aggregates and six sense bases respectively which are different ways of classifying dukkha or suffering. What I think they are telling us is not to feed on and identify with the dukkha of the past, present and future. .... S: I think they're telling us that because of ignorance and attachment, the khandhas and ayatanas are not understood - as fleeting, conditioned dhammas, not worth being fed on! ... >We can't stop feeding straightaway, first we need to eat more healthy food, taking the Three Characteristics in context i.e. thinking about past, present and future of things that are relatively long-term (vs. anicca), satisfying (vs. dukkha) and under our control (vs. anatta) e.g. faith, generosity, virtue, samadhi and discernment. See: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/change.html .... S: I think the only healthy food is the direct understanding of the present reality now. What's gone has gone completely, the future hasn't come. It's only by understanding the presently appearing dhammas that eventually the 3 characteristics of those dhammas will be understood. If we have any idea at all of what we should do, what we should think, what we should study, it's atta again. ... >The Buddha taught Recollection of Generosity (caganussati), Recollection of Virtue (silanussati) and Recollection of Peace. The Recollection of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha are recommended to arouse long-term, satisfying and stable faith. In Majjhima 61 the Buddha taught Rahula to reflect on his bodily, verbal and mental actions past, present and future. >I suspect that the main criticism of the above will be that faith, generosity, virtue, samadhi and discernment are completely anicca, dukkha and anatta. I look forward to constructive criticism. .... S: My main concern with what you write is that there seems to be an idea of purposely determining what to recollect, in other words, an attachment, a view that certain subjects should be selected. Is there any detachment from what is experienced at such times? Metta Sarah ====== #111915 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi James, Op 14-nov-2010, om 5:01 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > My understanding, based on the Vism. and the suttas, is that the > path is: morality leads to concentration/tranquility which leads to > insight/wisdom. ------- N: Siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa. A complex subject that can be seen from different aspects. This was discussed many times before on dsg. When we think of the ariyans, it is said that the sotaapanna has accomplished siila (no more transgressing the five precepts, no more bad deeds that could lead to an unhappy rebirth), the anaagaami has accomplished samaadhi (clinging to sense objects has been eradicated), and the arahat has accomplished wisdom (ignorance has been eradicated). We may repeat siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa and then they are merely words. They are realities each with their own characteristic. There has to be kusala citta for the observing of siila and it arises because of conditions. When we have listened to the Dhamma and see the value of siila there are conditions for its arising. It is just a dhamma, not self. It does not always arise whenever we want it to, it is beyond control. We have to learn to see it as 'just a dhamma'. It is the same for concentration, this has to be right concentration, arising with kusala citta, and it is beyond control, not self. It does not always arise whenever we want it to. There may be many discussions, many dilemmas: is there a certain order of siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa? But when we have understood that there are just dhammas arising because of their own conditions, not because we want them to arise in a certain order, there need not be any dilemmas. When there is right understanding and right mindfulness of a naama or ruupa there are at that moment: higher siila, higher citta (concentration) and higher pa~n~naa. When we consider the Path factors, and there is an opportunity for abstention from akusala, there are at the same time the factor which is siila, the factors which are samaadhi and the factors which are the wisdom of the eightfold Path. They all develop together. You and I think differently about the above matters, and it is not James or Nina who are thinking. There are mere cittas and cetasikas arising because of their own conditions. There are only dhammas, no persons who think. -------- Nina. #111916 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) sarahprocter... Hi James, Thx for your comments, helpful to reflect on... > >J:No one is going to automatically and/or naturally go to the foot of a tree, sit, and start practicing anapanasati unless that person is a bodhisatta on the path to sammabuddha!! > ... > S: Or has developed anapanasati as an object of jhana, for example. > > All according to our tendencies, just like we see here:) > >James: What I meant is that the Buddha wasn't "describing" a monk who has the natural tendencies to go to the foot of a tree, sit cross-legged, and develop anapanasati. Why? Because there is only one monk in existence who has the natural tendency to do that- the Buddha himself!! Only a sammabuddha, a self-awakened one, has the natural tendency to sit in a secluded spot and develop anapanasati to jhana and then to enlightenment. All others must be taught by the Buddha how to do it; they don't have the natural tendency to do it. They must purposefully follow the Buddha's example. Don't you agree with this? This is basic Buddhism. .... S: There were many who had developed anapanasati to jhana without the Buddha's assistance. No one then or even now could develop satipatthana, let alone become enlightened without the Buddha's assistance. For those who had developed samatha up to jhana, I think it was natural for them to sit at the foot of the tree, cross-legged and attend to breath. For others at the time, who had not attained jhana, I think it was also natural for them to sit amongst the trees, cross-legged and develop samatha and satipatthana. For anyone who had understood what the Buddha had taught on satipatthana, it would be of no consequence to their practice whether they were sitting like this with breath as an object or performing any other duties of the monks. They understood that it was a path of detachment and any reality could be known at anytime. Just my take... ... >James: Life is fine with me here in Taiwan. Yeah, it has been a long time since we met up. Where in the world are you guys now? ... S: Right now, in Hong Kong where Jon still has some work....for a week or two..:) Metta Sarah ====== #111917 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How to give up smoking? sarahprocter... Hi Sarah C, --- On Sun, 14/11/10, SARAH CONNELL wrote: >I totally agree with Howard. "cold turkey" is in the final analysis the easier way and I believe the surest way. As to alcohol it happened in '85 and as to smoking it happened in '91. May you be well and happy and always smiling, ... S: Lovely to see another Sarah! Why not introduce yourself a little? Meanwhile, welcome to DSG! Metta Sarah A =========== #111918 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: On Views, Snp4.5 sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sun, 14/11/10, truth_aerator wrote: >So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on. "...he does not seek a support even in knowledge" "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html >This part seems to refer to an Arahant if not a sekha. .... S: No wrong views, no attachment of any kind. The highest or samma di.t.thi however. Metta Sarah ===== #111919 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Sun, 14/11/10, truth_aerator wrote: >A:Do you say that purity comes in connection with, and holding the >right views? > ... > S: Yes "Not on account of his views, learning, or knowledge do the skilled here, Nanda, call one a sage. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.07.than.html An attainer-of-wisdom isn't measured made proud by views or what's thought, for he isn't fashioned of them. He wouldn't be led by action, learning; doesn't reach a conclusion in any entrenchments. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.09.than.html#fn-1 "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html .... S: No wrong views, but plenty of right view as I said. ... >A: Note: "Do I not exist" and "the view 'I have no self'" are >considered to be unbeneficial... > ... > S: Yes, because they are all sakkaya ditthi. No ommision. >A:So "self doesn't exist" (what 'I have no self' boils down to) is a sakkaya ditthi? .... S: As Howard explained, "I have" anything is sakkaya ditthi - no "I". On right view bringing purity, see Nina's Sangiiti post # 111561. "The commentary and Tiika explain the reasons. Pa~n~naa is the condition for all otehr kinds of kusala, it purifies from defilements and it gives brightness and pervasion. It illuminates the darkness of ignorance so that the truth of all realities can be realized. Pa~n~naa is one of the perfetions and through pa~n~naa all the other perfections are fulfilled. The perfections lead to the other shore, to nibbaana." "The treasure of pa~n~naa is the best of all (sabbase.t.tha.m)." Metta Sarah ======== #111920 From: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:15 pm Subject: New file uploaded to dhammastudygroup dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the dhammastudygroup group. File : /The Origin of Buddhist Meditation.pdf Uploaded by : buddhatrue Description : The Origin of Buddhist Meditation You can access this file at the URL: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/The%20Origin%20of%20Buddhis\ t%20Meditation.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit: http://help.yahoo.com/l/us/yahoo/groups/original/members/forms/general.htmlfiles Regards, buddhatrue #111921 From: "James" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:22 pm Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi James, > > Thx for your comments, helpful to reflect on... > > > >J:No one is going to automatically and/or naturally go to the foot of a tree, sit, and start practicing anapanasati unless that person is a bodhisatta on the path to sammabuddha!! > > ... > > S: Or has developed anapanasati as an object of jhana, for example. > > > > All according to our tendencies, just like we see here:) > > > > >James: What I meant is that the Buddha wasn't "describing" a monk who has the natural tendencies to go to the foot of a tree, sit cross-legged, and develop anapanasati. Why? Because there is only one monk in existence who has the natural tendency to do that- the Buddha himself!! Only a sammabuddha, a self-awakened one, has the natural tendency to sit in a secluded spot and develop anapanasati to jhana and then to enlightenment. All others must be taught by the Buddha how to do it; they don't have the natural tendency to do it. They must purposefully follow the Buddha's example. Don't you agree with this? This is basic Buddhism. > .... > S: There were many who had developed anapanasati to jhana without the Buddha's assistance. No one then or even now could develop satipatthana, let alone become enlightened without the Buddha's assistance. > > For those who had developed samatha up to jhana, I think it was natural for them to sit at the foot of the tree, cross-legged and attend to breath. For others at the time, who had not attained jhana, I think it was also natural for them to sit amongst the trees, cross-legged and develop samatha and satipatthana. > > For anyone who had understood what the Buddha had taught on satipatthana, it would be of no consequence to their practice whether they were sitting like this with breath as an object or performing any other duties of the monks. They understood that it was a path of detachment and any reality could be known at anytime. > > Just my take... > ... I have uploaded a well-researched book to the files section which contradicts most of what you claim here. First, no one other than the Buddha practiced anapansati to the level of jhana. Additionally, no one other than the Buddha practiced any form of satipatthana. It is only a Buddha who can discover those two forms of meditation, no one else. The types of meditation practiced by Brahmins and Jains during the Buddha's time period was completely different, and not at all like what you suggest above. Read the book and find out. Metta, James #111922 From: "James" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 1:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 14-nov-2010, om 5:01 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > > My understanding, based on the Vism. and the suttas, is that the > > path is: morality leads to concentration/tranquility which leads to > > insight/wisdom. > ------- > N: Siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa. A complex subject that can be seen > from different aspects. This was discussed many times before on dsg. > When we think of the ariyans, it is said that the sotaapanna has > accomplished siila (no more transgressing the five precepts, no more > bad deeds that could lead to an unhappy rebirth), the anaagaami has > accomplished samaadhi (clinging to sense objects has been > eradicated), and the arahat has accomplished wisdom (ignorance has > been eradicated). > We may repeat siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa and then they are merely > words. They are realities each with their own characteristic. There > has to be kusala citta for the observing of siila and it arises > because of conditions. When we have listened to the Dhamma and see > the value of siila there are conditions for its arising. It is just a > dhamma, not self. It does not always arise whenever we want it to, it > is beyond control. We have to learn to see it as 'just a dhamma'. It > is the same for concentration, this has to be right concentration, > arising with kusala citta, and it is beyond control, not self. It > does not always arise whenever we want it to. > There may be many discussions, many dilemmas: is there a certain > order of siila, samaadhi and pa~n~naa? But when we have understood > that there are just dhammas arising because of their own conditions, > not because we want them to arise in a certain order, there need not > be any dilemmas. > When there is right understanding and right mindfulness of a naama or > ruupa there are at that moment: higher siila, higher citta > (concentration) and higher pa~n~naa. > > When we consider the Path factors, and there is an opportunity for > abstention from akusala, there are at the same time the factor which > is siila, the factors which are samaadhi and the factors which are > the wisdom of the eightfold Path. They all develop together. > > You and I think differently about the above matters, and it is not > James or Nina who are thinking. There are mere cittas and cetasikas > arising because of their own conditions. There are only dhammas, no > persons who think. > I appreciate your response but I just can't follow your train of thought. I was writing to you in a conventional sense and you have replied to me in an ultimate sense, and the result is no sense....at least to me. :-) Metta, James #111923 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 3:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi James, Op 15-nov-2010, om 14:26 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > I appreciate your response but I just can't follow your train of > thought. I was writing to you in a conventional sense and you have > replied to me in an ultimate sense, and the result is no > sense....at least to me. :-) ------- N: The ultimate sense does not contradict conventional sense but it helps us to understand more deeply what is said in conventional sense. It goes to the root of the subject matter. In conventional language we say: I see, a person sees. But actually, in the ultimate sense the seeing sees, a citta sees. Seeing is a moment of consciousness, citta. It arises because of visible object and eyesense. Without these there would not be seeing. This helps to understand the Buddha's teaching of anattaa, non-self. Seeing is really and truly anattaa. Nina. #111924 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > The Buddha's purpose in mentioning postures and daily-life situations was to teach us the right place and time for practising satipatthana. > > The practice itself was to have right-mindfulness of a conditioned dhamma that was arising at that place and time. What I appreciate about this is that you have given a specific and coherent explanation of your view in this case. I would be interested in your extrapolation on how different "postures and different life situations" provide the setting for us to understand "the right place and time for practicing satipatthana." How does one understand these postures and life-situations as settings for satipatthana? And how does the Buddha's discussion set the stage for understanding this? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111925 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:26 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > It is the same with calm: this is the citta without defilements. > Cultivating calm: right understanding is indispensable: it must be > known whether at this very moment the citta is kusala or akusala. > Calm is not feeling relaxed, feeling calm. That kind of calm is > likely to be with lobha. The moment of citta has to be known precisely. I can understand that sometimes a person could feel calm but this could be akusala. For instance, a certain kind of calm could be "sloth and torpor" but feel fine to the person at the moment. However, I find it harder to entertain the idea that "calm" is something "other than calm," something that cannot be described...? I don't accept the idea that calm could be some odd cetasika that has nothing to do with being calm, but is some other completely different category of experience. If there is "good calm" and "bad calm" it would be good to have a description, as I have suggested above with "sloth and torpor," of what good calm is like and what bad calm is like. How can seeming calm really be akusala? What makes a truly calm state the "right" kind of calm to foster the path? What is it like? It seems to me that when Buddha talked about samatha he was talking about a real state of calm, peacefulness, equanimity, and that he intended this state of being at peace to foster further factors of the path. I would like to know how you see this kind of positive peacefulness developing, and what are its characteristics. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111926 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:28 pm Subject: Re: Vis. Ch XIV on one file? epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > pt: On that topic very dear to me, and in case you didn't know already, i just found out recently that Coles makes an excellent chocolate mud cake. It's like $4 on special for 500g, but it's really good. So, though I've been slacking off on dsg lately, at least I've been working properly on getting diabetes :) That is something we can all aspire towards. P.S. - You are making me hungry. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = #111927 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep epsteinrob Hi Sukin. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Herman, do you think that by "sheer coincidence" the Buddha actually > means "without cause or condition" rather than simply "very rare and > improbable"? (I don't think so. If there is one thing besides anatta the Buddha is > known for, it is his teaching on conditionality, isn't it?) Strange that Buddha would say something like this then, and leave it to chance that people would misunderstand him. I think it is hard to say why such contradictions exist in the records of his talks. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111928 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How to give up smoking? epsteinrob Hi Lukas and Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Lukas - > > In a message dated 11/14/2010 3:32:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, > szmicio@... writes: > > Dear friends > How to give up smoking? > -------------------------------------- > By "cold turkey." That is what worked for me years ago in stopping > smoking, and only that. Likewise for ceasing alcohol consumption. I used to > love good beer and good wine and Drambouie (sp?) and white russians and Long > Island ice teas, and Southern Comfort, etc, but I "stopped cold" years ago > and never started again, because I saw the value in abstention. Some > things need to be done AT ONCE. > ------------------------------------- I would agree. Nicotine has a very strong pull both physically and psychologically, and if you let them linger they will drag you back into the habit. It is a stronger addiction I understand than heroin in terms of pure physical dependence. The rituals around smoke and inhaling and the combination with other activities is really pernicious and difficult to get used to doing without. I stopped smoking many years ago, and I think I would be dead [at least this body :-) ] if I hadn't stopped. I was so psychologically upset about stopping that I was depressed for a year and didn't feel like doing anything. I wandered around with my friends but didn't participate much. Then one day the cloud lifted and a few years later I came to hate and despise tobacco. It shows you how arbitrary these attachments are. The "attachment" is the main attachment, and it has transferred over the years to food and green tea, which are now just as pleasurable as tobacco used to be, but stopping is extremely hard. I fooled myself into continuing the habit by partially stopping and telling myself I could just have "one a day" and other nonsense. In the end I had to understand psychologically that I could never smoke again ever, and come to terms with that, before physically stopping was possible. Be around people for support, get through the first few weeks of discomfort, then find a substitute habit - like watching sexy kung fu movies! ;-) Best, Robert E. P.S. I found yoga very helpful when I was stopping smoking. Focusing on the pleasant qualities of the natural breath and getting to enjoy that and extending it instead of inhaling smoke really helped quite a bit. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #111929 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 5:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Sukin. