#113600 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:05 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > > KH: In this case, to go further *is* to say otherwise. > > > H: But not in the sense that you meant. You meant that I take streams to be individual realities of their own. I do not. ---- KH: I take your point. Originally I had said a stream was not a reality, and I agree now that you were not saying otherwise. You were saying that neither streams *nor* conditioned dhammas were realities. I don't know which was worse! :-) ------------- <. . .> > > KH: Distinctions among people do not exist in absolute reality. The Buddha said, for example, "Whoever sees this Dhamma sees me." That must mean whoever has right understanding of one of the realities that are arising now understands everything that composes a Buddha. There is no difference between my dhammas, your dhammas, a snail's dhammas or a Buddha's dhammas. > > > H: That was not the Buddha's meaning here at all. He was speaking of the Buddhadhamma, his teaching. --------------- KH: Yes, and his teaching is to know the presently arisen reality (the way things are). ----------------------- <. . .> > H: You wish to be allowed to speak in a certain way while criticizing others for the very same thing. In any case, the bottom line is that ALL speech is conventional, and ALL thinking is conventional. ------------------------ KH: I don't know what you mean by 'all speech and thinking is conventional.' But in any case, we *can* use conventional terminology in Dhamma study so long as it is properly understood. We can tell each other (for example) to 'listen' 'study' and 'understand' without implying any control over those things. On the other hand, we couldn't tell anyone to engage in formal meditation (as distinct from single-moment, uncontrolled, conditioned bhavana). That sort of speech could not be understood in a way that was consistent with the Dhamma. ------------------ > > KH: First things first! :-) > > > H: I guess you meant " ;-) " rather than" :-) ". What could you mean other than a joke in speaking of the Abhidhamma as a "first thing," taking precedence over the suttas? ----------------- KH: I guess I was assuming you would know by now what I meant. It's another of those topics that DSG has gone over many times. There is only one teaching in the Tipitaka. The Dhamma and the Abhidahmma are one and the same. Many of the suttas were originally directed at advanced audiences and so they can be hard to follow. The Abhidhamma Pitaka, on the other hand, tends to be easier for beginners. Dhamma for Dummies. :-) Ken H #113601 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:06 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. sarahprocter... Hi Sarah Jane! --- On Sat, 19/2/11, SARAH CONNELL wrote: >With regard to the term abhisamaya, my Rhys Davids/Stede Pali-English dictionary shows meanings: coming by completely; insight into; comprehension; realization; clear understanding; grasp; penetration. I agree that convergence is misleading. ... S: Thank you that's helpful. Glad to see you still following and joining in! We seem to be on-line at the same time, but you must be a day behind me! ... >I guess to avoid another confusion I will have to start using my middle name as well as my first. ... S: That's kind of you. ... >May you be well and happy and always smiling, ... S: I appreciate your sign off:-) Lunch time here... Metta Sarah ====== #113602 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 5:19 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. dhammasanna Hi Sarah, Nearly bedtime of the day before here. I practice in the Thai tradition and have been learning Thai for the last 5 years but it is "nit noi". I also have been taking Dhamma classes at the Wat for the last 4 years and this year has been on the 1st section of the Abhidhamma - the Dhammasangani. Since all the classes are in Thai and my Pali Thai is even worse than my regular Thai so it has been a great challenge. The Wat has the full canon including commentaries and tika in Thai and most of the canon in the PTS English translations. I have been given permission to have full access to these resources. Over the years I have done other independent study but this DSG has been a real help to me. I don't share much as you all are far ahead of me. Thank you for the gift you all are giving to me. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane #113603 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:42 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (112992) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: To my understanding, dhammas are not the 'constituent elements' of conventional objects/experiences. So it would not be possible by analyzing objects/experiences to come to understand anything about dhammas.. > > > > Yes, I think this view is a very esoteric one that is not even suggested by the Buddha. I think it must come almost completely by way of the commentaries and sub-commentaries. As I learn a little more about them, it seems that the commentators had a radical agenda that was gnostic in nature, and removed from the gradual middle way that Buddha described in so many suttas. > > =============== > > J: Well, this is a very crucial issue. It would help if you could give some sutta passages exemplifying what you refer to as "the gradual middle way that Buddha described in so many suttas". I think you'll find, when you come to look at the Buddha's actual words, that what you understand to be the middle way is actually an interpretation of those words. Then what is the middle way, and what are the extremes as explained by the Buddha? > > =============== > I have heard even the plain words of the Visudhimagga twisted into a pretzel to mean something other than what they say. If Buddhaghosa says "seek out a teacher," it is interpreted to mean "don't seek a teacher but discern arising dhammas." > > =============== > > J: No, nobody has interpreted Buddhaghosa as saying that ;-)) It seemed that way when we discussed this passage before. I can't remember the exact conversation though. > What I do say though is that the need to have, or the advantage of having, a (properly qualified) teacher as mentioned by Buddhaghosa applies, and is intended to apply, to the person who has already developed samatha to the stage where the difference between kusala and akusala is clearly known as and when they occur (and I think that for most of us that time is some way off yet). I think we had this discussion before, but someone who is being told that counting breaths is one of the available practices is not someone who is very advanced. > The Vism does not purport to describe/specify the development of samatha at more beginning levels. How do you reach that conclusion? > > =============== > If Buddhaghosa says "count the breaths" it is said to be a coincidental description of one who happened to be counting the breaths, and he is being instructed to "discern arising dhammas." > > =============== > > J: ;;-)). It must be exasperating having to read my posts ;-)) I'm sure the feeling is mutual. :-) Still, I think that even the "dhamma" description of something that is said has to explain why it is said, and why it doesn't mean what it says, not just replace it with a convenient belief. > On my reading of the Vism passage (from memory now), counting the breaths is not being given as a way of inducing the consciousness to become kusala, but rather is ascribed to those with persistent and steady kusala already developed. My memory is that it is given as a technique, which is the only way that counting breaths makes sense. It is a way of training awareness to stay fixed to the breath, as opposed to drifting off into thought. It's an obvious and classic technique for that purpose and has no other purpose than to train mindfulness - for someone who is basically a beginner and doesn't have greatly developed concentration. "Counting," I think you would agree, is neither kusala nor akusala in itself, but it is a way to develop concentration. I don't see how it would have anything to do with discerning kusala from akusala, unless you were so advanced you wanted to count how many kusala moments were arising to see if there more kusala than akusala moments - a hobby to pass the time. :-) If you were already advanced in samatha there would be no need to count the breaths, as someone that advanced in the development of samatha would already have their concentration firmly fixed on the meditation object. Why count in that case? It would be a more gross concentration than the breath itself, to count them. > Do you see such an interpretation as being in any way inconsistent with the Vism passage in question? Yes. Here's the relevant passage from the Vis: "Now the beginner who is of good birth should attend to the subject first by means of counting. In ^counting, he should not stop short of five, nor go beyond ten, neither should he make any break in the series.1 For, when he stops short of five, the state of consciousness that has arisen in a confined space is restless, like a herd of cattle shut in a cow-pen. When he goes beyond ten, the state of conscious ness is dependent on the number.2 When the series is broken, his mind trembles, wondering if the subject will reach com pletion or not. Therefore he should do the counting avoiding these faults. He should first count slowly after the manner of a grain-measurer. For he who measures out grain fills the basket and empties it, saying, " o n e . " And in refilling it he says, " one, one," even though he is removing any rubbish he may have found in the basket. And the same with " two, two " and so on. So, seizing the breath that reveals itself from the breathings in and out, he should begin counting "one, one " [279] till he has counted "ten, ten," noting it as it arises each time.3 As he counts thus, the outgoing breath and the incoming breath are manifested. Then, putting aside the slow process of counting like a grain-measurer, he should count quickly like a cowherd. For a capable cowherd, whip in hand, takes gravel and other stones in his* pouch, goes early to the cow-pen, and striking the cows on the back while sitting on top of the cross-bar, he counts the cows as they reach the door, dropping a stone on each, saying, " One* two." And the herd of cows, which have been experiencing the misery of confined space during the three watches of the