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > Herman, do you think that by "sheer coincidence" the Buddha actually > > means "without cause or condition" rather than simply "very rare and > > improbable"? (I don't think so. If there is one thing besides anatta the Buddha is > > known for, it is his teaching on conditionality, isn't it?) Sorry, I think this may have been your comment and not Sukin's...? Best, Robert E. [[> Strange that Buddha would say something like this then, and leave it to chance that people would misunderstand him. I think it is hard to say why such contradictions exist in the records of his talks.]] = = = = = = = #111930 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Calm. Was: should one try one's best? nilovg Dear Rob E, I quote Vis. Ch XIV. Perhaps this answers your Q? Op 15-nov-2010, om 18:26 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > If there is "good calm" and "bad calm" it would be good to have a > description, as I have suggested above with "sloth and torpor," of > what good calm is like and what bad calm is like. How can seeming > calm really be akusala? What makes a truly calm state the "right" > kind of calm to foster the path? What is it like? > > It seems to me that when Buddha talked about samatha he was talking > about a real state of calm, peacefulness, equanimity, and that he > intended this state of being at peace to foster further factors of > the path. I would like to know how you see this kind of positive > peacefulness developing, and what are its characteristics. --------- The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV, 144. Intro: In the following paragraphs, the Visuddhimagga deals with six pairs of sobhana cetasikas that arise with each sobhana citta. Of each pair one cetasika is a quality pertaining to the accompanying cetasikas (kaaya or the mental body), and one a quality pertaining to citta. They perform their functions so that kusala citta and cetasikas can apply themselves to daana, siila or bhaavana. They are indispensable for the performing of kusala, they support the kusala citta, each in their own way. The first pair is tranquillity of body, kaaya-passaddhi, and tranquillity of citta, citta-passaddhi. Tranquillity or calm is not only necessary for samatha, but it has to accompany each kusala citta. Calm is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca, which prevents the arising of kusala citta. When there are conditions for kusala citta, calm performs its function while it accompanies kusala citta. There is no need to aim for calm first as a condition for kusala citta. It arises already when kusala citta arises. The Commentary to the ‘Abhidhammattha Sangaha’ (T.A. p 64) mentions that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: *** Text Vis. : (xvi)-(xvii) The tranquilizing of the body is 'tranquility of the body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the calming of anxiety. It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a group, and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (sańńaa) and the formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used. Text Vis.: But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the body and of consciousness. N: The Tiika refers here to anger or impetuosity (saarambho). This is a term for the defilements of restlessness etc. which are a condition for unpleasant feeling. Restlessness or agitation accompanies each akusala citta. Worry or regret, kukkucca, arises together with citta rooted in dosa, and this is accompanied by unpleasant feeling. At the moment of dosa-muulacitta one is disturbed and anxious, not calm. But tranquillity quiets such disturbances or anxieties. Text Vis.: Their function is to crush disturbance of the [mental] body and of consciousness. They are manifested as inactivity and coolness of the [mental] body and consciousness. N: Kaaya passadhi, calm of body, has the function of calming cetasikas, and citta passadhi has the function of calming citta. The Tiika explains that by crushing disturbance they are manifested as being unwavering, without agitation and as coolness. Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements of agitation, etc., which cause unpeacefulness in the [mental] body and in consciousness. N: As to the expression the defilements of agitation, etc., the Tiika explains these as the defilements with agitation or restlessness (uddhacca) as the foremost, or, that all defilements to begin with restlessness are included. **** When one performs daana which also includes the appreciation of someone else’s kusala, there are calm of citta and cetasikas. One is not disturbed by stinginess or jealousy, defilements that are accompanied by unpleasant feeling. When one observes siila, one is not disturbed by remorse, there is calm. In samatha calm is developed to a high degree so that jhaana can be attained. Calm suppresses the hindrances and it is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca. The aim of samatha is to be free from sense impressions that are bound up with defilements. Right understanding is necssary for the development of calm, there has to be precise understanding of the characteristic of calm so that it is known when kusala citta with calm arises and when there is attachment to calm. There is also calm in the development of insight. When there is right understanding of naama and ruupa, the six doors are guarded at that moment. One is not disturbed by unwholesome thoughts about persons and situations when right understanding of dhammas is developed, one begins to see them as impersonal elements devoid of self. Calm is one of the factors of enlightenment. As right understanding develops, the enlightenment factor of calm develops as well. Insight leads to the eradication of defilements. The arahat has reached the highest calm that cannot be disturbed anymore by defilements. ***** Nina. #111931 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 4:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 11/15/2010 12:40:41 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Sukin. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@ wrote: > > > Herman, do you think that by "sheer coincidence" the Buddha actually > > means "without cause or condition" rather than simply "very rare and > > improbable"? (I don't think so. If there is one thing besides anatta the Buddha is > > known for, it is his teaching on conditionality, isn't it?) Sorry, I think this may have been your comment and not Sukin's...? --------------------------------------- Yeah, it was mine. (No problem. Er, none for me, that is, but maybe for Sukin! ;-) ------------------------------------- Best, Robert E. [[> Strange that Buddha would say something like this then, and leave it to chance that people would misunderstand him. I think it is hard to say why such contradictions exist in the records of his talks.]] ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependency /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #111932 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:36 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: On Views, Snp4.5 truth_aerator Hi Sarah, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > --- On Sun, 14/11/10, truth_aerator wrote: > >So by views you mean only the wrong views? While this strained interpretation is possible for first few sentences, it is refuted later on. > > "...he does not seek a support even in knowledge" > "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html > > >This part seems to refer to an Arahant if not a sekha. > .... > S: No wrong views, no attachment of any kind. The highest or samma di.t.thi however. > > Metta > > Sarah > ===== > Why didn't the Buddha specifically mentioned Wrong views, but simply stated "views"? Are you saying that an Arahant is identified with right views? With metta, Alex #111933 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) truth_aerator Hi Sarah, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Alex, > > --- On Sun, 14/11/10, truth_aerator wrote: > >A:Do you say that purity comes in connection with, and holding the >right views? > > ... > > S: Yes > > "Not on account of his views, learning, or knowledge do the skilled here, Nanda, call one a sage. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.5.07.than.html > > An attainer-of-wisdom isn't measured made proud by views or what's thought, for he isn't fashioned of them. He wouldn't be led by action, learning; doesn't reach a conclusion in any entrenchments. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.09.than.html#fn-1 > > "That brahmana who does not grasp at a view, with what could he be identified in the world? "They do not speculate nor pursue (any notion); doctrines are not accepted by them. A (true) brahmana is beyond, does not fall back on views."" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.4.05.irel.html > .... > S: No wrong views, but plenty of right view as I said. > ... > > >A: Note: "Do I not exist" and "the view 'I have no self'" are >considered to be unbeneficial... > > ... > > S: Yes, because they are all sakkaya ditthi. No ommision. > > >A:So "self doesn't exist" (what 'I have no self' boils down to) is a sakkaya ditthi? > .... > S: As Howard explained, "I have" anything is sakkaya ditthi - no "I". > > On right view bringing purity, see Nina's Sangiiti post # 111561. > > "The commentary and Tiika explain the reasons. Pa~n~naa is the condition for all otehr kinds of kusala, it purifies from defilements and it gives brightness and pervasion. It illuminates the darkness of ignorance so that the truth of all realities can be realized. Pa~n~naa is one of the perfetions and through pa~n~naa all the other perfections are fulfilled. The perfections lead to the other shore, to nibbaana." > > "The treasure of pa~n~naa is the best of all (sabbase.t.tha.m)." > > Metta > > Sarah > ======== > Are you saying that Arahant depends on panna? Does arahant cling to panna? Does Arahant hold panna "to be best of all"? With metta, Alex #111934 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 11:38 pm Subject: Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[a] epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > ...Isn't it sobering, calming, when we reflect wisely? I like this idea, and agree that a moment of wise reflection on death or breath can be sobering and calming. I can relate to your example. However, I would distinguish between the sobering aspect of this, and the calming aspect. The "wise reflection" is not the same as the "calm," and I also find it difficult to accept the idea that "wise reflection" is the main method for development of samatha, as opposed to a more yogic approach to the breath as described by Buddha himself in the anapanasati sutta. When Buddha goes into somewhat physicalistic detail about the series of skillful ways that the breath is to be regarded in anapanasati, he is making clear a very specific program for development of sati and samatha. I hate to ignore his very specific instructions for a momentary development of samatha is much more arbitrary and more general. While such general reflection can be quite profound, the development of samatha through systematic regard for the physical sensation and use of the breath, which you must be quite familiar with on a parallel track with yoga, is more profound, as it is more systematic. This idea that samatha can only come in isolated moments, when Buddha's idea for it is obviously much more sustained and systematic, seems like a torturing of the obvious way to develop samatha in favor of something that is philosophically ordained, but skewed in practice. How can one isolated moment or two or three or twenty of samatha based on general reflection of the concept of death or breath as a conceptual root of life, be anything like the effectiveness of systematic development of samatha by actually working with the breath. As in your example below, one may or may not be inclined to play the piano regularly enough to create music, but even if one is so inclined, doing a bit of casual piano playing when you feel like it will also not lead to becoming a skilled piano player. Only sitting down and practicing regularly and systematically will do this, and we all know that this can be done, despite the possible non-existence of pianos and piano-players in absolute reality. Similarly with samatha, the real development of deep calm and peacefulness for sustained periods of time that lead to a real sustained wholesome experience of samatha, and potentially leading to even deeper sustained peaceful states in jhana, cannot arise arbitrarily and must be cultivated systematically. Buddha says: "Mindfulness of in-&-out breath, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit." ... "Breathing in long, he discerns that he is breathing in long; or breathing out long, he discerns that he is breathing out long. Or breathing in short, he discerns that he is breathing in short; or breathing out short, he discerns that he is breathing out short." "He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to the entire body, and to breathe out sensitive to the entire body. He trains himself to breathe in calming the bodily processes, and to breathe out calming the bodily processes." Buddha says to train oneself to breathe in and out, calming the bodily processes. This is the development of samatha by attending the breath, and working with the breath. It goes on from development of samatha to development of jhana factors: "He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to rapture, and to breathe out sensitive to rapture. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to pleasure, and to breathe out sensitive to pleasure. He trains himself to breathe in sensitive to mental processes, and to breathe out sensitive to mental processes. He trains himself to breathe in calming mental processes, and to breathe out calming mental processes." Here is a deeper level of development of samatha/jhana. Previously he calmed bodily processes, now he calms mental processes. If you look at the actions inbetween, there is a systematic succession of techniques with mindful observation of breath as its foundation, leading to deeper calm and peacefulness. This has little in common, in depth, duration or quality, with the profound but casual coming upon reflection on breath as concept that we encounter in the midst of ordinary everyday life. Buddha is saying to observe the breath as concrete key to deeper states of consciousness, by following the rupas of the breath, not the concept. Long and short breath are observations of movement, pressure, etc. - they are known through rupas. Bodily fabrications are known through rupas. And it develops from there, but is a concrete process of perceiving the breath as rupa or nama. The idea that Buddha is ever saying to develop breath as everyday life concept seems quite contradictory to these instructions, and this pathway. > As I mentioned to Pt, I find this kind of reflection very natural during the day. Some people said they never, ever reflected on breath - so just depends on accumumulations. When there is more and more wise reflection on an object, such as breath or death, it is the development of samatha, more than just the occasional momentary wise reflection. I cannot see the idea that more and more wise reflection *is* samatha. Wise reflection may lead to calm, and continued wise reflection may lead to deeper calm, but there wise reflection is not synonymous with calm. Calm is calm, and is cultivated by calming actions and their cultivation. Wise reflection may develop a certain degree of samatha. According to Buddha, working with the breath to develop samatha leads to the deepest calm, and leads to satipatthana and the development of the enlightenment factors through deepening the perception and work with the breath. > Just like the occasional touching of the piano keys is not piano playing, but if > there are conditions to play more so that one begins to play melodies, then it is piano playing. That is the beginning of something that could be called piano playing, but is by no means its completed development, which is only attained through - usually arduous - practice. > It's the panna that is the key (no pun intended!) in the case of the development of samatha. So in playing the "piano keys" it is "panna that is the key" and you say "no pun intended?" I find that equally hard to contemplate! ;-) In fact it's an excellent pun. So I'll just say: "Well played!" Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111935 From: "James" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:10 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Hi James, > Op 15-nov-2010, om 14:26 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > > > I appreciate your response but I just can't follow your train of > > thought. I was writing to you in a conventional sense and you have > > replied to me in an ultimate sense, and the result is no > > sense....at least to me. :-) > ------- > N: The ultimate sense does not contradict conventional sense but it > helps us to understand more deeply what is said in conventional > sense. It goes to the root of the subject matter. > In conventional language we say: I see, a person sees. But actually, > in the ultimate sense the seeing sees, a citta sees. Seeing is a > moment of consciousness, citta. It arises because of visible object > and eyesense. Without these there would not be seeing. This helps to > understand the Buddha's teaching of anattaa, non-self. Seeing is > really and truly anattaa. > The problem is that I was describing a method of training, a method that is detailed in the Vism. The Path of Purification in conventional terms. That method of training is: morality-->concentration-->tranquility-->insight. Now, when you start saying that in ultimate terms there is no first, second, third, etc. That all path factors arise at once, etc. Well, that just muddies up the entire method of training, and it makes communication between you and I impossible. Metta, James #111936 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Nov 15, 2010 10:28 pm Subject: The Burning Five! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 5 Clusters are Burning on Ignorance! The Blessed Buddha once explained: Friends, form is burning, feeling is burning, perception is burning, mental constructions are burning, and consciousness itself is burning... Burning with what? Burning with Greed. Burning with Hate. Burning with Ignorance. Burning with rebirth. Burning with ageing. Burning with decay. Burning with sickness & pain. Burning with death. I tell you: Burning with Suffering! Understanding this fully, friends, the learned Noble Disciple is disgusted with all form, feeling, perception, and with all constructions! He is disgusted even with consciousness! The experience of that disgust, brings disillusion and disenchantment. Through this disillusion, the mind is completely released! When it is liberated, then this assurance appears: "This mind is fully and irreversible freed" and one instantly understands: The rebirth process is now ended, this Noble Life have been completed, done is what should be done, there is no state beyond this... <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya 22:61 III 71 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 _/\_ * <...> #111937 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 6:35 am Subject: Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[b] epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > [b] > ... > >S: 1. Breath as object of samatha: > > > > First of all, we must stress that the cittas must be kusala and arise with understanding, if it is the development of samatha (calm). When breath is the object, it is a concept of breath only, a pannatti or nimitta, not the paramattha dhamma. > ... > R:>So the kusala cittas are both understanding the nimita or pannati/concept of breath. Is this the same as the wise reflection on the role of the breath? Or is this a more direct reflection on the presence of the breath itself, albeit as concept? > .... > S: It doesn't matter - more likely to be wise reflection when breath is apparent, but really, just depends on conditions and rt understanding as to when there is wise reflection. Most people who do lots of yoga or jogging, with lots of breath apparent, don't have any/much wise reflection at all. In any case, it's always a concept of breath as object. It would seem to me that if one is in the habit of observing the breath with a degree of mindfulness, that this will tend to focus on the breath as experience rather than concept. Rather than thinking about the breath - wisely or otherwise - one would be inclined to experience the movement, smoothness, rapidity, longness/shortness, inner lung-inner body sensation, etc., which would be more or less of an experience of rupa. Although it might not be direct, it would not need reflection as much as mindful perception that is appreciative of the experiential quality of the breath. Even though the rupas of the breath as they pass might only be experienced as nimita, or even as concept of the rupas, it would still be pointing towards a direct experience of the breath as experiential rupas, rather than as concept. I think this is what Buddha had in mind, by my reading of the suttas, rather than a reflective experience *about* the breath, or about the meaning of the breath. > >S: There can be wise reflection, sati sampajanna, on how life at this moment depends on breath. This helps us to have less attachment to other things or possessions. As I've mentioned, I find it useful to reflect on how life and all we hold dear depends on this very in and out-breath. Without breath there'd be no life at all. The moments of calm have to be understood, otherwise it doesn't make sense. > ... > R:> Noting that in K. Sujin's description above, there is none of the traditional idea of calming the breath/body/fabrications directly by concentration on the breath in the moment, ie, in the meditative way we would think of calming the breath and body. In the suttas Buddha says that the meditator observes the breath and "calms fabrications." So there is a sense in the suttas that the concentration on the breath with sati brings the calming of the breath, body and mind. > .... > S: When we concentrate on the breath and it slows down, for example, I think the predominant factor is lobha, which seems very pleasant and peaceful at such a time. This is why people would like to continue such a practice. I don't hear of much wise consideration or understanding at such times, but of course, we can only know for ourselves. Trying to concentrate, trying to calm the breath would definitely be lobha. I think it is possible that there are two separate qualities being mashed together here. You are saying that it is not real calm, real samatha, unless it has the ingredient of wise reflection. The element of wise reflection has a mental quality of contemplating the meaning of the experience, which seems to me to be related to mindfulness, if not directly having to do with mindfulness, but of other cetasikas that have to do with understanding, of which mindfulness may be the doorway. It seems like mindfulness, wise consideration, contemplation of anatta and dukkha, vittaka - my personal favorite - and other kusala mental qualities, are not necessarily *included* in samatha - calm/peacefulness - but are accompaniments that could be there or not. I think you are saying that calm without any insight, awareness or wisdom, is a lower grade sort of calm, and apt not to see what defilements might be lurking beneath the calm, and I would agree with that. But that doesn't mean it is not really *calm.