night, rush out rubbing up against one another and quickly forming groups. And he quickly counts three, four, five . . ♦" Clearly a technique that is being given to develop concentration, with a beginning and advanced stage once one progresses and gets used to the early "slow" technique. Please note at the beginning, as direct evidence of my view on this matter, the following introduction: "Now the BEGINNER who is of good birth should attend to the subject first by means of counting." Case closed? I'm sure you'll say that the 'good birth' means that they had already accumulated the tendency for samatha, but it still says BEGINNER, no matter what else. > > =============== > > If we look at the Abhidhamma and the instructions discussed on this list as a way of seeing life more clearly and in more detail, I think it is very valuable. To see the conditioning factors that create arising dhammas and kamma is extremely valuable as a way of understanding what happens in life. > > > > But when you take it away from that and say "life as we know it is a meaningless illusion showing us nothing - Buddhism is about a completely separate world of little dhammas that have nothing to do with the worldling's life" - it loses all integrity and no longer references what the Buddha said or instructed about how to be liberated from *this* world of suffering, not some other one that is made up and never seen, and only exists for us in books. > > =============== > > J: It would not be correct, for obvious reasons I think, to say the world of dhammas has nothing to do with the worldling's life. After all, dhammas are very much 'of samsara'. Well the question is whether our ordinary life as we experience it are subject for development of mindfulness and discernment of anicca and anatta. I think they are, just not on the highest level, but the mundane path is part of true development in my view. > But it can I think be said that the world of dhammas is a different world to the world of concepts (people, things and ideas), since it's a world that becomes apparent only to developed panna. The question is whether the world of concepts is a deluded view of dhammas, or not a view of dhammas at all. My view is that there is a continuum between seeing ordinary objects and life-situations clearly, applying the understanding of anicca and anatta to them, and the greater understanding and ability to see the actual experiential objects in the moment. It seems that there is a view here that there is a radical split between one view and the other, and that the former is not even part of the path. That's what I disagree with. > The position as I see it is as follows. At the moment of seeing a computer monitor, the arising dhammas include (among others) seeing consciousness, visible object and mental processing (including memory). But that visible object is the visible data currently being experienced by seeing consciousness (rather than the visible object of/belonging to a computer monitor in particular), in the same way that the object of hearing consciousness at the time of a conventional live conversation is audible data in general rather than a particular person's voice or individual words. I think I agree with this; it's just that the particular person's voice breaks down into the dhammas of sound, and the dhammas of sound are the constituents that are "woven" by citta into conventional objects. There's a recognition of the same dhammas constituting both, just not experienced in the same way. I can easily imagine the arahant going back and forth - able to navigate the conventional view and slip into seeing the exact dhammas whenever there is no conventional task or recognition at hand. That makes sense. The radical split view is a much less workable one in my view. In that view one is waiting for something to arise that will come much later and there is not much to do now. The continuum view allows Dhamma to be applied at *any* level of understanding and develop further in any given lifetime. One doesn't have to wait for the ultimate view to arise to understand one's place on the path. > Words do not break down into audible object; words are mental constructs formed up from the hearing of audible data. What's the difference? Sound + concept = word meaning. Without the sound there is no base for the concept to arise, so they are glued together, not separate. > Similarly, a computer monitor does not break down into visible object. I disagree. The concept of a computer monitor is formed by visible object + interpretation, not interpretation *without* visible object. The radical separation that you are creating is not necessary, and in my view not accurate. It denies the path for unenlightened worldlings in my view rather than supports it. I think pariyatti will arise a lot more relevantly and quickly when our everyday view is seen as breaking down into paramatha dhammas, rather than being irrelevant. > > =============== > > The difference in our understanding is that you think the 5 kandhas do not occur in life, but occur in an alternate universe that is described in commentaries. I see the 5 kandhas as being a practical breakdown of our very existence in this moment. > > =============== > > J: No, I do not see the 5 khandhas as occurring in an alternate universe; they are very much part of samsara. In fact, to my understanding of the teachings, the 5 khandhas are the only things that can truly be said to be *occurring* now. Then they must be part of everything we experience, not just the "real view" of dhammas, but also the false view, only misinterpreted, not obliterated. Dhammas are the constituent elements of *every* perception, whether that perception is correct or false. > The rest, that is to say, the world as conventionally perceived, is the product of mental construction (not that there's anything 'wrong' with that). Mental construction is constructed from what? What is the object of mental construction? It is proliferations of dhammas is it not? > > =============== > When we see that the body, thought and perception break down to momentary experiences of physicality, thought-acts and moments of contact-vedana-proliferation, I understand that my life is a mechanism of kamma and conditions, not the life of a self that controls existence, or thoughts and possessions that can belong to self. That is the Buddha's message and it actually helps worldlings to move towards liberation. > > =============== > > J: But the question is whether reflection of that kind can constitute (mundane) path-moments leading eventually to enlightenment. To my understanding, only the direct experience of dhammas as they truly are can amount to such moments. That is where there is some disagreement. I don't see the radical split between experience and discernment. I see experience as deluded perception of dhammas, not as pure hallucination. I see mindfulness as an actual skill of mind, not something that arises only in the purest of conditions. I think it's something that can be developed within ordinary perceptions as one sees more clearly what they really are - rupas and namas, and then sees them break down more distinctively as one develops mindfulness. > > =============== > It is not an erudite, removed, separate world that one has to wait to see, but one that can be engaged now, with tools to engage it now, and open up the possibility of liberation in this lifetime. The kandhas describe *this* reality, how we move, act and think, not a universe in another realm. This is samsara, and it is this samsara that we need to wake up to truly see. > > =============== > > J: The dhammas (khandhas, dhatus, ayatanas, etc.) are of samsara and it is dhammas that need to be seen as they truly are. It's all dhammas all the way down - including deluded perceptions, which are namas. > > =============== > > I continue to be educated by you and the others through your commitment, scholarship, and understanding. But I'm afraid we may never apply this great knowledge in the same way - aiming towards different universes and all that. > > =============== > > J: Hoping I've managed to explain that it's not a question of you and I 'aiming towards different universes'. So there's hope of agreement yet! ;-)) > > > =============== > Still I appreciate all that you know and your fellowship. > > =============== > > J: And the same on my part. It's great (and a real challenge) talking with you. Yes it is fun. :-)) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113604 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:55 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi again Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > The Vism does not purport to describe/specify the development of samatha at more beginning levels. > > > =============== > If Buddhaghosa says "count the breaths" it is said to be a coincidental description of one who happened to be counting the breaths, and he is being instructed to "discern arising dhammas." > > =============== > > J: ;;-)). It must be exasperating having to read my posts ;-)) > > On my reading of the Vism passage (from memory now), counting the breaths is not being given as a way of inducing the consciousness to become kusala, but rather is ascribed to those with persistent and steady kusala already developed. > > Do you see such an interpretation as being in any way inconsistent with the Vism passage in question? Just thought I'd throw in another quote from the Vis on counting breaths as a developmental practice. I'd be interested in your comments on this: "...he should dispel drowsiness due to over-eating and, being seated at ease, gladden the heart with recollection of the qualities of the Three Gems, and...give attention to this subject of mindfulness as to respiration. ... "And herein is the procedure of his attention: counting, connection, touching, fixing, noting, turning away, purification, and the viewing of them. Of these, counting is just counting (the breathings); connection is sequence (of mindfulness after breathings); touching is touching the places of contact (i.e., nostrils); fixing is applying (mind to Jhana); noting is discerning; turning away is the Path; purification is the fruition; and the viewing of them is reflection.When he takes his mind out together with the outgoing breath it becomes distracted by many objects outside. Only by developing with his mindfulness fixed on each point of contact, does he attain to success. Hence