* It is possible to have this sort of peace, and I think Buddha referred to it, as a kusala quality while the defilements are suppressed, just as jhana is dependent on suppression of defilements, rather than eradication. It may still be kusala, as I understand it, as the defilements are switched from active intrusions on the mental state to the status of being potential defilements that are not arising at the present time. It then goes to satipatthana to use that ground of peacefulness to open the door to the nature of the mental and physical state and see the namas and rupas more directly, and gain insight into the state of consciousness. So I'm not really disagreeing, but just saying that it seems maybe more useful to me to see samatha and vipassana as two separate elements that come together, rather than saying that if there is not an element of wisdom in the samatha, then it is not samatha at all. I think it's important to acknowledge the positive benefit of calming the fabrications, even if they are suppressed, and the doorway this may open for sati to break in and for vipassana to develop. That is why it seems to me that the anapanasati suttas and some other suttas seem to suggest a dual track of developing samatha and mindfulness in tandem, or in a kind of supportive turn-taking. As peacefulness gets deeper, it allows the space for more mindfulness. As mindfulness and concentration grow, more insight develops and this allows for a deeper peace to develop. So I don't see the wisdom factor as necessarily being built-in to "true samatha," but maybe being a quality that grows to accompany and support the development of deeper samatha and then jhana, which then allow peace and space for greater understanding and insight into the presently arising experience. I don't think the momentary "wise reflection" in the course of the day is going to allow for the deeper development of the deeper samatha/peacefulness, or that true jhana develops for just a moment, but is dependent on development to the point where a string of moments of samatha or jhana allow for a deeper, longer experience of peace. I have heard I think Jon [?] acknowledge lately that at a certain point the tendency to follow breath and develop deeper samatha would develop naturally, in one so inclined, and that they would spend longer times naturally experiencing breath as object of samatha, and the deeper experience of samatha would develop when there were many moments of samatha experienced in a row. Something like that - may be wrong about the exact way that was put. > As for the suttas, we need to know again whether the Buddha is referring to samatha or satipatthana development. In either case, there is panna at such moments of "observing the breath" as you put it and the citta is calm, i.e accompanied by passaddhi cetasika. To change your last sentence around, when there is sati, there is kusala concentration and kusala calm at such a time, i.e. whenever the citta is kusala. Usually when we concentrate on breath, it is akusala concentration, akusala calm and akusala awareness that arise. As for the "calming of the breath, body and mind", there are two factors of calmness, often translated as calmness of body (kaya passaddhi) and calmness of mind (citta passaddhi). We need to be clear that kaya passaddhi is calmness of the mental body, the cetasikas - these are two cetasikas. It seems that in the anapanasati sutta, that the order the Buddha presents has a logical sequence - in the first stanzas he gives some ways of regarding the breath, including some that focus on mindfulness and some on samatha, and then they culminate in "calming the bodily fabrications." I would take this to mean physical relaxation/calm that comes from the calm breath, the long breath, and observing it with calm concentration, and then the body calms down and becomes relaxed and more comfortable. This is physically based samatha in my view. Then in the next series of "exercises," for lack of a better word, he goes into the more subtle qualities of the breath, the focus on the pleasant quality of the breath, rapture etc. which indicate the jhanas, and then ends that sequence with the "calming of mental fabrications," or what I would see as a deeper samatha going into the first four jhanas. This deeper, mental development of samatha is a further development of the physical-based jhana. The body can calm down, but then the mind may still be somewhat active. When the mental fabrications are calmed - a much more advanced trick - there is a much more subtle awareness which has a better chance of observing the subtle namas and rupas clearly. So it seems like samatha is part of the development of both physical and mental calm, and supports in tandem with mindfulness and moments of vipassana to deeper potential for wisdom. My way of seeing how it works may be somewhat sloppy, but that's generally how it appears to me. The question is whether samatha is a supporting condition for development of wisdom, or merely the result of moments of understanding. We seem to see this in slightly different ways, though I think we'd agree that ultimately they have to appear together to be a fully formed knowing that would be both detached - peaceful - and wise - directly experiencing. Thanks for discussing this with me! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #111938 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 6:47 am Subject: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[d] epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > >R:If so, this is quite different than the Buddha's instruction to "go to the root of a tree and practice jhana" which he said quite explicitly. Can you explain the contradiction? I don't see how breath as object can be especially useful if one waits to notice it here or there for a moment here or a moment there. > .... > S: As has been explained, the monks were already at the roots of the trees and the Buddha was encouraging the development of samatha and satipatthana up to full enlightenment. He praised what was kusala. He didn't say that any Self should do anything. If there isn't patience to understand what is conditioned now, there will never be any development of either kind of bhavana! Though I think as you said further on that "any object" could be the subject of wise reflection and development of samatha, it still seems hard for me to think that samatha or any other factor will develop unless it gets to the point where the experience is repeated, extended, and thus accumulated in greater degree; so in a way, you are saying - in my interpretation - that the person who sat at the root of the tree to develop samatha of breath intensively had simply reached the point of conditions and accumulations where he would have that inclination full-time, and thus would naturally sit for long periods of time deepening the experience of samatha in a kusala way. This does not particularly line up with Buddha saying "*Go* to the root of a tree" and to meditate intensely, or whatever he exactly said, but something to that effect. He seemed to be urging not just the development of the kusala qualities but also the conditioning activity - sitting and contemplating the breath. But leaving that aside, if it is true that the more prolonged sitting in anapanasati was a natural development that the Buddha then praised and encouraged, I would draw two conclusions, and wonder what you think of them: 1. If one were to develop the thought "I *should* go meditate more and develop the enlightenment factors through mindfulness of breathing," that would be akusala and involve self-view and the illusion of control. 2. If one were to develop the natural inclination to go meditate and practice mindfulness of breathing, that would be kusala and would involve the conditions and accumulations that would naturally lead to this way of developing the path factors. So if it is not a desire, an intention that is aimed towards results, but a natural development, then one would be in the same situation as the monks whom Buddha encouraged. I would say if the latter were the case then there would be no craving, no conflict, no worry about doing it well or often enough, but just that "when convenient" [as I think Jon put it...] he would naturally be inclined to sit down and engage in mindfulness of breathing. Just as one who likes carrots might be inclined to regularly grab one from the refrigerator. Would you agree with this distinction? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111939 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) nilovg Hi James, Op 16-nov-2010, om 1:10 heeft James het volgende geschreven: > The problem is that I was describing a method of training, a method > that is detailed in the Vism. The Path of Purification in > conventional terms. That method of training is: morality-- > >concentration-->tranquility-->insight. Now, when you start saying > that in ultimate terms there is no first, second, third, etc. That > all path factors arise at once, etc. Well, that just muddies up the > entire method of training, and it makes communication between you > and I impossible. ------ N: Yea, yea, communication is difficult. I do not want to convince you, just suggesting that it is good to learn about paramattha dhammas. It depends on you. I think that as soon as we talk about morality-->concentration-->tranquility-->insight we are already deep into paramattha dhammas. Also, that special order I see as an order of teaching, but I do not want to repeat all the arguments we formerly dealt with. The Pathfactors arising together, see Jon's former posts, discussed many times. Nina. #111940 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best to get out of a burning house? sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Fri, 5/11/10, truth_aerator wrote: >S: And what is this "great effort" mentioned, if not viriya cetasika, >arising with great panna, i.e. conditioned dhammas again. > .... >S: And what is this "ardent person"? Is it anything other than the >same viriya, panna and other conditioned dhammas too? > ... > S: No whole at all, just the various dhammas arising by conditions. >The "whole" is just an idea. *** A:>But none of the above refute what the Buddha taught and what was said in commentaries such as VsM. Certain actions do occur and they bring certain results. <...> A:>Just because a car is composed of millions of components, it doesn't make it non-functional and it doesn't mean that one cannot drive it. .... S: We're talking about the truth, the reality, of experience. At a moment of touching "the car", what is experienced? At a moment of seeing "the car", what is experienced? At a moment of thinking, what is thought about or imagined to exist? Metta Sarah ======= #111941 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best to get out of a burning house? sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Sun, 7/11/10, Robert E wrote: > > b/ Intentional actions and practices can be allowed to take place without invoking or supporting self-concept. It can be understood even during a practice that there is no self doing anything, and such an understanding would not be "wrong view." > .... > S: In other words, just like now - various namas and rupas arising by conditions. No self to do anything. R:>Yes, but given that, no reason to run away from practice, as some do - it is another situation that arises according to conditions. .... S: We don't need to think of "practice" in terms of situations at all. Right understanding can arise and know the reality appearing, the present moment reality, at any time at all, regardless of whether one is sitting, standing, walking or lying down. Metta Sarah ============= #111942 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: concept of concept sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Sat, 6/11/10, Herman wrote: > >R: Is there an earlier time, prior to parinibbana, when the Buddha is said > to have delivered the Abhidhamma on one of the immaterial planes? > ... > S: Yes, during a rains retreat, the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma to his > mother in the Tavatimsa realm. This is the highest deva realm (from memory),not an immaterial realm. > . > H:> I was interested in this comment, especially because I do not believe there is any overlap between daily life and meditation. Here, you seem to express the notion that the Buddha can be on a rains retreat, and in the Tavatimsa realm, at the same time. To me, you are in one realm or another, not both at once. .... S: Different moments, different realms. The Buddha could visit the Tavatimsa realm without anyone noticing anything untoward. The time frames are completely different in such heavenly realms, and this is why the Buddha taught the Abhidhamma there. I'll just give you a quote on this which I just plucked out from something Sitagu Sayadaw wrote and which came up when I googled: " The time-scale in the ream of the gods is vastly different from our own. One hundred human years equals only one day in Tavatimsa heaven, Because of this, the times for eating and sleeping, for example, are separated by extremely long intervals. Moreover, the gods neither defecate nor urinate, and they feel no bodily aches or weariness. Therefore, they were able to listen to the entire exposition of the Abhidhamma in a single sitting, and - for what was to them only fifteen minutes - to attend to the discourse with a stream of thought that was undivided and continuous. In contrast, it took the Venerable Sariputta, who was the most intelligent of the Buddha's disciples, ninety days and ninety separate trips to Tavatimsa to learn and then preach in the human realm that Abhidhamma which was taught to the gods in one uninterrupted sitting." ... S: I'll leave this topic here, as it's all rather academic and I know little about it. Metta Sarah ======= Cheers Herman #111943 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] fixed archive mp3 link sarahprocter... Hi Connie, --- On Fri, 5/11/10, nichicon cp wrote: >Please let your friend know I fixed the link for the Savatthi E1, 2004 discussion. Apologies for the inconvenience and delay. ... S: A belated thanks for your help. So how are things going these days Connie? Seems like ages since we heard from you. What are you reading? Laundro? Grand-kid duties? metta Sarah ====== #111944 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What I heard on kamma [6] sarahprocter... Hi Phil, thx for reading and considering these extracts. --- On Mon, 1/11/10, philip wrote: > K.Sujin: In order to understand deeper and better and more perfectly about vipaka, it doesn't mean that we listen to someone's story or one's own story from birth and understand when was the kusala vipaka and when was the akusala vipaka. That's not clear enough to see that it's not self at all. There is still the idea of someone, "I". ... >Ph: Of course there is! Whether it's a story about people doing things in the conventional sense, or thinking about dhammas, it is still "I." This is what I don't get, the power of thinking is not that liberating. .... S: Agreed, thinking is not understanding! ... > Can we say that that is the understanding about vipaka or the vipaka moment or just thinking about vipaka? But, at this moment, it's vipaka which sees, it's vipaka which hears, when there can be the understanding of the nature of reality, no self. ... >Ph: Of coure we can say that. But we don't understand it, not really. It is just "I" thinking about deep teachings again! It is a good narrative, the narrative of a person whose life has come to be centered on discussing and thinking about the Dhamma, especially deep, paramattha topics. A good narrative, a fine narrative (as long as there aren't dark corners of behaviour that aren't hidden away and justified by thinking about anatta etc. >My personal narrative is all about conventional behaviour, about refining behaviour. I think it will come to contain more paramattha thinking, we'll see.... .... S; Whatever the narrative, it's conditioned that way. I'm very interested in understanding this moment, the vipaka and the akusala on account of such vipaka now. Long stories about someone's life and the good and bad events in it is not liberating for me in any sense. Appreciating more about seeing now and thinking about such seeing brings us closer to the truth, especially when there are direct moments of awareness of these dhammas. Metta Sarah ====== Metta, Phil #111945 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Helpful & Unhelpful Questions (4NT or Self-views) sarahprocter... Hi Antony, --- On Mon, 1/11/10, antony272b2 wrote: >>S: The more there is an understanding of dhammas, the less concern there is about "me" in the past, future or present. Wouldn't you agree? ... >Antony: Here is a sutta from the Nidanasamyutta, the last paragraph of which explains why seeing dependent co-arising makes it impossible to ask the useless questions: >Bhikkhu Bodhi translation: "For what reason [is this impossible]? Because, bhikkhus, the noble disciple has clearly seen with correct wisdom as it really is this dependent origination and these dependently arisen phenomena." <...> "When a disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be, it is not possible that he would run after the past, thinking, 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past?' or that he would run after the future, thinking, 'Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' or that he would be inwardly perplexed about the immediate present, thinking, 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?' >Such a thing is not possible. Why is that? Because the disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.020.than.html .... S: Excellent! Metta Sarah ======= #111946 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: science vs dhamma - small correction sarahprocter... Hi Howard, #111374 --- On Mon, 1/11/10, upasaka@... wrote: >Sarah, you had written "For example, the more precisely 'heat' is known when it's experienced, the clearer becomes its nature as being anatta - just the element which is experienced, no thing in it at all. And later, the nature of that element as anicca and thereby dukkha too." That "no thing in it at all" of yours just made me sit up and take notice! I've never seen you write anything of that sort! Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you - I very much hope not - but this strikes me as exactly the way that I think about "no self." If I DO understand your meaning here, I'm a trifle puzzled as to why you are so comfortable using "the realities" instead of, for example, "the phenomena," and using "element" rather than, say, "phenomenon," but I will just accept that by that terminology you are referring to actual content of experience as opposed to phenomena with "thingness" conceptually overlaid.) .... S: hmmm, elements, realities are the translations of dhatus, dhammas. They are not "content of experience", they are the "actualities" or 'realities" experienced. For example, we can't refer to visible object as "content of seeing". Seeing is nama, it experiences visible object. Visible object is rupa, it is experienced only. "Phenomena" is rather vague, to my thinking, and could include concepts. The actuality of visible object, just that which is seen, has no "conceptual overlay". It's just the reality seen - no computer, no finger, no tree in it. Metta Sarah ======= #111947 From: "James" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Bangkok discussions with K.Sujin: Anapanasati 1 (was Re: metta) buddhatrue Hi Nina, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Yea, yea, communication is difficult. I do not want to convince > you, just suggesting that it is good to learn about paramattha > dhammas. It depends on you. I think that as soon as we talk about > morality-->concentration-->tranquility-->insight we are already deep > into paramattha dhammas. Also, that special order I see as an order > of teaching, but I do not want to repeat all the arguments we > formerly dealt with. > The Pathfactors arising together, see Jon's former posts, discussed > many times. > Yes, these are all things we have discussed many times. I just popped into DSG again because I missed Dhamma conversation with old friends. I get lonely sometimes. I wasn't expecting to reach any grand conclusions :-). Just to hash things out a bit with old friends :-). Metta, James #111948 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 9:56 pm Subject: [dsg] Bangkok with K. Sujin. Anapanasati 2 (was Re: Saturday meeting)[a] glenjohnann Hello Sarah (and Rob Ep et al) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > S: Like now, there may (by conditions, not by selection, I stress!) be wise reflection on death, breath, the Buddhas's virtues, even colour (actually, could be any object in the beginning). We find our lives, our bodies, our friends, our houses, everything really, to be so important, but life can come to an end at any moment. It just depends on this very in and out breath and life lasts just for this instant - that's all there is to life, just a momentary citta depending on breath. Isn't it sobering, calming, when we reflect wisely? As I mentioned to Pt, I find this kind of reflection very natural during the day. Some people said they never, ever reflected on breath - so just depends on accumumulations. When there is more and more wise reflection on an object, such as breath or death, it is the development of samatha, more than just the occasional momentary wise reflection. Just like the occasional touching of the piano keys is not piano playing, but if > there are conditions to play more so that one begins to play melodies, then it is piano playing. > > It's the panna that is the key (no pun intended!) in the case of the development of samatha. > A: I love the analogy to playing the piano! Ann #111949 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:04 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? kenhowardau Hi Robert E. ----- <. . .> KH: >> The Buddha's purpose in mentioning postures and daily-life situations was to teach us the right place and time for practising satipatthana. > > The practice itself was to have right-mindfulness of a conditioned dhamma that was arising at that place and time. >> RE: > What I appreciate about this is that you have given a specific and coherent explanation of your view in this case. ----- Well, that's something. But I was only repeating what I always repeat - namas and rupas, no self. -------------------------- RE: > I would be interested in your extrapolation on how different "postures and different life situations" provide the setting for us to understand "the right place and time for practicing satipatthana." --------------------------- The Dhamma is a here-and-now teaching. Regardless of where we are, or what we are doing. there is only one ultimate reality to be known, and that is the present one. ----------------------------------------- RE: > How does one understand these postures and life-situations as settings for satipatthana? And how does the Buddha's discussion set the stage for understanding this? ------------------------------------------ It has to be here and now. If we are hoping to become enlightened in the future we have missed the point. There is only the present moment. Ken H #111950 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 11:04 pm Subject: Re: Calm. Was: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ... > Text Vis. : (xvi)-(xvii) The tranquilizing of the body is > 'tranquility of the > body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of > consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, > feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). > > N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the > calming of anxiety. It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a > group, and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the > tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (sańńaa) and the > formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the > cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used. > > Text Vis.: But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness > have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the > body and of consciousness. > > N: The Tiika refers here to anger or impetuosity (saarambho). > This is a term for the defilements of restlessness etc. which are a > condition for unpleasant feeling. Restlessness or agitation > accompanies each akusala citta. Worry or regret, kukkucca, arises > together with citta rooted in dosa, and this is accompanied by > unpleasant feeling. At the moment of dosa-muulacitta one is disturbed > and anxious, not calm. But tranquillity quiets such disturbances or > anxieties. ... This, with your accompanying notes, is one of the best discussions I have seen about samatha to date. The description you have shared of the different factors of restlessness and other akusala factors that are calmed by samatha, and the distinctions of calming body, cetasika and citta are very good. I like hearing these details which make the subject more specific. I hope to return to this post to make some more specific comments soon. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #111951 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Nov 16, 2010 10:16 pm Subject: Sweet Solitude! bhikkhu5 Friends: Purification is best in Sweet Silent Solitude! CONTENT WHEN UNDERSTANDING Solitude is happiness for one, who is content, Who sees and clearly understands this Dhamma. Harmlessness is happiness in all worlds, Kindness towards all living beings. :-) Udana 10 IDEAL SOLITUDE Avoid going along with fools. Should one fail to find any one, who is better or equal as a good companion, then one should continue this journey all alone. Since there can be no friendship with fools... Dhammapada Illustration 61 Background Story 61 SWEET & NOT LONELY The one who has tasted the sweetness of solitude in cooled calm, such one fears not, and wrongdo not, since so indeed is the sweet joy of true Dhamma! Dhammapada Illustration 205 Background Story 205 SOLITUDE AS NECESSITY If one cannot find a clever companion, upright, straight and determined, then walk alone like a king leaving the kingdom, like an Elephant freely roam in all the forest... Dhammapada Illustration 329 Background Story 328-330 SOLITARY FREEDOM Life in solitude is better than friendship with the fool. Let the one live alone, acting only right, freed from greed, Like the Bull Elephant freely roam in all the forest. Dhammapada Illustration 330 Background Story 328-330 THE MASTER Mastering the hands. Mastering the feet. Mastering the speech. Mastering the thoughts. Highest Master of Mind; Concentrated and composed, Calm and content in secluded solitude, Such one is indeed rightly called a Bhikkhu ... Dhammapada Illustration 362 Background Story 362 Comments: Be realistic! If one cannot be in company with one-self, then something must be wrong! Any form of company will dissolve, since all meetings end in separation... The ever socializing parrot-like personality cannot ever end suffering! Only dead fish float with the stream! More on Sweet Secluded Solitude: Alone yet Free , Ideal Solitude , The_Rhinoceros_Horn ! Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Sweet Solitude! #111952 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:28 am Subject: Re: Calm. Was: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV, 144. > Intro: > In the following paragraphs, the Visuddhimagga deals with six pairs > of sobhana cetasikas that arise with each sobhana citta. Of each pair > one cetasika is a quality pertaining to the accompanying cetasikas > (kaaya or the mental body), and one a quality pertaining to citta. What is the definition of a kaya as a physical or mental body, given that only one citta arises at a time, and there is no "body" per se? What is the cetasika of "kaya?" > They perform their functions so that kusala citta and cetasikas can > apply themselves to daana, siila or bhaavana. They are indispensable > for the performing of kusala, they support the kusala citta, each in > their own way. > The first pair is tranquillity of body, kaaya-passaddhi, and > tranquillity of citta, citta-passaddhi. Tranquillity or calm is not > only necessary for samatha, but it has to accompany each kusala > citta. Calm is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca, which prevents the > arising of kusala citta. Interesting to see that "restlessness" is strong enough to create akusala. That was interesting to me. > When there are conditions for kusala citta, > calm performs its function while it accompanies kusala citta. There > is no need to aim for calm first as a condition for kusala citta. It > arises already when kusala citta arises. Does not calm have conditions that give rise to it as well? What are conditions for "calm" [which then allow for kusala citta to arise.] I say it this way because above it is said that opposite of calm, "restlessness" prevents kusala. So it seems that samatha is not just an accompanying cetasika for kusala citta, but also indeed a necessary condition for arising of kusala citta. > The Commentary to the `Abhidhammattha Sangaha' (T.A. p 64) mentions > that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: tranquillity, etc., of consciousness brings about a state of > tranquillity, etc., of only consciousness, but tranquillity of the > body brings about these states of the material body also by virtue of > pervading the refined materiality arising from it; in order to make > this point as well, their twofold nature is stated.> Again, I am interested in what the "material body" consists of. Is it just a momentary cetasika? I ask because I have heard here that there is no material body per se, that this is just a concept. When tranquility "pervades the refined materiality arising from" the material body, what does this "refined materiality" consist of, and how does tranquility pervade it? > *** > Text Vis. : (xvi)-(xvii) The tranquilizing of the body is > 'tranquility of the > body'. The tranquilizing of consciousness is 'tranquility of > consciousness'. And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, > feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). > > N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the > calming of anxiety. This is great to hear the various opposites of "calm" that cause samatha from being present, and that prevent kusala cittas from arising. We had restlessness before, now anxiety is being mentioned. I really like these details of what the akusala qualities are with regard to samatha. > It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a > group, Okay, this is good to hear. So the term kaya, kaayo, or body, deontes a group - can you say a word about what the group is and what that grouping consists of? How do the kandhas of feeling, sanna and formations combine [with cetasikas also...?] to form a "group" which is referred to as kaayo or body? Do they arise together in a single moment, or is there a group of rupas that arise in sequence to create the kaayo? > and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the > tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (sańńaa) and the > formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the > cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used. So these three kandhas are tranquilized in samatha, which is a kusala thing to happen. I wonder what is the citta like, or what qualities other than samatha does it have, when vedana, sanna and formations are tranquilized? This sounds like a very tranquil state. > Text Vis.: But both tranquility of the body and of consciousness > have, together, the characteristic of quieting disturbance of the > body and of consciousness. > > N: The Tiika refers here to anger or impetuosity (saarambho). > This is a term for the defilements of restlessness etc. which are a > condition for unpleasant feeling. Restlessness or agitation > accompanies each akusala citta. Worry or regret, kukkucca, arises > together with citta rooted in dosa, and this is accompanied by > unpleasant feeling. At the moment of dosa-muulacitta one is disturbed > and anxious, not calm. But tranquillity quiets such disturbances or > anxieties. This is very good - a further extrapolation of what is included in restlessness and anxiety, mentioned earlier, which cause "unpleasant feeling," which I take to be another way of saying "unpleasant vedana." There is impetuosity, agitation, worry or regret, in addition or as part of restlessness, anxiety, etc. And it is easy to see how these cause or are accompanied by unpleasant vedana. One could say that in addition to explaining what opposes calm and samatha, that it is also a very good detailed analysis of what occurs in the sub-process of unpleasant vedana. I would guess that pleasant vedana would probably have greater calm and other positive qualities? But is pleasant vedana always kusala? This has come up before, but now I am unsure about it again. I would not guess that pleasant vedana is always accompanied by samatha, for instance, because I would think that pleasant vedana can often rise with clinging - attachment. > Text Vis.: Their function is to crush disturbance of the [mental] > body and of consciousness. > They are manifested as inactivity and coolness of the [mental] body and > consciousness. So to tranquilize the mental fabrications [?] the mental body and consciousness are cooled and stilled by the tranquilization of samatha on the material and mental bodies, and the negative effects of agitation and restlessness are crushed and cease. One can see how crushing agitation, anxiety and other painful disturbances in the body and mind, that samatha would allow for kusala in the citta at that moment, or in that group. [?] [Not sure if there is a grouping of sequential rupas and/or namas in the "kaayos" or if the grouping is only between the khandas that are stilled *in* the kayas at a single moment.] > N: Kaaya passadhi, calm of body, has the function of calming > cetasikas, and citta passadhi has the function of calming citta. > The Tiika explains that by crushing disturbance they are manifested > as being unwavering, without agitation and as coolness. I note there that "unwavering" is probably a pretty good synonym for equanimity and that samatha of a degree to cause equanimity is being described here. [?] > Text Vis.: Their proximate cause is the [mental] body and > consciousness. They should be regarded as opposed to the defilements > of agitation, etc., which cause unpeacefulness in the [mental] body > and in consciousness. > > N: As to the expression the defilements of agitation, etc., the Tiika > explains these as the defilements with agitation or restlessness > (uddhacca) as the foremost, or, that all defilements to begin with > restlessness are included. > > **** > When one performs daana which also includes the appreciation of > someone else's kusala, there are calm of citta and cetasikas. One is > not disturbed by stinginess or jealousy, defilements that are > accompanied by unpleasant feeling. We now see that stinginess and jealousy are also included in defilements that accompany negative vedana, and that the lack of samatha is far-ranging, causing disturbance not only in calm of material and mental fabrications, but even making dana impossible. It would seem from this that samatha is much more important than just being an accompanying factor to kusala, but a very important ingredient of kusala. It seems that some degree of samatha is necessary to perform any kusala function, such as dana, and I would guess this would be true of vinaya as well. [?] Without a certain degree of calm and equanimity, restlessness, agitation, greed and jealousy, and other turbulent qualities that are the opposite of calm, acceptance and peacefulness are able to arise and cause disturbance and akusala. > When one observes siila, one is not disturbed by remorse, there is calm. Now remorse is also added to the list of those akusala qualities that can arise in the absence of samatha. So sila is likewise disturbed by lack of calm/peacefulness/equanimity [= samatha.] > In samatha calm is developed to a high degree so that jhaana can be > attained. And here is the bridge between deep calm and the introduction of jhana, the state of absorption, or very deep calm. > Calm suppresses the hindrances and it is opposed to restlessness, > uddhacca. > The aim of samatha is to be free from sense impressions that are > bound up with defilements. Now we see the purpose of jhana in creating a high degree of kusala leading to understanding, in this simple sentence. As the sense impressions tend to cause disturbance and cause all kinds of akusala tendencies towards everything from restlessness to anxiety and jealousy, the suppression of sense impressions at the level of jhana cuts off the stimuli for such disturbances and thus cuts off the corresponding defilements. This gives some greater understanding of what is meant by jhana "suppressing defilements" which often has a negative connotation, since it doesn't completely eradicate them, but here I think we see the suppression of defilements as an extension of the kusala quality of samatha, and a very important function in giving samatha a chance to expand beyond sensory disturbance, in its embodiment of jhana. To me it even gives a view of the disturbing waves of the kandhas always leading to more disturbances and defilements in the absence of samatha, and how one can shut the door on samsara so to speak at the level of jhana, and create kusala conditions for citta. It seems to me in this sense that the experience of jhana is a very important moment in the accumulation of kusala, as it teaches the citta what it is like to be free from defilements, free from the negative influence of samsara for a brief or longer period, and thus gives citta a foreshadowing of nibbana. Right understanding is necssary for the > development of calm, there has to be precise understanding of the > characteristic of calm so that it is known when kusala citta with > calm arises and when there is attachment to calm. > There is also calm in the development of insight. This expresses the connection between samatha/jhana and satipatthana/vipassana. There is an important mutual dependence here, which I think the Vis is acknowledging here, even though it gives right understanding the leading role. > When there is right > understanding of naama and ruupa, the six doors are guarded at that > moment. So right understanding and samatha really arise as part of the same detachment and clear seeing, which leads to peacefulness. Yet a certain degree of samatha expressed earlier is necessary to push aside and calm the defilements to the point where this is possible. > One is not disturbed by unwholesome thoughts about persons and > situations when right understanding of dhammas is developed, one > begins to see them as impersonal elements devoid of self. > Calm is one of the factors of enlightenment. As right understanding > develops, the enlightenment factor of calm develops as well. Insight > leads to the eradication of defilements. The arahat has reached the > highest calm that cannot be disturbed anymore by defilements. Beautifully put. One can see the world of disturbances, and the doorway to peace, in this description. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #111953 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Calm. Was: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Nina. In my last post I wrote: "It seems that some degree of samatha is necessary to perform any kusala function, such as dana, and I would guess this would be true of vinaya as well. [?]" I meant to say: "It seems that some degree of samatha is necessary to perform any kusala function, such as dana, and I would guess this would be true of sila as well. [?]" I was thinking of the vinaya as the expression of sila, and so put that word in instead. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111954 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:34 am Subject: [dsg] Re: More Response to Robert Ep epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Sorry, I think this may have been your comment and not Sukin's...? > --------------------------------------- > Yeah, it was mine. (No problem. Er, none for me, that is, but maybe > for Sukin! ;-) :-))) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111955 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:43 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best to get out of a burning house? epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > S: We don't need to think of "practice" in terms of situations at all. Right understanding can arise and know the reality appearing, the present moment reality, at any time at all, regardless of whether one is sitting, standing, walking or lying down. That is true, but still, accumulations increase when one develops the natural tendency to see more and more closely what is actually arising at each moment, and that is a function of sati, etc., which, when accumulations are at the right point, expresses as the tendency to "go to the root of a tree..." etc., as the monks did in Buddha's time. It may be that moments arise here and there by any means, but as even Jon said recently - and I enjoyed it - when the practitioner gets to a certain point, he will indeed have the natural inclination to spend more time sitting and following the breath and develop those accumulations described in anapanasati sutta. I agree that it would be a mistake to try to force anything, or think that one should be doing something one is not. I think it's also important though, to acknowledge that these more consistent situations, such as sitting under a tree and developing jhana, or any other of the things that the monks might tend to do, are perfectly valid when they arise naturally. It is not the rule for all time that moments of sati or whatever can only arise in isolated moments. There may come a time when it is natural to do what Buddha did, and spend an inordinate amount of time under a tree. :-) The point is not to force it or think there is a self involved, or that one will gain more by "efforting" harder. That point is well taken. And yet, the path is not arbitrary - it does develop and it does go further as it goes forward. I think there is some confusion between "a controlling self" and a "logical progression." They are not the same thing. The former does not exist, the latter does take place, according to conditions and accumulations of course. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111956 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > RE: > How does one understand these postures and life-situations as > settings for satipatthana? And how does the Buddha's discussion set the stage for understanding this? > ------------------------------------------ > > It has to be here and now. If we are hoping to become enlightened in the future we have missed the point. There is only the present moment. Well I would agree without question that at any given time, there is only the present moment. I don't think anyone believes that experience can somehow take place in the past or future, or that when and if enlightenment occurs it will be in the future. It will be now when anything happens. But the present now is not the only think taken into account, even by the Commentarial perspective. Even if the moment is all that exists now, one has to account for development over time, otherwise the path would not have any meaning or any function. Thus accumulations are spoken of, and development is spoken of, both of which are part of right view, and both of which do not take place only in the moment, but by definition take place over time. And even in speaking about rupas and cittas, it is spoken of that rupas occur in a pattern one after the other, and certain rupas always follow others, so this is also acknowledging the role of time beyond an isolated present moment. Things do occur in time, even in the most radical view of the path. Rupas occur not in a single moment, but over a series of moments. So the idea that there is only the present moment is a bit of a limited view, contradicted by the analysis of conditions. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111957 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:08 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111741) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Well, I would say, in the present context, that having a map is only useful if one also rows, rather than reading the map to understand it better, while refusing to touch the oars. > =============== J: To which I would reply that having a map is only useful if it is fully consulted before the journey is begun so that the right path is taken from the outset. Navigating in (partial) reliance on one's innate sense of direction could mean one ends up on a different path than originally intended ;-)) Jon #111958 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:20 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111742) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Well it is a reference to the constant dismissal of "intentional activities" as akusala, something which is quite familiar at this point. > =============== J: It is not being said here that all intentional activities are akusala (we've been through this a number of times before ;-)). . Intentional activities comprise multiple mind moments which may be all akusala, all kusala or a mixture of both. > =============== > > J: The panna that sees dhammas directly is the same panna that understands dhammas at the intellectual level, but in a more developed form. (It is one of those kusala cetasikas mentioned above.) So there's no need for a linking 'practice' that somehow changes the intellectual understanding into direct experiencing. > > That is if you believe that the intellectual understanding is, in and of itself, the bridge to the direct experience of that which is. I don't believe that, and don't see any basis for such a belief other than faith in a doctrine for which there is no evidence. > =============== J: The way I've explained it is what I understand the commentarial position to be. The notion of a bridge to direct experience, i.e., something other than the development of panna of a lesser degree, is not one that I've come across. Right intellectual understanding and understanding of the level of direct experience are on the same continuum (both are the mental factor of panna). As previously explained, there cannot be right intellectual understanding without an appreciation of how what is being considered is applicable to the present moment. So the element of 'application' is there already; there is no need for some separate 'bridge'. > =============== > > J: Panna has its particular conditioning factors, although they are not apparent to us, without which it cannot appear. > > I am not a big fan of believing in that which cannot be experienced and which is "not apparent to us." Based on what should we take this as an actual process that will yield this result in some mysterious way? > =============== J: We are not being asked to 'believe' in conditions that cannot be directly verified at this stage of our development. On the other hand, it's inevitable is it not that such conditions are postulated in the teachings (after all, if everything was readily apparent, there'd be no need for a Buddha to have to explain everything in such detail ;-)). Where certain conditions are postulated in the teachings, we are hardly in a position to refute that part of the teachings, just on the basis that it cannot for the time being be verified (wouldn't that be like saying, If I can't get it, it can't be true? ;-)). > =============== > > On the other hand, there is no way of predicting when panna will arise or what dhamma will be its object. > > Yes, but it's more sensible to have some logical understanding of how this comes to be, even if the actual arising of it is not predictable. Not just a theoretical understanding, but a methodology that develops that - and that is meditation in my view. > =============== J: The idea of meditation as a methodology that develops panna is an idea that you choose to infer from the texts, rather than something said directly by the Buddha. > =============== > I still don't see any basis for how panna is expected to develop in an intellectual vaccuum, free from application to experience. > =============== J: You are perhaps looking for an 'application to experience' that is in the form of step-by-step instructions to be followed. What if there was no such application explained by the Buddha? > =============== > In many cases he references the conventional world and talks about the impermanence of conventional forms. That is the most predominant way in which he talks about the three marks, is it not? It takes a special act of privileged interpretation to suppose that he is saying something other than what he repeats constantly. > =============== J: Could you give some examples of the Buddha talking about the impermanence of conventional forms? Thanks. > =============== > In the Great Forty he talks about all the path factors with effluents and then speaks of the development of the Noble path factor as a separate tier that is a higher development without effluents. It is just the path factors with or w/o effluents, according to the sutta. From that I derive the "ordinary" and "noble" version of the path as being on a continuum. Right View with effluents "sides with merit and results in acquisitions." I am calling this the "worldly" path as its fruits are kusala fruits in the world, and he also distinguishes the Noble path factor that is a "factor in the path": > =============== J: Thanks for the reference to the Great Forty sutta. That's helpful. To my understanding, the 2 versions of the path spoken of in that sutta are the mundane (not the conventional) and the lokuttara. The mundane path is the path of the worldling who