it was said " without apprehending the breath that is within or without, he should count with speed in the way described.'' "But how long is he to go on counting? Until, without the help of counting, his mindfulness is established on the breathings as object. For counting serves the purpose of cutting off thoughts which run after external things, and establishing mindfulness on the breathings as object. "Having thus directed his attention by means of counting, he should direct it by means of connection. Connection is the ceaseless pursuit of the breathings by mindfulness after counting has been given up..." In other words, a sequence is described in developing concentration with breath as object that starts with counting - for beginners - and then continues with "connection" and 5 more highly advanced stages, each one taking up where the other leaves off. Let me note the passage again in which counting is clearly given as a technique for beginners to develop basic concentration on the breath as object: "But how long is he to go on counting? Until, without the help of counting, his mindfulness is established on the breathings as object. For counting serves the purpose of cutting off thoughts which run after external things, and establishing mindfulness on the breathings as object." How would you interpret this? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113605 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 9:58 pm Subject: Re: How can killiing or stealing not be a conventional deed? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: 'Avoiding' an evil act with akusala would be itself an evil act and hence not an avoiding at all. ... > The meaning is this: the avoiding of an evil deed may be done with kusala or with akusala mind states, or with a mixture of both. Insofar as an avoiding is done with akusala mindstates, it is itself an akusala (i.e., 'evil') deed. Yes, but the question is: what makes the evil deed evil in the first place? If a *deed* can be described as evil, it is the act that is evil and not only the intention that one may have in doing it or refraining from doing it. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113606 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:07 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing rjkjp1 --- > > Dear Ken and Howard > > > > Abhidhammattha Sangaha: Ch VI, BODHI:guide to #6 > > > > <. . .> > > > Thus, through the sequence of mind-moments, the flow of consciousness continues uninterrupted LIKE THE WATERS IN A STREAM ."" > > robert > > > > ================================== > > Thanks for this quotation, Robert! BTW, nice to hear from you. :-) > -------- > > Ditto from me, Robert, but some comments would be helpful. Howard and I both like the quote, we just understand it differently. > > Ken H > Dear Ken The quote seemed self-explanatory perhaps if you first detail where Howard and you interpret it differently I can add my two cents. robert #113607 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Sarah .... S: Just curious, can you quote from (not give your paraphrase from!) any DSG message which says that "panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts" or something very similar. I don't remember ever having read anyone say this - especially not any long-time "regulars". KO: I dont think I need to explain much because many a times I always look a the email stating concepts cannot use for development since concepts does not have the three characteristics. I have yet met in the commentarian text that said panna that arise with concepts is not the same as panna that arise with nama and rupa (except in vipassana level) nor did the commentarian text ever claim that panna that arise with concepts cannot be used for the development to enlightment, cannot be used for the understanding of the three characteristics. On the contrary, many a times, concepts are also used for development, similarly for nama and rupa. the understanding of nama and rupa is to help the understanding of not self and not to say concepts cannot be used for development.. this understanding throught the Abhidhamma is of great value, of great beneficial to the understanding of not self. Similarly in the suttas where conventional terms where concepts are used to understand dhamma is of great value, benficial. Ken O #113608 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 2:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 19-feb-2011, om 1:43 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Yes, reflecting on dhamma, thinking of answers to help others is so > useful. We forget our own "feeling low". At other times, there's > bound to be more "feeling low" - just conditioned dhammas, nothing > to be concerned about. Not "me" or "you"! ------- N: Yes, posting on dsg is also helpful in this respect. No time for feeling low for a long time, just a short time. ------- > > S: I know Lodewijk will also be a great support to everyone at this > time too! Our regards to him as usual and from my mother to you > both. She's having a lovely holiday here:). ----- N: Thank you and our regards to your mother. We were talking about her, wondering how she would spend her time apart from her early morning swim. ------- S: Pls let us know how it went (I thought of you this week) and how your sister manages. -------- N: Outwardly she kept well, but who could know her cittas. It was difficult with her partner's family, who wanted to take over the funeral and did not mention her at all in the speeches, except one grandson. My sister's children had a chance to speak also and did very well. Now here is a lesson in equanimity or impartiality and I just read from the Perfections to Lodewijk at that time:< The perfection of equanimity is evenmindedness, it is non-disturbance by controversial conduct of people or by trying events. If we do not habitually develop satipa.t.thaana, we are easily affected by attachment and aversion, and the citta is not calm. We encounter outside objects which cause sadness and distress. Our unhappy mood is conditioned by unpleasant objects which appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue and bodysense. > Afterwards we were sitting together with my sister and her children at the same table and I realised how difficult it is not to be partial, we would be inclined to take my sister's side, against the family of her partner. Lodewijk and I discussed this matter and we found the reminder from the perfections very useful. ------ Nina. #113609 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 4:33 am Subject: Re: You too should exert yourself... rjkjp1 HI alex try these links and see what you think http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=135 http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=21&hl= best robert --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, Jon, KenH, all, > > ""Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with regard to skillful qualities[1] and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I exerted myself, ..." > > "You, too, monks, should relentlessly exert yourselves, [thinking,] 'Gladly would we let the flesh & blood in our bodies dry up, leaving just the skin, tendons, & bones, but if we have not attained what can be reached through human firmness, human persistence, human striving, there will be no relaxing our persistence.' You, too, in no long time will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for yourselves in the here & now." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an02/an02.005.than.html > ================================================================== > > In first part of the sutta it says that we should not be content with wholesome qualities that we have, and do not be content with current level of exertion. Increase them. > > > And > =================================================================== > "As with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth he is beating down, constraining, and crushing his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.020.than.html > ==================================================================== > > > It does sound like Buddha taught effort and "discontent" with current lack of achievement. > > > > With metta, > > Alex > #113610 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 2/18/2011 8:05:05 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > > KH: In this case, to go further *is* to say otherwise. > > > H: But not in the sense that you meant. You meant that I take streams to be individual realities of their own. I do not. ---- KH: I take your point. Originally I had said a stream was not a reality, and I agree now that you were not saying otherwise. You were saying that neither streams *nor* conditioned dhammas were realities. I don't know which was worse! :-) ----------------------------------------------- ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- ------------- <. . .> > > KH: Distinctions among people do not exist in absolute reality. The Buddha said, for example, "Whoever sees this Dhamma sees me." That must mean whoever has right understanding of one of the realities that are arising now understands everything that composes a Buddha. There is no difference between my dhammas, your dhammas, a snail's dhammas or a Buddha's dhammas. > > > H: That was not the Buddha's meaning here at all. He was speaking of the Buddhadhamma, his teaching. --------------- KH: Yes, and his teaching is to know the presently arisen reality (the way things are). ----------------------- <. . .> > H: You wish to be allowed to speak in a certain way while criticizing others for the very same thing. In any case, the bottom line is that ALL speech is conventional, and ALL thinking is conventional. ------------------------ KH: I don't know what you mean by 'all speech and thinking is conventional.' But in any case, we *can* use conventional terminology in Dhamma study so long as it is properly understood. We can tell each other (for example) to 'listen' 'study' and 'understand' without implying any control over those things. On the other hand, we couldn't tell anyone to engage in formal meditation (as distinct from single-moment, uncontrolled, conditioned bhavana). That sort of speech could not be understood in a way that was consistent with the Dhamma. ------------------ > > KH: First things first! :-) > > > H: I guess you meant " ;-) " rather than" :-) ". What could