is developing insight. Both the mundane and the lokuttara paths involve insight into the true nature of dhammas, as I understand the sutta. There is no 'conventional path' being taught there. So I think there is only one path, the paramattha one. Jon > ""Of those, right view is the forerunner. And how is right view the forerunner? One discerns wrong view as wrong view, and right view as right view. This is one's right view. ... > > "And what is right view? Right view, I tell you, is of two sorts: There is right view with effluents [asava], siding with merit, resulting in the acquisitions [of becoming]; and there is noble right view, without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path. > > "And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions. > > "And what is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path? The discernment, the faculty of discernment, the strength of discernment, analysis of qualities as a factor for Awakening, the path factor of right view of one developing the noble path whose mind is noble, whose mind is free from effluents, who is fully possessed of the noble path. This is the right view that is without effluents, transcendent, a factor of the path." #111959 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:24 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111743) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > I purposely put my examples in the context of sutta so you could see that both are used in the context of Dhamma, rather than using examples from the the law and the violin, which I do understand the distinction. I think both are used in relation to Dhamma. When he says that "a monk should train himself thus" he is saying "this is what you should do to acquire this attribute." And that is referring to bhavana, development of the attributes of the Noble disciple. Those sorts of references are not any different than practicing the violin. The training, practice and development references are throughout the sutta body, and are often *not* of the form of the "practice of law," but represent the Buddha's program for development: > =============== J: Well this is the point we are trying to resolve. To my understanding, the way declared by the Buddha as being the way that "a monk should train himself" is a reference to kusala states of consciousness only, and not to some kind of 'trial and error' practice that must necessarily involve akusala. > =============== > DIPA SUTTA > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html > > "Monks, concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. And how is concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit? > > ... > > "So if a monk should wish: 'May neither my body be fatigued nor my eyes, and may my mind, through lack of clinging/sustenance, be released from fermentations,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. > > = = = = = = = = = > > Please look carefully at the form of this part of the sutta, which repeats a number of times: > > "If a monk should wish: X,' then he should do Y." > > "Then he should do" is not a description, it is an instruction for how to develop this or that quality. > =============== J: OK, let's take your formula: "If a monk should wish: X [J: X being some level of kusala attainment], then he should do Y" To my understanding, the Y that is to be done is a reference to kusala mindstates only; it is not a reference to the undertaking of a conventional activity (i.e., a 'practice') that must necessarily involve many moments of akusala. How do you see it? Jon #111960 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:26 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111744) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > He did indeed say "if you want to develop these wholesome qualities, practice in this way." I guess I have to quote from the Dippa Sutta again: > =============== J: Thanks again for the sutta quote. The sutta says "he should *attend carefully* to" specific matters. This is clearly a reference to kusala mindstates, not to a conventional 'focussing on' that would for the worldling involve akusala mindstates. > =============== > > "If a monk should wish: 'May I remain percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. > > "If a monk should wish: 'May I remain percipient of unloathsomeness in the presence of what is loathsome,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. ... > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html > > > What he said was to develop kusala; this can only be achieved if kusala is recognised as kusala as and when it arises. > > This is not what he said in these quotes from the Dippa Sutta. Can you tell me where he did say this? It seems to me that he constantly said to develop kusala through continued developmental practice, as in the Dippa Sutta and all the other practice suttas which generally use anapanasati as their foundation and method and show how the higher states and path factors are systematically developed through practice. > =============== J: To my understanding, the only 'developmental practice' recommended by the Buddha is various moments of kusala. Jon #111961 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:32 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Herman (111755) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi Jon, > ... > > J: In the development of awareness, it is dhammas rather than intentional > > activities (concepts) that are to be known. > > > > > I am sure that you would have a good reason for saying this. What is it? :-) > =============== J: The idea that in the development of awareness it is dhammas rather than intentional activities (concepts) that are to be known represents my understanding of the teachings as a whole. In my view, each part of the Tipitaka must be read in the context of the Tipitaka as a whole (and, I would say, of the commentaries also). As far as specific reference is concerned, I can only think off-hand of the beginning of Part 3 'Understanding' of the Vism, where it explains about the khandhas as being the soil in which understanding grows. > =============== > > I ask in the light of the following: > > "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I am walking.' When > standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he discerns, 'I am > sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' Or however his > body is disposed, that is how he discerns it. > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or > focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a > monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. > =============== J: Yes, there are a number of passages in the suttas that on the surface suggest awareness of conventional things (e.g., the body) or actions (e.g., walking). In the present case, the commentary explains that the reference is to awareness of the element of motion rather than of the conventional act of walking. I have no idea what awareness of 'me walking' would involve ;-)) Jon #111962 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:34 am Subject: Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111759) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > What are the causes of "kusala in the past" that conditions arising of kusala now? > =============== J: If you're asking about a first cause, the Buddha has explained that no first cause or first beginning of the round of rebirths is ascertainable. Jon #111963 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] what is "path" and why is it important? jonoabb Hi Herman (111783) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Herman wrote: > > Hi Jon, > ... > So, I think you are saying the Buddha intends without craving. He is not > attached to the outcome. He eats, he walks, he teaches, he seeks out > solitude, but does so without craving. > > If I have got that right, thanks for clarifying your position. I must say > that I cannot understand how this scenario is even possible, for I see all > action as an attempt at modifying the world. To be unattached to the outcome > of one's actions is to do stuff only for the sake of doing stuff. Why do it? > As you say, one feeds the body to stop or prevent hunger, or to stay healthy > and alive, not just for the sake of eating. One teaches for the benefit of > others, not just for the sake of teaching. One avoids doing harm, because > there is aversion to the consequences of that, not just for the sake of > avoiding doing harm. I just don't get the idea that any of that can happen > without any thought of how one one wants the world to be. > =============== J: I agree it's difficult to conceive of a kind of intending that is not part of a larger idea of wanting things to be different from what they are, if one looks at things from that particular point of view. Nevertheless, if the underlying tendency to akusala has been totally eradicated (as in the case of the arahant), then it is just not possible for any intending there may be to be unwholesome. When you think about it, whether there's action or inaction in the conventional sense, there's bound to be intending involved. For example, if the present posture becomes uncomfortable, the 2 options available both involve intending: moving to a different posture to relieve the discomfort requires intending; not moving to a different posture despite the discomfort would also require intending. Remaining just so without any change is not possible; that is the nature of samsara. Jon #111964 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! jonoabb Hi Robert E (111878) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Can you explain again how practice is something that arises by itself without any doing? "Practice" is inherently doing, not arising. To "practice" means to "do," even if it is the kind of practice you cited, such as "a practicing lawyer," it is still a "doing." How can "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" be "the arising of satipatthana," rather than its development through practice? You have managed to delete the "practice" out of "practice." How do you explain or justify this? > =============== J: The question is whether "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" means the actual development of the path (i.e., satipatthana) as opposed to the doing of something that, while not itself the development of the path, will conduce to moments of path development occurring (as in some form of 'practice' as commonly conceived). I was making the point that one usage of the term 'practice' is to describe the exercise of a skill already acquired (as in the practice of the law). It is not limited to the other common usage of an act done in the course of the acquisition of the skill (as in to practise a musical instrument or piece). You make the point that "practice" is inherently doing, not simply the arising of something. Even if that is so (which I doubt ;-)), there are many instances in the suttas of dhammas and their functions being described in conventional terms which, to the casual reader, would be suggestive of people and things and actions. Jon #111965 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:39 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Alex (111864) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > ... > The passage IS connected with the development of path, that in this sutta ends with Anagami or Arhaship. The Buddha compares one to the other. If the talk of developing skill in archery was totally unrelated to developing of the path up to Arhatship, then why include it? > =============== J: I'm afraid I don't see it that way. We may have to agree to differ on this one ;-)) Jon #111966 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:43 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Robert E (111882) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > from: The Agganna Sutta: > "And sometimes a Khattiya takes life, takes what is not given, commits sexual misconduct, tells lies, indulges in slander, harsh speech or idle chatter, is grasping, malicious, or of wrong views. Thus such things as are immoral and considered so, blameworthy and considered so, to be avoided and considered so, ways unbefitting an Ariyan and considered so, black with black result and blamed by the wise, are sometimes to be found among the Khattiyas, and the same applies to Brahmins, merchants, and artisans. > > 'Sometimes too, a Khattiya refrains from taking life, does not take what is not given, refrains from sexual misconduct, speaks truth, shuns slander, harsh speech or idle chatter, is not grasping, malicious, or of wrong views. Thus such things are moral and considered so, blameless and considered so, to be followed and considered so, ways befitting an Ariyan and considered so, bright with bright results and praised by the wise..." > > You can see above that "taking life and telling lies," not mental qualities but ethically akusala *actions,* are within the definition of akusala, of unwholesomeness, and refraining from taking life, lying and sexual misconduct, the speaking of truth and other moral *actions* are considered kusala wholesome *actions.* So I would not agree that Buddha has restricted the definition of what is kusala or akusala to "ethical or unethical mental states." It is clear from such suttas that this is *not* the case. > > I mean, I know that you know that the Buddha has outlined what is wholesome and unwholesome activity in hundreds of suttas, so I'm not sure why you are feigning ignorance in this area. It's Dhamma kindergarten, isn't it? Do you play dice regularly? > =============== J: ;-)) ;-)) Again, thanks for the sutta quote. I must say it helps greatly in narrowing the scope of the discussion (not that we're more likely to agree, mind you ;-)). An activity comprises many moments of consciousness over a span of time. An activity is only wholesome or unwholesome to the extent that the mental states in the javana processes accompanying those moments of consciousness are kusala or akusala. Killing and stealing necessarily involve some moments of akusala, and restraint from those unwholesome deeds necessarily involves some moments of kusala. But there may also be moments of the opposite quality occurring in the javana processes during the course of the deed (this is particularly so in the case of 'kusala' deeds, I would think). For most of the day there is neither killing, stealing, etc nor abstaining from the same (where 'abstaining from' means that the inclination is there but not acted upon), but other more 'neutral' actions (eating, working, brushing teeth, etc). So there are kusala or akusala javana cittas arising all the time. What makes these cittas kusala or akusala are the accompanying mental states, not the supposed 'quality' of the deed or action. > =============== > > > > =============== > > > That is not so, Jon. Buddha constantly talks about the conventional factors of life and how they are anatta and anicca. He does so in countless suttas, so it is not fair to say he always does so in some pure form of understanding of dhammas. He finds it valuable to tell people to detach from conventional objects, so I think it is valuable too. > > > =============== > ... > I will note that A. Sujin and Nina appear to be talking about food, fruits, and other conventional objects as objects of clinging. More later... > =============== J: Of course, we generally speak in terms of conventional objects and actions, as did the Buddha in many of his suttas. But the Dhamma is to be understood in terms of dhammas (namas and rupas). It would somewhat inhibit discussion if everything had to be couched in paramattha terms all the time ;-)). Jon #111967 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 8:46 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Ann (111904) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "glenjohnann" wrote: > > Hello Jonothan > ... > > For each moment of sound that is the object of hearing consciousness there are multiple moments of processing by which the sound is recognised and given meaning. (However, the object of those moments of subsequent processing is no longer the actual audible object but a remembered concept of it.) > > A: Your last sentence in parentheses above - when you say remembered concept of it, are you talking about the nimitta of it or the memory of what was heard, now a concept and not reality of the sound itself? > =============== J: Thanks for the question. My understanding of the theory is that it would be a nimitta for the first few mind-door processes that follow the original sense-door experience and then a concept for the many processes after that. Not sure if that makes 'nimittas' any easier to come to terms with ;-)) Jon #111968 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 2:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Re: Calm. part 1. nilovg Dear Rob E, I appreciate your interesting questions. Op 17-nov-2010, om 6:28 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV, 144. > > Intro: > > In the following paragraphs, the Visuddhimagga deals with six pairs > > of sobhana cetasikas that arise with each sobhana citta. Of each > pair > > one cetasika is a quality pertaining to the accompanying cetasikas > > (kaaya or the mental body), and one a quality pertaining to citta. > > What is the definition of a kaya as a physical or mental body, > given that only one citta arises at a time, and there is no "body" > per se? What is the cetasika of "kaya?" -------- N: All cetasikas arising with the citta are sometimes referred to as kaya, the mental body. -------- > > They perform their functions so that kusala citta and cetasikas can > > apply themselves to daana, siila or bhaavana. They are indispensable > > for the performing of kusala, they support the kusala citta, each in > > their own way. > > The first pair is tranquillity of body, kaaya-passaddhi, and > > tranquillity of citta, citta-passaddhi. Tranquillity or calm is not > > only necessary for samatha, but it has to accompany each kusala > > citta. Calm is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca, which prevents the > > arising of kusala citta. > > R: Interesting to see that "restlessness" is strong enough to > create akusala. That was interesting to me. -------- N: Restlessness, uddhacca, is a cetasika accompanying each akusala citta. It is different fromn what we mean by restlessness or agitation in conventional language. It accompanies akusala cittas rooted in lobha, in dosa, and in moha. It prevents the citta from applying itself to kusala. When we are attached with pleasant feeling, there is also restlessness. -------- > > When there are conditions for kusala citta, > > calm performs its function while it accompanies kusala citta. There > > is no need to aim for calm first as a condition for kusala citta. It > > arises already when kusala citta arises. > > R: Does not calm have conditions that give rise to it as well? What > are conditions for "calm" [which then allow for kusala citta to > arise.] I say it this way because above it is said that opposite of > calm, "restlessness" prevents kusala. So it seems that samatha is > not just an accompanying cetasika for kusala citta, but also indeed > a necessary condition for arising of kusala citta. ------ N: When we use the word samatha it is not a specific cetasika, it is a kind of bhaavana. But here you mean passaddhi, calm or tranquillity, a cetasika. Restlessness prevents kusala: at that moment; it arises with akusala citta, and then there cannot be kusala citta. Calm, passaddhi conditions kusala, at that moment, it arises with the kusala citta. It is not so that there is first calm and then kusala citta. Citta conditions the accompanying cetasikas by way of conascence, sahajata-paccaya, and cetasikas condition the other cetasikas and the citta they accompany by way of conascence. And also by mutuality- condition, a~n~na-ma~n~na-paccaya. As to your question what conditions the passaddhi, the answer is: the kusala citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies. The passaddhi cetasikas are in the context of five pairs: lightness, pliancy, etc. These cause the kusala citta to be light, not sluggish, and wieldy, pliable. All these cetasikas are helpers for the kusala citta they accompany. There are many helpers and calm is among them. There are 19 sobhana cetasikas that have to arise with each sobhana citta. Six of them, pa~n~naa and some others, do not arise with each sobhana citta. When we see how many conditioning factors are needed for just one moment of kusala, we shall be less inclined to take kusala citta for self. -------- (to be continued). Nina. #111969 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 4:48 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? glenjohnann Hi Jonothan Thanks - not sure if it makes it easier, but it fits with the idea of it. Ann --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Ann > > (111904) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "glenjohnann" wrote: > > > > Hello Jonothan > > ... > > > For each moment of sound that is the object of hearing consciousness there are multiple moments of processing by which the sound is recognised and given meaning. (However, the object of those moments of subsequent processing is no longer the actual audible object but a remembered concept of it.) > > > > A: Your last sentence in parentheses above - when you say remembered concept of it, are you talking about the nimitta of it or the memory of what was heard, now a concept and not reality of the sound itself? > > =============== > > J: Thanks for the question. My understanding of the theory is that it would be a nimitta for the first few mind-door processes that follow the original sense-door experience and then a concept for the many processes after that. > > Not sure if that makes 'nimittas' any easier to come to terms with ;-)) > > Jon > #111970 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 5:33 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (111741) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Well, I would say, in the present context, that having a map is only useful if one also rows, rather than reading the map to understand it better, while refusing to touch the oars. > > =============== > > J: To which I would reply that having a map is only useful if it is fully consulted before the journey is begun so that the right path is taken from the outset. Navigating in (partial) reliance on one's innate sense of direction could mean one ends up on a different path than originally intended ;-)) To which I would reply, "There is a middle way" between the map and the road. :-) I wouldn't recommend flying blind, for sure. I also would not trade all travel for a lifetime of map-reading. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111971 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:06 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: The panna that sees dhammas directly is the same panna that understands dhammas at the intellectual level, but in a more developed form. (It is one of those kusala cetasikas mentioned above.) So there's no need for a linking 'practice' that somehow changes the intellectual understanding into direct experiencing. > > > > That is if you believe that the intellectual understanding is, in and of itself, the bridge to the direct experience of that which is. I don't believe that, and don't see any basis for such a belief other than faith in a doctrine for which there is no evidence. > > =============== > > J: The way I've explained it is what I understand the commentarial position to be. The notion of a bridge to direct experience, i.e., something other than the development of panna of a lesser degree, is not one that I've come across. It may not be in commentary, but in sutta Buddha prescribes action as the bridge between understanding and direct experience. There is no suggestion in sutta that action does not exist, should be refrained from, or that intellectual understanding leads to direct experience. Instead there is a concrete path of concentration, mindfulness, taking wholesome actions and refraining from unwholesome activities. If commentary contradicts this understanding, I'll go with sutta. > Right intellectual understanding and understanding of the level of direct experience are on the same continuum (both are the mental factor of panna). I think it is a misunderstanding of panna to think that it is of the intellect in the usual sense. Panna is on the continuum with awakening, not on the continuum with thought. It is of the nature of realization, not of intellectual understanding. Intellectual understanding can set the table, but it cannot create food out of ideas. > As previously explained, there cannot be right intellectual understanding without an appreciation of how what is being considered is applicable to the present moment. So the element of 'application' is there already; there is no need for some separate 'bridge'. Thinking about how intellectual knowledge applies to the present moment is as far from seeing the present moment, or developing the ability to see, as recipe-reading is to cooking. They are not of the same dimension, since the object of intellectual knowing is always a concept and not a presence in the moment. Mistaking one for the other is like being trapped in one's head. > > =============== > > > J: Panna has its particular conditioning factors, although they are not apparent to us, without which it cannot appear. > > > > I am not a big fan of believing in that which cannot be experienced and which is "not apparent to us." Based on what should we take this as an actual process that will yield this result in some mysterious way? > > =============== > > J: We are not being asked to 'believe' in conditions that cannot be directly verified at this stage of our development. Well, I'm not a big fan of accepting, believing - whatever you want to call it - something that neither be logically demonstrated nor proven through direct evidence or experience. One either believes such a doctrine or not. How is it borne out in experience? If not demonstrated in the quality of experience or the direct realization of the stuff of life, it is an article of faith. > On the other hand, it's inevitable is it not that such conditions are postulated in the teachings (after all, if everything was readily apparent, there'd be no need for a Buddha to have to explain everything in such detail ;-)). What is explained in great detail in sutta are the difficult changes and engagements that must be undertaken in real life in order to transform ordinary consciousness and life experience into consciousness that becomes gradually more free and then liberated from suffering. It is complicated to undestand the workings of reality, but it is equally necessary and difficult to follow the path in practical living and practice. For some, as for me, the work of meditative practice is the core of the path, and intellectual understanding's main purpose is to design the framework for practice. > Where certain conditions are postulated in the teachings, we are hardly in a position to refute that part of the teachings, just on the basis that it cannot for the time being be verified (wouldn't that be like saying, If I can't get it, it can't be true? ;-)). Similarly, one cannot find it said in sutta that we should not practice and that we should be restricted to Dhamma study. There is nowhere where a disciple, monk or householder is told to refrain from meditation. There are many places where right concentration and right mindfulness are clearly attached to meditation, and yet you have no problem reinterpreting those instructions to suit your philosophy. If we are to deny nothing, we should take account of that which doesn't fit into our view as well. > > =============== > > > On the other hand, there is no way of predicting when panna will arise or what dhamma will be its object. > > > > Yes, but it's more sensible to have some logical understanding of how this comes to be, even if the actual arising of it is not predictable. Not just a theoretical understanding, but a methodology that develops that - and that is meditation in my view. > =============== > > J: The idea of meditation as a methodology that develops panna is an idea that you choose to infer from the texts, rather than something said directly by the Buddha. It is said directly over and over again. When Buddha describes the detailed path of meditation in anapanasati and various other suttas, or when he says "go and practice jhana" how could anything be more direct? You just have a convenient way of reinterpreting what he says. If you take it at face value, he is very direct indeed. > > =============== > > I still don't see any basis for how panna is expected to develop in an intellectual vaccuum, free from application to experience. > > =============== > > J: You are perhaps looking for an 'application to experience' that is in the form of step-by-step instructions to be followed. What if there was no such application explained by the Buddha? You mean in addition to the hundreds of instructions and admonitions that are throughout the sutta body, and even in the Vis? I realize you reinterpret these to *not* be instructions, but they are in the form of suggestions, teachings or sometimes commands, so it takes very special acrobatics to reinterpret what are clearly imperatives in any language. "If a person wishes to develop X, [which happens to be a path factor,] he should do Y, and do it with as much fervor and dedication as possible," is not a description but an instruction and admonition to *do.* > > =============== > > In many cases he references the conventional world and talks about the impermanence of conventional forms. That is the most predominant way in which he talks about the three marks, is it not? It takes a special act of privileged interpretation to suppose that he is saying something other than what he repeats constantly. > > =============== > > J: Could you give some examples of the Buddha talking about the impermanence of conventional forms? Thanks. Can't find anything right now, even though I have a number of these somewhere in my files. I'll keep looking. I used to run into them all the time when I was *not* looking. Oh well. > > =============== > > In the Great Forty he talks about all the path factors with effluents and then speaks of the development of the Noble path factor as a separate tier that is a higher development without effluents. It is just the path factors with or w/o effluents, according to the sutta. From that I derive the "ordinary" and "noble" version of the path as being on a continuum. Right View with effluents "sides with merit and results in acquisitions." I am calling this the "worldly" path as its fruits are kusala fruits in the world, and he also distinguishes the Noble path factor that is a "factor in the path": > > =============== > > J: Thanks for the reference to the Great Forty sutta. That's helpful. To my understanding, the 2 versions of the path spoken of in that sutta are the mundane (not the conventional) and the lokuttara. > The mundane path is the path of the worldling who is developing insight. Both the mundane and the lokuttara paths involve insight into the true nature of dhammas, as I understand the sutta. There is no 'conventional path' being taught there. Well the language of the sutta suggests otherwise, as it refers to many worldly situations which you would consider concept, not dhamma. Such as: "And what is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions? ... There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is the right view that has effluents, sides with merit, & results in acquisitions." Please note that Buddha talks about good and bad actions, this world and the next world, and says about them "There is...", not "these are mere concepts." "There is mother and father, there are...beings; there are priests and contemplatives..." He speaks of all of these different types of people and actions as real, not as concepts, and he says that the right view with effluents - the mundane path - is indeed acknowledging the existence of these people and these actions; so it is the opposite of what you are saying, that there is only the paramatha path. That is not what the Buddha says. Do you have an alternate way of explaining why Buddha says that these people are real and these actions lead to good and bad results and are real, and that this is right view? Can you explain it in any other way than by saying that the world of actions and people is indeed part of right view and part of the path? > So I think there is only one path, the paramattha one. Well you can think that, but I'll go with what the Buddha says. Abhidhamma and commentary may break the worldly path down into its constituent parts so that one sees on a deeper level, I don't deny that possibility, and in many cases, that reality; but it does not replace or dismiss the worldly path, it supplements and expands our understanding of it. This gnostic view of the path, that it is only paramatha and that there is nothing to be done about this world of action and people, seems to be quite wrong according to the Buddha's own words in sutta. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #111972 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:11 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (111743) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > I purposely put my examples in the context of sutta so you could see that both are used in the context of Dhamma, rather than using examples from the the law and the violin, which I do understand the distinction. I think both are used in relation to Dhamma. When he says that "a monk should train himself thus" he is saying "this is what you should do to acquire this attribute." And that is referring to bhavana, development of the attributes of the Noble disciple. Those sorts of references are not any different than practicing the violin. The training, practice and development references are throughout the sutta body, and are often *not* of the form of the "practice of law," but represent the Buddha's program for development: > > =============== > > J: Well this is the point we are trying to resolve. To my understanding, the way declared by the Buddha as being the way that "a monk should train himself" is a reference to kusala states of consciousness only, and not to some kind of 'trial and error' practice that must necessarily involve akusala. > > > =============== > > DIPA SUTTA > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html > > > > "Monks, concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. And how is concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to be of great fruit, of great benefit? > > > > ... > > > > "So if a monk should wish: 'May neither my body be fatigued nor my eyes, and may my mind, through lack of clinging/sustenance, be released from fermentations,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. > > > > = = = = = = = = = > > > > Please look carefully at the form of this part of the sutta, which repeats a number of times: > > > > "If a monk should wish: X,' then he should do Y." > > > > "Then he should do" is not a description, it is an instruction for how to develop this or that quality. > > =============== > > J: OK, let's take your formula: > "If a monk should wish: X [J: X being some level of kusala attainment], then he should do Y" > > To my understanding, the Y that is to be done is a reference to kusala mindstates only; it is not a reference to the undertaking of a conventional activity (i.e., a 'practice') that must necessarily involve many moments of akusala. > > How do you see it? I see it as it is stated, and don't reinterpret it. If the Buddha wished to say that practice only consists of non-active, non-volitional arising of mindstates, he would not have said the opposite, that "he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing." There is no way to interpret that as a non-volitional arising. It is clearly a practice being advocated by the conventional self, in order to transcend the self. If that seems contradictory, so be it. In samsara we do things in order to realize that there is no one that does them. That's the way it is. Look at it again. He says: "He should attend carefully...through mindfulness of in and out breathing." "He should attend carefully" does not mean he should not do anything and wait for kusala mindstates to arise. You are adding that from your own way of thinking. It is not what he said. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #111973 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best to get out of a burning house? egberdina Hi Sarah, On 16 November 2010 20:49, sarah abbott wrote: > > S: We're talking about the truth, the reality, of experience. At a moment > of touching "the car", what is experienced? At a moment of seeing "the car", > what is experienced? At a moment of thinking, what is thought about or > imagined to exist? > > If we are going to talk about the reality of experience, then we should immediately discard the notion of there being a moment. Cheers Herman > Metta > > Sarah > ======= > > > #111974 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 10:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cutting off at feeling ( was Re: Present Moment...) egberdina Hi Sarah, On 13 November 2010 20:14, sarah abbott wrote: > > >H: This is an interesting perspective. You seem to be saying > > > that seeing is > > real, seen object is real, hearing is real, heard object is > > real, thinking > > is real, but thought object is not real?? > ... > S: Yes > ... > > > > > That does not reconcile easily with, say, MN28 > > > > "Now if internally the intellect is intact but externally > > ideas do not come > > into range, nor is there a corresponding engagement, then > > there is no > > appearing of the corresponding type of consciousness.<...> > ... > S: Ven Thanissaro gives intellect as a translation of mano and ideas as a > translation of dhammaa. i don't have my texts with me, but I think you'll > find that the passage is referring to the coming together of the internal > and external ayatanas - manayatana and dhammayatana - all realities, all > khandhas. The text continues to discuss the khandhas. Ideas or concepts are > not included in the khandhas. They can only be thought about. > > I still don't understand the distinction you are making, I'm afraid. You say visible object is real, when it is seen. Yet an idea is not real, when it is thought. I don't get it, what else does one expect from an idea? When thinking a thought, it is a real thought, isn't it? Cheers Herman > Metta > > Sarah > ========> > > > #111975 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! egberdina Hi Jon, On 13 November 2010 23:56, jonoabb wrote: > > > Hi Herman > > (111643) > > > > To my understanding, specific intentional activities (whether regarded > in > > > conventional terms as 'good', 'bad' or 'neutral') are neither a support > nor > > > a hindrance for the development of the path. Those supports and > hindrances > > > are other factors (mainly mental states) but not intentional activities > per > > > se. > > > > > > > > I infer from what you say above that theme-less awareness release is not > > related to the path, in your view. > > > > MN43 > > "There are three conditions for the persistence of the theme-less > > awareness-release: lack of attention to all themes, attention to the > > theme-less property, and a prior act of will. These are the three > conditions > > for the persistence of the theme-less awareness-release." > > > > It is clear from the text above that an act of will is a pre-requisite in > > this instance. > > =============== > > J: I'd have to check the sutta and possibly the Pali too, neither of which > is readily available to me at the moment. Specifically, I'm not sure what > "theme-less awareness-release" refers to (I doubt however that it refers to > the bare development of awareness). > > I know that, for example, in the case of nirodha-samapatti (attainment of > extinction) the pre-requisites include a resolution as to the time of > emerging from the state. That would be an instance of a 'prior act of will' > as mentioned in your sutta text, while in no way conflicting with the notion > that specific intentional activities are neither a support for nor a > hindrance to the development of the path. > > The passage I quoted specifies the three pre-requisite conditions necessary for the persistence of the state. There is a separate section on the pre-requisite conditions for the emergence from the state. "There are two conditions for the emergence from the theme-less awareness-release: attention to all themes and lack of attention to the theme-less property. These are the two conditions for the emergence from the theme-less awareness-release." There is thus no hint of a suggestion that the prior act of will is connected with the emergence from the state, but solely with the persisting of the state. Being a reasonable man :-), it continues to be plain fact, not requiring interpretation, that in this case specific intentional activity is an absolute must. Cheers Herman #111976 From: Kevin F Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:26 pm Subject: DSG: Musical playlist of sotapanna farrellkevin80 This is a musical play-list that a sotapanna might listen to. This one is mine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4gJN2NhSNI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hignzKHphvQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-5EwdEEN24 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51V1VMkuyx0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwCt0YQPn7g http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaCijH0USo8 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SuapCENFM2U Why share such a play list? Well, if you think about it you might find an answer. What I've done today: generally enjoyed sense pleasures including taking a walk outdoors in the wilderness, petting someones golden retriever dog, seeing women and being attracted to them, wanting to talk to them and spend some time with them, listening to all the above songs in a row. At the end of this day, I will enjoy more creature comforts. ___________ With metta Kevin The business of an intellectual is to think. Most people think religion is staring at the perfection of a rose bud. They don't understand the decay of the rose bud nor of the mind that admires it and then quickly decays. - me Kevin's discussion forum = http://www.dhammasnippets.webs.com/ #111977 From: Herman Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:52 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khun Bong’s Diary, no 1. egberdina Hi Jon, On 14 November 2010 00:18, jonoabb wrote: > > > Hi Herman > > (111703) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, > Herman wrote: > > > > Hi Jon, > > ... > > > It seems to me that the reality of the present moment is always an > intended > > object, it is not a given object. To be aware of anything is always an > act. > > =============== > > J: Not sure what you mean by the terms 'intended object' and 'given > object'. > > To my understanding, the 'reality of the present moment' in the context of > the Dhamma, refers to whatever dhammas are present at that moment. > > I would like to combine this reply with one from another thread, where you wrote: "When you think about it, whether there's action or inaction in the conventional sense, there's bound to be intending involved. For example, if the present posture becomes uncomfortable, the 2 options available both involve intending: moving to a different posture to relieve the discomfort requires intending; not moving to a different posture despite the discomfort would also require intending. Remaining just so without any change is not possible; that is the nature of samsara." I agree with this last reply, and that is why I cannot agree with your first reply. The present moment and it's alleged content is a furphy. What there is for an intentional being ( ie you, me and everybody) is a constant effort towards states of affairs which do not (yet) exist. States that are being intended are not there, they are not given, they are being intended to be there. Intended states, because they do not exist (yet), cannot be the content of the present moment. Cheers Herman #111978 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:39 pm Subject: Friendliness Frees! bhikkhu5 Friends: Friendly Goodwill is the 9th Mental Perfection: Friendliness means Goodwill Friendliness means Kindness Friendliness means Helpfulness Friendliness means Assistance Friendliness means Support Friendliness means Benevolence Friendliness means Concern Friendliness means Care Friendliness means Compassion Friendliness means Cooperation Friendliness means Mutual Aid Friendliness means Mutual Advantage Friendliness means Sympathy Friendliness means Symbiosis Only friendliness can completely evaporate the poison of hate and anger! Its characteristic is promoting other being's welfare, its function is to do only good, and its manifestation is kindness, sympathy, and gentleness... The proximate cause of friendliness is seeing the good aspects of things! The proximate cause of understanding compassion is this very friendliness! The Blessed Buddha said about friendliness (Metta): "Bhikkhus, whatever kinds of worldly merit there are, all are not worth one sixteenth part of the release of mind by universal friendliness; in shining, glowing and beaming radiance, this release of mind by universal friendliness far excels & surpasses them all..." What are the 11 Advantages of cultivating such Universal Friendliness? The four Brahma Viharas; The four Divine States: The four Supreme States; The four Infinite States: "Friends, eleven advantages are to be expected as effect from the release of mind into friendliness by the practice of Goodwill, by cultivating amity, by making much of it frequently, by making friendliness the vehicle, the tool, the basis, by insisting on it, by being well established in it as a sublime habit! What are these eleven advantages ? One falls asleep well! One wakes up Happy! One dreams no evil dreams! One is liked and loved by all human beings! One is liked and loved by all non-human beings too! One is guarded and protected by the divine devas! One cannot be harmed by fire, poison, or weapons! One easily attains the concentration of absorption! Ones appearance becomes serene, calm, and composed! One dies without confusion, bewilderment, or panic! One reappears after death on the Brahma level, if one has penetrated to no higher level in this very life! When the mind is released into friendliness by the practice of goodwill, by manifesting friendliness, by cultivating amity, by frequently making much of it, by making friendliness the vehicle, the tool, the basis, the medium, the foundation, by persisting in it, by insisting on it, by properly consolidating it, by thoroughly undertaking it, by making it a familiar supreme habit, by so being well established in it, these eleven blessings can be expected!" Anguttara Nikaya V 342 There, Oohh friends, the Bhikkhu with a mind full of friendly loving-kindness pervading first one direction, then a 2nd one, then a 3rd one then the 4th one, as below so above, across and all around, everywhere identifying himself with all sentient beings, he is encompassing the whole world with a mind of friendly loving-kindness, with a wide mind, vast, refined, unbounded, cleared, exalted, pure and bright, free from all hate and ill will ... There, Oh friends, the Bhikkhu with a mind full of understanding compassion pervading first the front, then the right side, then the back, then the left side, as below so above, across & all around, all over, far & wide; identifying himself with all sentient beings, he is perfusing the whole universe with a mind imbued with pity, with a spacious mind, a refined mind, infinite, purified, all luminous, freed from all anger and any trace of enmity ... There, the Bhikkhu with a mind full of altruistic, sympathetic and mutual Joy pervading the North, then the East, then the South, then the West, as below so above, across & all around, universally, infinitely; identifying himself with all sentient beings, he is suffusing all galaxies with a mind elevated by genuine mutual and altruistic sympathetic joy, with an open mind, immeasurable, wide, limitless, pure & shining, free from all aversion and bitterness ... There, Oohh friends, the Bhikkhu with a mind full of balanced equanimity is pervading first the frontal quadrant, then the right, then the rear & then the left quadrant, as below so above, across and all around, everywhere placing himself with all sentient beings, he is permeating the whole world with a mind satiated of stilled and balanced equanimity, calmed, with a mountain-like mind, cultivated, endless, clean, dazzling, freed from any irritation and resentment." "So too, Bhikkhus, others may speak to you timely or untimely, true or untrue, gentle or harsh, beneficial or harmful, based on kindness or on bitter hate! If they abuse you verbally, you should train yourselves in this way: "Our minds will remain unaffected, we shall speak no angry words, will dwell friendly and understanding, with thoughts of kindness and no inward anger! We shall remain friendly and beam goodwill towards that very person, and we shall dwell extending it to the entire universe, mentally overflowing, exalted, measureless and infinite in friendliness, without any trace hostility or ill-will." That is how you should train yourselves. Even if bandits were savagely to cut you up, limb by limb, with a two-handled saw, one who harbours hate on that account, would not be one who carried out my teaching. Bhikkhus, you should keep this instruction on this Simile of the Saw constantly in mind... Majjhima Nikaya, Sutta 21 Thus he who both day and night takes delight in harmlessness sharing love with all that lives, finds enmity with none... Samyutta Nikaya. I 208 When one with a mind of love feels compassion for the entire world above, below and across, unlimited everywhere. Jataka 37 The Bodhisatta once was born as the righteous king Ekaraja. His kingdom was taken by force and he and his son was buried in a pit to the neck... King Ekaraja, however neither resisted, nor bore even slight ill will against the invaders. Later he remembered this as his ultimate perfection of friendliness. Ekaraja Jataka 303 On the Practice of Loving-Kindness (Metta): http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/bps/wheels/wheel007.html <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <.... #111979 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:21 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (111744) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > He did indeed say "if you want to develop these wholesome qualities, practice in this way." I guess I have to quote from the Dippa Sutta again: > > =============== > > J: Thanks again for the sutta quote. The sutta says "he should *attend carefully* to" specific matters. This is clearly a reference to kusala mindstates, not to a conventional 'focussing on' that would for the worldling involve akusala mindstates. > > > =============== > > > > "If a monk should wish: 'May I remain percipient of loathsomeness in the presence of what is not loathsome,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. > > > > "If a monk should wish: 'May I remain percipient of unloathsomeness in the presence of what is loathsome,' then he should attend carefully to this same concentration through mindfulness of in-&-out breathing. ... > > > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn54/sn54.008.than.html > > > > > What he said was to develop kusala; this can only be achieved if kusala is recognised as kusala as and when it arises. > > > > This is not what he said in these quotes from the Dippa Sutta. Can you tell me where he did say this? It seems to me that he constantly said to develop kusala through continued developmental practice, as in the Dippa Sutta and all the other practice suttas which generally use anapanasati as their foundation and method and show how the higher states and path factors are systematically developed through practice. > > =============== > > J: To my understanding, the only 'developmental practice' recommended by the Buddha is various moments of kusala. Well you're contradicting what's in the text of the suttas in saying that. So I don't know what "to my understanding" means. If you do not accept what the Buddha says, what do you understand him to mean? As far as I can see, you are saying the Buddha's statements here are wrong. I don't know how else to interpret your response. You don't show evidence for this understanding. You say that your understanding is the opposite of what I have quoted you, and I am quoting the Buddha. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111980 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A lovely dream about Kaeng Krajan! epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (111878) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Can you explain again how practice is something that arises by itself without any doing? "Practice" is inherently doing, not arising. To "practice" means to "do," even if it is the kind of practice you cited, such as "a practicing lawyer," it is still a "doing." How can "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" be "the arising of satipatthana," rather than its development through practice? You have managed to delete the "practice" out of "practice." How do you explain or justify this? > > =============== > > J: The question is whether "practice in accordance with the Dhamma" means the actual development of the path (i.e., satipatthana) as opposed to the doing of something that, while not itself the development of the path, will conduce to moments of path development occurring (as in some form of 'practice' as commonly conceived). > > I was making the point that one usage of the term 'practice' is to describe the exercise of a skill already acquired (as in the practice of the law). It is not limited to the other common usage of an act done in the course of the acquisition of the skill (as in to practise a musical instrument or piece). > > You make the point that "practice" is inherently doing, not simply the arising of something. Even if that is so (which I doubt ;-)), Please give me a coherent description of what "practice" means, other than practice. > there are many instances in the suttas of dhammas and their functions being described in conventional terms which, to the casual reader, You mean the reader who actually reads what is there? > would be suggestive of people and things and actions. And how does the non-casual reader read those words, by refusing to give them the meaning that they actually have? How is this accomplished? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111981 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:32 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (111882) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > from: The Agganna Sutta: > > "And sometimes a Khattiya takes life, takes what is not given, commits sexual misconduct, tells lies, indulges in slander, harsh speech or idle chatter, is grasping, malicious, or of wrong views. Thus such things as are immoral and considered so, blameworthy and considered so, to be avoided and considered so, ways unbefitting an Ariyan and considered so, black with black result and blamed by the wise, are sometimes to be found among the Khattiyas, and the same applies to Brahmins, merchants, and artisans. > > > > 'Sometimes too, a Khattiya refrains from taking life, does not take what is not given, refrains from sexual misconduct, speaks truth, shuns slander, harsh speech or idle chatter, is not grasping, malicious, or of wrong views. Thus such things are moral and considered so, blameless and considered so, to be followed and considered so, ways befitting an Ariyan and considered so, bright with bright results and praised by the wise..." > > > > You can see above that "taking life and telling lies," not mental qualities but ethically akusala *actions,* are within the definition of akusala, of unwholesomeness, and refraining from taking life, lying and sexual misconduct, the speaking of truth and other moral *actions* are considered kusala wholesome *actions.* So I would not agree that Buddha has restricted the definition of what is kusala or akusala to "ethical or unethical mental states." It is clear from such suttas that this is *not* the case. > > > > I mean, I know that you know that the Buddha has outlined what is wholesome and unwholesome activity in hundreds of suttas, so I'm not sure why you are feigning ignorance in this area. It's Dhamma kindergarten, isn't it? Do you play dice regularly? > > =============== > > J: ;-)) ;-)) > > Again, thanks for the sutta quote. I must say it helps greatly in narrowing the scope of the discussion (not that we're more likely to agree, mind you ;-)). > > An activity comprises many moments of consciousness over a span of time. An activity is only wholesome or unwholesome to the extent that the mental states in the javana processes accompanying those moments of consciousness are kusala or akusala. > > Killing and stealing necessarily involve some moments of akusala, and restraint from those unwholesome deeds necessarily involves some moments of kusala. But there may also be moments of the opposite quality occurring in the javana processes during the course of the deed (this is particularly so in the case of 'kusala' deeds, I would think). > > For most of the day there is neither killing, stealing, etc nor abstaining from the same (where 'abstaining from' means that the inclination is there but not acted upon), but other more 'neutral' actions (eating, working, brushing teeth, etc). So there are kusala or akusala javana cittas arising all the time. What makes these cittas kusala or akusala are the accompanying mental states, not the supposed 'quality' of the deed or action. I don't doubt this at all. Obviously wholesomeness includes wholesome mental states, and these affect the quality of the accompanying "deeds or actions" as you say. All I was trying to demonstrate, and all I was obligated to show, was that conventional actions and abstentions in the material world are included prominently in the Buddha's program for development, and this sutta amply demonstrates that. Of course, mental states are also included and change the quality of actions. > > > > That is not so, Jon. Buddha constantly talks about the conventional factors of life and how they are anatta and anicca. He does so in countless suttas, so it is not fair to say he always does so in some pure form of understanding of dhammas. He finds it valuable to tell people to detach from conventional objects, so I think it is valuable too. > > > > =============== > > ... > > I will note that A. Sujin and Nina appear to be talking about food, fruits, and other conventional objects as objects of clinging. > > =============== > > J: Of course, we generally speak in terms of conventional objects and actions, as did the Buddha in many of his suttas. But the Dhamma is to be understood in terms of dhammas (namas and rupas). It would somewhat inhibit discussion if everything had to be couched in paramattha terms all the time ;-)). But the Buddha is talking about the path here and what is kusala and akusala, Jon. It's not a casual conversation on his part, and I don't think you can dismiss his examples or his clear delineations of conventional activities and involvements that are wholesome are unwholesome. What would be more interesting would be to see how the wholesomeness of mental states and material actions intersect and influence each other. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111982 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:34 am Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > My understanding of the theory is that it would be a nimitta for the first few mind-door processes that follow the original sense-door experience and then a concept for the many processes after that. > > Not sure if that makes 'nimittas' any easier to come to terms with ;-)) I guess since we are only able to see nimittas or concepts, that makes all of us sort of "nimwits," doesn't it. :-( Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #111983 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 4:39 am Subject: [dsg] Q. Re: Calm. part 1. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > I appreciate your interesting questions. Thanks. :-) > Op 17-nov-2010, om 6:28 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > The Path of Purification" (Visuddhimagga) Ch. XIV, 144. > > > Intro: > > > In the following paragraphs, the Visuddhimagga deals with six pairs > > > of sobhana cetasikas that arise with each sobhana citta. Of each > > pair > > > one cetasika is a quality pertaining to the accompanying cetasikas > > > (kaaya or the mental body), and one a quality pertaining to citta. > > > > What is the definition of a kaya as a physical or mental body, > > given that only one citta arises at a time, and there is no "body" > > per se? What is the cetasika of "kaya?" > -------- > N: All cetasikas arising with the citta are sometimes referred to as > kaya, the mental body. > -------- Thank you, that's good to know. > > > They perform their functions so that kusala citta and cetasikas can > > > apply themselves to daana, siila or bhaavana. They are indispensable > > > for the performing of kusala, they support the kusala citta, each in > > > their own way. > > > The first pair is tranquillity of body, kaaya-passaddhi, and > > > tranquillity of citta, citta-passaddhi. Tranquillity or calm is not > > > only necessary for samatha, but it has to accompany each kusala > > > citta. Calm is opposed to restlessness, uddhacca, which prevents the > > > arising of kusala citta. > > > > R: Interesting to see that "restlessness" is strong enough to > > create akusala. That was interesting to me. > -------- > N: Restlessness, uddhacca, is a cetasika accompanying each akusala > citta. It is different fromn what we mean by restlessness or > agitation in conventional language. It accompanies akusala cittas > rooted in lobha, in dosa, and in moha. It prevents the citta from > applying itself to kusala. When we are attached with pleasant > feeling, there is also restlessness. It sounds like it is almost like a vibration of movement that keeps the citta from settling clearly on its object. > -------- > > > When there are conditions for kusala citta, > > > calm performs its function while it accompanies kusala citta. There > > > is no need to aim for calm first as a condition for kusala citta. It > > > arises already when kusala citta arises. > > > > R: Does not calm have conditions that give rise to it as well? What > > are conditions for "calm" [which then allow for kusala citta to > > arise.] I say it this way because above it is said that opposite of > > calm, "restlessness" prevents kusala. So it seems that samatha is > > not just an accompanying cetasika for kusala citta, but also indeed > > a necessary condition for arising of kusala citta. > ------ > N: When we use the word samatha it is not a specific cetasika, it is > a kind of bhaavana. But here you mean passaddhi, calm or > tranquillity, a cetasika. I see. > Restlessness prevents kusala: at that moment; it arises with akusala > citta, and then there cannot be kusala citta. Calm, passaddhi > conditions kusala, at that moment, it arises with the kusala citta. > It is not so that there is first calm and then kusala citta. > Citta conditions the accompanying cetasikas by way of conascence, > sahajata-paccaya, and cetasikas condition the other cetasikas and the > citta they accompany by way of conascence. And also by mutuality- > condition, a~n~na-ma~n~na-paccaya. > As to your question what conditions the passaddhi, the answer is: the > kusala citta and the other cetasikas it accompanies. > The passaddhi cetasikas are in the context of five pairs: lightness, > pliancy, etc. These cause the kusala citta to be light, not sluggish, > and wieldy, pliable. All these cetasikas are helpers for the kusala > citta they accompany. There are many helpers and calm is among them. > There are 19 sobhana cetasikas that have to arise with each sobhana > citta. Six of them, pa~n~naa and some others, do not arise with each > sobhana citta. > When we see how many conditioning factors are needed for just one > moment of kusala, we shall be less inclined to take kusala citta for > self. > -------- Very interesting, Nina. Although I can't understand much of it in its detail, I can get a sense of how the cetasikas are configured to support the citta. Thanks! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #111984 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:10 am Subject: Quick word of thanks to Nina philofillet Hi Nina and all Just wanted to pop in with a quick word of thanks. Last night in the bath I was reading a book by a psychologist based on discussions with Dalai Lama that I found in the staffroom at work and after a few minutes I tossed it aside, irritated by the complete lack of solid Dhamma content. (No fault to the Dalai Lama, probably in the way the book was presented...probably.) I got out of the bath dripping wet and went and got "Conditions." Wow, the chapter on the Root condition is so solid and helpful. I have often said that I think that it is a mistake to have a lot of interest in paramattha teachings unless one's conventional morality is very solid, but now that there is a pretty strong degree of conventional morality established for me (yes, because of asuyanas(?latent tendencies) it can crumble at any time, I know, I know...) it was a pleasure to delve back into the teachings that reflect the understanding of the enlightened mind. (Even if the paccayas weren't all taught by the Buddha as experts in Buddhist history agree, the understanding descends directly from him, unlike the horrible pap I was reading in that other book..) So thanks, Nina. I do honestly feel that when I am doing battle with gross defilements that push me towards commiting akusala kamma patha, your words *do* at times become agents of Mara if they fail to clearly and firmly say "don't do that bad deed", because first things first. Stop doing bad deeds. At a certain degree in gradual training, "just stop doing it" and "just don't do it" come before understanding the dhammas involved. And then conditions are created for delving a little more deeply into understanding dhammas, and that of course leads in the direction of a more permanent liberation from bad deeds than that which is provided by just-don't-do-it-no-matter-what. I think I (so to speak) may be reaching that point....possibly, we'll see. But as soon as my conventional morality crumbles and there are bad deeds in a habitual way, I will put away "Conditions" again and turn back to the way of teaching the Buddha gave to people who do bad things habitually...that was *not* by teaching about paramattha dhammas, the sutta on the leper made it clear that he started with more basic points. Anyways, thanks. And Happy 50th Birthday to me! I am so grateful that I am continuing to live my life in the light of the Buddha's teaching! The best possible gift that one could give to oneself... Metta, PHil #111985 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 7:23 am Subject: Nina's Visuddhimagga chapter XIV study ptaus1 Hi all, Nina's Visuddhimagga chapter XIV study with commentary has been uploaded into Files section: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/z - Visuddhimagga Ch XIV study.doc Now that I had a bit of time to look at it, it seems a huge amount of work went into it, so thanks a lot to Nina and Larry for this. And since I have the opportunity now - happy birthday to Phil! Best wishes pt #111986 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 7:30 am Subject: Re: Nina's Visuddhimagga chapter XIV study ptaus1 Hi all, And hopefully a link that works this time: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/z%20-%20Visuddhimagga%20Ch%\ 20XIV%20study.doc Best wishes pt #111987 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] DSG: Musical playlist of sotapanna nilovg Dear Kevin, Nice to see you again, I hope you are well. I thought of you. Op 18-nov-2010, om 0:26 heeft Kevin F het volgende geschreven: > What I've done today: generally enjoyed sense pleasures including > taking a walk > outdoors in the wilderness, petting someones golden retriever dog, > seeing women > and being attracted to them, wanting to talk to them and spend some > time with > them, listening to all the above songs in a row. At the end of this > day, I will > enjoy more creature comforts. -------- N: Yes, all this is daily life. Enjoying things is conditioned, depending on one's accumulated inclinations. We all have different inclinations, I am not so inclined to listening to songs. But during work at the computer I listen to quiet organ music. Naama and ruupa are never absent. Nina. #111988 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Q. Re: Calm. part 1. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 18-nov-2010, om 5:39 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Restlessness, uddhacca, is a cetasika accompanying each akusala > > citta. It is different fromn what we mean by restlessness or > > agitation in conventional language. It accompanies akusala cittas > > rooted in lobha, in dosa, and in moha. It prevents the citta from > > applying itself to kusala. When we are attached with pleasant > > feeling, there is also restlessness. > > It sounds like it is almost like a vibration of movement that keeps > the citta from settling clearly on its object. ------ N: You see this rightly. There is no steadiness, no stable condition. The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 250) gives the following definition of uddhacca: It has mental excitement as characteristic like wind-tossed water; wavering as function, like a flag waving in the wind: whirling as manifestation like scattered ashes struck by a stone; unsystematic thought owing to mental excitement as proximate cause; and it should be regarded as mental distraction over an object of excitement. > ----------- > > R: Very interesting, Nina. Although I can't understand much of it > in its detail, I can get a sense of how the cetasikas are > configured to support the citta. Thanks! ------- N: It helps to know more details. Citta and cetasikas condition each other mutually, and also all the cetasikas that arise with the citta condition one another mutually. For instance, pa~n~naa and calm that accompany kusala citta condition one another. As Pa~n~naa develops, also calm becomes stronger and this will become more apparent as stages of insight are reached. And, as I quoted, when all defilements have been eradicated at arahatship there is the highest calm. Another example: there can be pleasant feeling when we enjoy a pleasant object, and also when we are generously helping someone else. In the latter case the citta is kusala citta and this conditions the pleasant feeling to be calm and more refined than when it accompanies enjoyment that is akusala. For more details you could consult my book on Cetasikas: in Zolag and also on Rob K's web: ------ Nina #111989 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Quick word of thanks to Nina nilovg Dear Philip, Op 18-nov-2010, om 4:10 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Anyways, thanks. And Happy 50th Birthday to me! I am so grateful > that I am continuing to live my life in the light of the Buddha's > teaching! The best possible gift that one could give to oneself... ------- N: I wish you a happy birthday with all the benefits of Dhamma! I liked your story about reading in the oforu and tossing aside the Dalai Lama's book. At different periods of life we are inclined to different litterature. I think that people who spend their lives with all kinds of akusala are not inclined to listen and study anyway. If I would tell someone who kills 'do not kill' will this help him? If I try to tell him about the disadvantages of akusala he may listen or not, who knows? I am glad you find the Ch on root-condition useful. It is about daily life, the roots keep on motivating our actions, good or bad, even now while you are writing emails, or reading them. Nina. #111990 From: Herman Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 12:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] MN131 & The 3 Characteristics in Context egberdina Hi Sarah, On 15 November 2010 21:26, sarah abbott wrote: > > >The Buddha taught Recollection of Generosity (caganussati), Recollection > of Virtue (silanussati) and Recollection of Peace. The Recollection of the > Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha are recommended to arouse long-term, satisfying > and stable faith. In Majjhima 61 the Buddha taught Rahula to reflect on his > bodily, verbal and mental actions past, present and future. > > >I suspect that the main criticism of the above will be that faith, > generosity, virtue, samadhi and discernment are completely anicca, dukkha > and anatta. I look forward to constructive criticism. > .... > S: My main concern with what you write is that there seems to be an idea of > purposely determining what to recollect, in other words, an attachment, a > view that certain subjects should be selected. > > Is there any detachment from what is experienced at such times? > It sounds like you disapprove of mindfulness. Cheers Herman #111991 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:10 pm Subject: Q. Calm, no 2. nilovg Dear Rob E, --------- > > The Commentary to the `Abhidhammattha Sangaha' (T.A. p 64) mentions > > that calm of cetasikas also conditions bodily phenomena: > tranquillity, etc., of consciousness brings about a state of > > tranquillity, etc., of only consciousness, but tranquillity of the > > body brings about these states of the material body also by > virtue of > > pervading the refined materiality arising from it; in order to make > > this point as well, their twofold nature is stated.