you mean other than a joke in speaking of the Abhidhamma as a "first thing," taking precedence over the suttas? ----------------- KH: I guess I was assuming you would know by now what I meant. It's another of those topics that DSG has gone over many times. There is only one teaching in the Tipitaka. The Dhamma and the Abhidahmma are one and the same. --------------------------------------------------------- You wish it so. This is an interpretation of the Buddha's teaching that you impose. HIS characterization of his teaching is that of a teaching only of dukkha and the ending of dukkha. ----------------------------------------------------------- Many of the suttas were originally directed at advanced audiences and so they can be hard to follow. The Abhidhamma Pitaka, on the other hand, tends to be easier for beginners. Dhamma for Dummies. :-) ------------------------------------------------------------- Hardly!!! ------------------------------------------------------------ Ken H ===================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113611 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Dear Ken O, Op 18-feb-2011, om 17:47 heeft Ken O het volgende geschreven: > What is the dhamma we experience > now is conventional and not direct knowing, so can one say that > concepts cannot > be used for development of understanding of dhamma into > satipatthana level or > vipassana level. Concept does not have the characterisitics does > not mean > concepts cannot help in the understanding until one reach > vipassana, there are > many instance of them as development in Buddha bhavana. ------- N: Yes, concepts can help. But there can be a gradual growing to understanding the reality at this moment. That is actually pariyatti. Pariyatti is more than just theoretical understanding. That is why I always find reminders to attend to seeing now, hardness now so helpful. We do not have to think all the time: is this a concept or a reality. Slowly, slowly we come to understand that the Buddha's teachings are pointed towards understanding this moment. At first we may think about texts in the book, and this is also good, nobody denies this. Then we can find out for ourselves that the Dhamma is more than that, that it is actually our daily life right now. Our daily life with all the adversities, with a great deal of akusala cittas, with lobha that is pulling and pushing us. That is the way the five indriyas of confidence, energy, mindfulness, concentration and understanding can develop. -------- Nina. #113612 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 6:26 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg > > Dear Phil, Sending this to dsg, as your own address did not work. > Op 19-feb-2011, om 13:45 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > >> I'd just like to say I was sory to read about your sister's loss >> and I was interested to read about how you and Lodewijk found >> encouragement in Perfections. I'm reading it again, maybe the 7th >> or 8th time. Somehow the things that I complain about at DSG don't >> come up when I read that book, it may be the internet medium >> itself that caused me to become so contrary here, I don't know. >> I'm also eading "Conditions", "Cetasikas" and the book on Rupa. >> I'm going to Thailand in March and will have a chance to meet >> friends and Acharn Sujin for the first time and discuss Dhamma. > -------- > N: Thank you Phil for your kind words and appreciation of my books. > Wonderful that you go to Thailand in March. Don't worry about your > mindframe, it is fine, also when you do not agree, or also when you > do not agree. The latter case can be very inspiring to consider > things over for oneself. Let us hear about your trip, I am very > interested, > Nina. #113613 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:49 am Subject: Re: You too should exert yourself... truth_aerator Hi RobertK2, all, > HI alex > try these links and see what you think > http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=135 > http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=21&hl= > best > robert Thank you for the links. Do you think #4 is correct in (http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=135)? In any case, as you know, I don't believe in free will. Things happen due to impersonal causes and conditions, and occur in the only possible way that they could ever occur given that set of conditions. However, just because of anatta, it doesn't mean that certain things don't happen. They do. Effort and exertion is not excluded. It happens due to certain causes and conditions - not Self. Awakening also happens due to certain causes and conditions, right effort being one of many. Just like a person trains with weights to be stronger and bigger. Same with meditation. In both cases the process is fully conditioned, not self, and happens the only possible way that it ever could occur given those conditions. With metta, Alex #113614 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:30 pm Subject: Kusala intention (was, Re: The clansman who is a beginner ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113388) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > Leaving that aside, there