> > > Again, I am interested in what the "material body" consists of. Is > it just a momentary cetasika? I ask because I have heard here that > there is no material body per se, that this is just a concept. ------- N: Material body are ruupas of the body. When the citta is kusala citta and accompanied by sobhana cetasikas, these dhammas also affect the body, refresh it. One may be tired, but when there is an occasion to help others, all tiredness is gone. One does not think of one's own comfort. As I said there are six pairs of sobhana cetasikas, and calm or tranquillity of citta and of the mental body is one pair. There is also the pair of lightness, plasticity or pliancy, wieldiness and proficiency. Note 65, taken from the Tiika: 'And here by tranquilization, etc., of consciousness only consciousness is tranquilized and becomes light, malleable, wieldy, proficient and upright. But with tranquilization, etc., of the [mental]body also the material body is tranquilized, and so on. This is why the twofoldness of states is given by the Blessed One here, but not in all places' (Pm.489). ---------- R:When tranquility "pervades the refined materiality arising from" the material body, what does this "refined materiality" consist of, and how does tranquility pervade it? ------- N: There are coarse ruupas and subtle ruupas. The coarse ruupas are the sense objects and the sense organs which impinge on each other. The other ruupas are subtle. Among these there are lightness, plasticity, and wieldiness of body. These are actually qualities of ruupa. The above mentioned sobhana cetasikas and kusala citta condition ruupas such as lightness, pliancy and wieldiness of the material body. quote (from my Physical Phenomena): It is citta that conditions speech. Kusala citta is accompanied by sobhana cetasikas, and they condition the three above mentioned ruupas that are qualities of ruupa and that make speech supple and workable. Also in the suttas we read about the great disciples that their faculties looked very bright because of their wisdom. Citta and the accompanying sobhana cetasikas conditioned their outward appearance. ----------- > > > > N: The Tiika explains that tranquilizing (passambhana.m) means the > > calming of anxiety. > > This is great to hear the various opposites of "calm" that cause > samatha from being present, and that prevent kusala cittas from > arising. We had restlessness before, now anxiety is being > mentioned. I really like these details of what the akusala > qualities are with regard to samatha. ------- N: Anxiety: we have to think of dosa, sorrow and distress. The Tika mentions: conditioned by unpleasant feeling, domanassa-paccaya. ---------- > > R: > It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a > > group, > > Okay, this is good to hear. So the term kaya, kaayo, or body, > denotes a group - can you say a word about what the group is and > what that grouping consists of? How do the kandhas of feeling, > sanna and formations combine [with cetasikas also...?] to form a > "group" which is referred to as kaayo or body? Do they arise > together in a single moment, or is there a group of rupas that > arise in sequence to create the kaayo? -------- N: Just the group of cetasikas arising together with the kusala citta. Text: And here 'body' means the three [mental] aggregates, feeling, [perception and formations] (see Dhs.40). It states that the term body, kaayo, denotes a group, and it refers to the Dhammasangani which mentions the tranquillity of the khandhas of feeling, remembrance (sańńaa) and the formations. With reference to these three khandhas that include the cetasikas, the word body, kaayo, is used.> They arise together in a single moment. Here there is no reference to ruupas. --------- (to be continued) Nina. > #111992 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 3:14 pm Subject: Khun Bong's Diary, no 7. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Bong: Nobody knows what will happen at which moment. Some people are shot to death, children are hit. Kh Sujin: Rocks are thrown. Kh Bong: We are sitting comfortably but anything can happen. Nothing is more valuable than the development of pa~n~naa through satipa.t.thaana, so that the truth can be known. Kh Sujin: It is miraculous that pa~n~naa can know at this moment the truth which is very subtle and complex. Ignorance of the truth about life causes one to be deluded and to cling to what appears through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind, from birth to death. Kh Bong: Before, when I was not yet ill I wanted to look young, but since I became ill the medicine that I take makes me look older, even twenty years older. Kh Sujin: we have to think of Ambapaali who was very beautiful [1]. Kh Bong: Her body gradually decayed. Kh Sujin: Her body changed completely. Her fingers, hair and eyebrows which were beautiful before changed. That is the truth of Dhamma. Kh Bong: My hair became grey. Kh Sujin: Soon you will be a deva. Then you will not grow old, your body will not change, you will not become ugly. Kh Bong: Our body teaches us the truth. If we do not study the Dhamma we harm people around us. Without pa~n~naa we are stupid. Kh Sujin: One may be beautiful but with an evil character, and therefore one’s beauty is only outward... Khun Bong tells that she from her youth was educated by her father to like beautiful cloths. She was involved with fashion shows and speaks about her attachment and infatuation. Khun Sujin: This does not matter at all. Everybody clings to a greater or lesser extent. Listen little by little and develop pa~n~naa gradually so that the truth can be known. Kh Bong tells that before she studied the Dhamma she wanted to be conspicuous, to be in the news. Kh Sujin (laughing): That is the idea of self, love of self.... One is deceived. Lobha deludes one all the time. Kh Bong: It is of no use at all. Kh Sujin. Lobha deludes one into thinking that it is a close friend. It clearly deludes one. Kh Bong: This is clear and attachment is a hindrance. Kh Sujin: But Khun Bong, though some people are delighted and infatuated, we are not disturbed. However, sometimes we are annoyed and do not see that their speech is of any use. Kh Bong: That concerns those who have already understanding, like Acharn, but as regards me... Kh Sujin: laughs. Kh Bong: I am as usual, as I always was. I think that it is all right that sometimes tears are flowing, and I am still attached. Usually people are attached (laughing). As a consequence there is still sadness. ------- 1: A beautiful courtisan who became a follower of the Buddha. Her ageing body reminded her of impermanence. She attained arahatship (Theragaatha vs. 252-270). ****** Nina. #111993 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:07 pm Subject: Re: Nina's Visuddhimagga chapter XIV study epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > And hopefully a link that works this time: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/files/z%20-%20Visuddhimagga%20Ch%\ 20XIV%20study.doc Found and downloaded the study. It is really awesome-looking! I agree with you that a lot of work must have gone into this. Thanks, Nina and Larry, and thanks pt for putting it in the files. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = #111994 From: "Huajun" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 6:29 pm Subject: Which one is the right order in the conceptualization processesŁż huajun_tang Online Now Send IM Send Email Send Email Hi everyone, I am translating into Chinese some of the materials in the book " Essentials of Insight Meditation Practice--A Pragmatic Approach to Vipassana" by Ven. Sayadaw Sujiva, however, I find that the description part of the conceptualization processes is inconsistent with the examples in that the naming process is in the fourth place in the description part but in the third place in the examples. I believe the inconsistency is duo to some editorial error, can anyone tell me which order is the right one? The following is the original text: ______________________________________________________ After this follows the mind-door processes, such as: 1 The first type of process is usually the compaction of past object process which is a carry over of the object from the sense doors (atitaghannavithi). 2 Following it is the amassing process, where the various eye objects are amassed into formation eg of shape concepts (samuhaghanavithi). 3 Next, ideas of what they are develop through the meaning or idea processes (atthaghanavithi). 4 Lastly, the names ascribed to it may be given mentally. This is through the naming process (namaghanavithi). These may develop further into more abstract ideas especially when associated with other sense doors and ideas. But from here we may say that to note ˇ°seeingˇ± without thinking would cut off a lot of concepts. It would also help to disregard the shape and forms as far as possible. With the hearing process: 1 past process 2 amassing of sound forms 3 naming 4 meaning or ideas Similarly, by just noting ˇ°hearingˇ± we cut off concepts. It would also help to disregard the ˇ°wordsˇ± if we are to arrive at the Vipassana object faster. And again with smelling, tasting, and touching processes: 1 past 2 amassing 3 naming 4 meaning Only by noting ˇ°smellingˇ± merely as ˇ°smellingˇ± etc, we cut off concepts. Idea of what is smelt, tasted or touched should also bedisregarded. The processes follow one another so quickly that they make whatis complex seem solid and as a whole. Thanks, Huajun #111995 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 10:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Q. Re: Calm. part 1. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 18-nov-2010, om 5:39 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > Restlessness, uddhacca, is a cetasika accompanying each akusala > > > citta. It is different fromn what we mean by restlessness or > > > agitation in conventional language. It accompanies akusala cittas > > > rooted in lobha, in dosa, and in moha. It prevents the citta from > > > applying itself to kusala. When we are attached with pleasant > > > feeling, there is also restlessness. > > > > It sounds like it is almost like a vibration of movement that keeps > > the citta from settling clearly on its object. > ------ > N: You see this rightly. There is no steadiness, no stable condition. > > The Atthasalini (II, Part IX, Chapter I, 250) gives the following > definition of uddhacca: > > It has mental excitement as characteristic like wind-tossed > water; wavering as function, like a flag waving in the wind: whirling > as manifestation like scattered ashes struck by a stone; unsystematic > thought owing to mental excitement as proximate cause; and it should > be regarded as mental distraction over an object of excitement. > > ----------- That is really nicely described, and very poetic. It must be pleasant to read text like this at greater length. > > > > R: Very interesting, Nina. Although I can't understand much of it > > in its detail, I can get a sense of how the cetasikas are > > configured to support the citta. Thanks! > ------- > N: It helps to know more details. Citta and cetasikas condition each > other mutually, and also all the cetasikas that arise with the citta > condition one another mutually. For instance, pa~n~naa and calm that > accompany kusala citta condition one another. As Pa~n~naa develops, > also calm becomes stronger and this will become more apparent as > stages of insight are reached. And, as I quoted, when all defilements > have been eradicated at arahatship there is the highest calm. > Another example: there can be pleasant feeling when we enjoy a > pleasant object, and also when we are generously helping someone > else. In the latter case the citta is kusala citta and this > conditions the pleasant feeling to be calm and more refined than when > it accompanies enjoyment that is akusala. > For more details you could consult my book on Cetasikas: in Zolag > and also on Rob K's web: > > > ------ > Nina Thank you, Nina. I will look at your book. The above - regarding levels of calm and mutual conditioning of cetasikas, is very good to hear about. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #111996 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:33 pm Subject: Re: Khun Bong's Diary, no 7. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear friends, > > Kh Bong: Nobody knows what will happen at which moment. Some people > are shot to death, children are hit. > > Kh Sujin: Rocks are thrown. > > Kh Bong: We are sitting comfortably but anything can happen. Nothing > is more valuable than the development of pa~n~naa through > satipa.t.thaana, so that the truth can be known. > > Kh Sujin: It is miraculous that pa~n~naa can know at this moment the > truth which is very subtle and complex. Ignorance of the truth about > life causes one to be deluded and to cling to what appears through > the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind, > from birth to death. > > Kh Bong: Before, when I was not yet ill I wanted to look young, but > since I became ill the medicine that I take makes me look older, even > twenty years older. > > Kh Sujin: we have to think of Ambapaali who was very beautiful [1]. > > Kh Bong: Her body gradually decayed. > > Kh Sujin: Her body changed completely. Her fingers, hair and eyebrows > which were beautiful before changed. That is the truth of Dhamma. > > Kh Bong: My hair became grey. > > Kh Sujin: Soon you will be a deva. Then you will not grow old, your > body will not change, you will not become ugly. > > Kh Bong: Our body teaches us the truth. If we do not study the Dhamma > we harm people around us. Without pa~n~naa we are stupid. > > Kh Sujin: One may be beautiful but with an evil character, and > therefore one's beauty is only outward... > > Khun Bong tells that she from her youth was educated by her father to > like beautiful cloths. She was involved with fashion shows and speaks > about her attachment and infatuation. > > Khun Sujin: This does not matter at all. Everybody clings to a > greater or lesser extent. Listen little by little and develop > pa~n~naa gradually so that the truth can be known. > > Kh Bong tells that before she studied the Dhamma she wanted to be > conspicuous, to be in the news. > > Kh Sujin (laughing): That is the idea of self, love of self.... One > is deceived. Lobha deludes one all the time. > > Kh Bong: It is of no use at all. > > Kh Sujin. Lobha deludes one into thinking that it is a close friend. > It clearly deludes one. > > Kh Bong: This is clear and attachment is a hindrance. > > Kh Sujin: But Khun Bong, though some people are delighted and > infatuated, we are not disturbed. However, sometimes we are annoyed > and do not see that their speech is of any use. > > Kh Bong: That concerns those who have already understanding, like > Acharn, but as regards me... > > Kh Sujin: laughs. > > Kh Bong: I am as usual, as I always was. I think that it is all right > that sometimes tears are flowing, and I am still attached. Usually > people are attached (laughing). As a consequence there is still sadness. Thanks for this transcript. It is very beautiful, and it is a case of hearing the direct application of the Dhamma to our "conventional" attachments and desires, rather than a technique discussion. I am happy to hear K. Sujin speaking this way, in such a moving personal exchange. I wonder if this tape is around? This is one that would be very good to hear "live." K. Bong showed a lot of courage. This is a moving and honest talk. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #111997 From: Herman Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? egberdina Hi Jon, On 17 November 2010 19:32, jonoabb wrote: > > > > > I ask in the light of the following: > > > > "Furthermore, when walking, the monk discerns, 'I am walking.' When > > standing, he discerns, 'I am standing.' When sitting, he discerns, 'I am > > sitting.' When lying down, he discerns, 'I am lying down.' Or however his > > body is disposed, that is how he discerns it. > > > > "In this way he remains focused internally on the body in & of itself, or > > focused externally... unsustained by anything in the world. This is how a > > monk remains focused on the body in & of itself. > > =============== > > J: Yes, there are a number of passages in the suttas that on the surface > suggest awareness of conventional things (e.g., the body) or actions (e.g., > walking). > > In the present case, the commentary explains that the reference is to > awareness of the element of motion rather than of the conventional act of > walking. > > I have no idea what awareness of 'me walking' would involve ;-)) > > Perhaps it would make more sense if there was awareness of intending when intending, eg of the intention to walk around when walking around. More subtle, but nevertheless possible, would be an awareness of an intention to be "me walking around". More subtle still, but nevertheless possible, would be a cessation of any intentional activity altogether, and the texts are quite clear about what the awareness is in such a case. It is best described by ................. Cheers Herman #111998 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 19, 2010 4:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Khun Bong's Diary, no 5. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, A belated thanks and appreciation for sharing the extracts from K.Bong's diary. They are very touching and she had a really good appreciation of the Dhamma: --- On Wed, 3/11/10, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > Khun Bong thought that there is not much difference between > someone > who is sick and someone who is healthy, because for both > there are > seeing, hearing etc., kusala citta, akusala citta. These > can arise > for everyone. .... S: True! ... > > She realised that even when speaking about Dhamma there can > be > akusala citta. She expressed her thanks to Acharn Sujin who > had > enabled her to understand realities. She wrote: “When > sati is > developed time and again there will not be the idea of self > who has > dosa and painful feeling. I am firmly convinced that > these are only > the dhammas of dosa and painful feeling.” .... S: It seems such a short time ago that she and her husband were celebrating their 60th birthdays in the same year as Jon, with no idea then of how little time was left. It's the same for us all - we never know. Jon and I had known Khun Bong for many years and on previous trips to India, she and I sometimes had breakfast together, joking about how our husbands always were always late. On our last trip to India, it was different - she wasn't joking or having fun anymore and we wondered if anything was wrong. Only later did I find out that she already knew at this time about her disease. It's a reminder to me that we never know when we see our friends or even strangers, what difficulties they are facing. Opportunities for metta all the time.... Anumodana! Metta Sarah ====== #111999 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:52 pm Subject: Rejoice! bhikkhu5 Friends: How is the Mental Release by Mutual Joy? The Blessed Buddha once explained: How is the release of mind by infinite mutual joy (Mudit a) achieved? What does this liberation have as its destination, what is its culmination, what is its sweet fruit, and what is the ultimate goal of mental release by universally mutual, unselfish, altruistic, appreciative & rejoicing joy? Here, Bhikkhus, a Bhikkhu dwells pervading the frontal quadrant with a mind imbued with infinite mutual joy, so the 2nd, 3rd and 4th quadrant. As above, so below, across, and everywhere to all beings as for himself, he dwells pervading the entire cosmos with a mind fully saturated with unlimited mutual joy, immense, exalted, measureless, without hostility, without any enmity, without any trace of ill will, of jealousy or of envy! Thus prepared and mentally quite expanded, he then develops: 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening joined with limitless mutual joy. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening fused with such mutual joy. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening together with infinite mutual joy. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening accompanied with absolute mutual joy. 5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening linked with noble mutual joy. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening associated with mutual joy. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening joined with endless mutual joy. Based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, and culminating in release... If he then wishes: May I dwell experiencing repulsion by any attractive & tempting object, then he can dwell experiencing repulsiveness therein. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in any disgusting and repulsive object, then he experiences pleasing beauty in whatever disgusting & ugly thing! If he wishes: Avoiding both the repulsive & the unrepulsive, may I dwell in equanimity , just aware & clearly comprehending, then he experiences equanimity , just aware and clearly comprehending! When meditating he can completely transcend the realm of infinitude of space, only aware that consciousness is infinite, he can enter and dwell in the sphere of the infinitude of consciousness.. I tell you Bhikkhus for a quite wise Bhikkhu here, who has not yet penetrated to an even more superior mental release, the mental release by infinite, altruistic and mutual joy has the sphere of the infinitude of consciousness as its culmination! <...> Comments: Are you Discontent? Here is Why! Mutual joy is the proximate cause of contentment. Consequentially: Lack of mutual joy produces frustrated discontent! Mutual joy also eliminates jealousy and envy! Absence of mutual joy therefore induces the acid like mental pain called envy and jealousy! Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikaya. Book [V: 115-21] 46: The Links. 54: Joined by Friendliness... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samahita _/\_ * <...>