is a certain logic to the idea of kamma, which is that certain kinds of causes and conditions will lead to certain kinds of results, and that basic situation is not a mystery. ... What I don't quite relate to, or immediately have confidence in, is that the conditions and how they accumulate and arise is *so* mysterious and comvoluted that no one can ever predict anything, and it is all just too complicated to make any sense to our simple minds. ... The idea that everything gets thrown into latency and it may not come up at all until fourty-thousand lives later, or whatever, is fine and may be true, but I don't really have a reason to think it is true with no evidence to support it. I'd rather stick to a version of kamma that shows a path to more kusala, as gradual as it may be, and that makes some sense of our present thoughts and actions. ... > =============== J: So you're happy with the idea of kamma and vipaka as long as it works the way you think it should ;-)). You seem to be implying that the results of a given action should be experienced within the same lifetime as the action, so as to make it more easily verifiable, perhaps ;-)) > =============== > I'm also happy to entertain the more complicated version of "kamma incessantly delayed" which seems to go along with "direct experience of dhammas on semi-permanent hold" if someone can give me a reasonable explanation of why it is supposed to work that way. > =============== J: Not really delayed, just not as immediate as you think it should be. > =============== I just don't see the "come and see" attitude of Buddha to the Kalamas as being well expressed in a philosophy in which *everything* that can be experienced of kusala and the path happens later, and nothing that happens now is evidence of anything. > =============== J: One of the epithets used by the Buddha to describe the Dhamma is that of 'ehipassiko' sometimes translated as 'inviting one to come and see', suggesting that it is verifiable by direct experience. This does not however mean that every aspect of the teachings is immediately verifiable by all. It means only that there is a least some aspect that is verifiable by anyone. For example, that the object experienced through a sense-doors is a dhamma unique to that sense-door. Jon #113615 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:41 pm Subject: Re: Meditation (was, The clansman ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113390) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: You are saying that the Buddha was recommending the doing of those things despite the fact that it would necessarily involve a lot of akusala on the part of the person undertaking the 'practice'. > > That's your interpretation not mine, > =============== J: It was more a question than an attempt to put words into your mouth ;-)). You said the Buddha "clearly did instruct people to do specific things in specific cases, and in general encouraged followers to 'try hard,' 'keep going until you reach the goal' and other conventional things that a coach might say." As you see it, would someone taking that instruction to heart and practising the doing of specific things be likley to have more kusala than aksuala during the course of that practice? > =============== and not verified by the Buddha, who never said -- never -- never-ever -- "don't purposely follow the path because if you do you will be invoking an akusala sense of control and self-view." > =============== J: Neither did the Buddha ever say "Do this form of practice and it'll bring you lots of kusala" ;-)) > =============== I mean, I understand that this is *your* view, and I have no problem with that, but it remains that the Buddha never ever said anything like that, so I'm not sure what makes you think that seeing conventional effort, intention and action as akusala is Buddhist in nature. What did the Buddha say to make you think that this is his view, that conventional Right Effort, Right Intention, Right Action and Right Livelihood -- the Action portion of the teachings -- is akusala? > =============== J: Obviously Right Effort is, by definition, effort that is kusala. So when the Buddha spoke about Right Effort, he would not have been including any effort that was akusala. We agree on that point. Where we differ is the extent to which kusala can be induced to arise by virtue of having the intention that it should. > =============== > I don't think that would be consistent with his general teaching. > > Where does it contradict his general teaching. Have you got a quote from sutta handy? > =============== J: I'm thinking of, for example, the teaching that all dhammas are anatta. Jon #113616 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:45 pm Subject: Re: Meditation (was, The clansman ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113390) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > There are more than one way of developing insight, and Buddha made it clear that the path that includes jhana as the base for insight, which was *his* personal path as well his entire life, was a high kusala path that was well defined and recommended by him. > =============== J: Yes, there can be insight, and even the attainment of enlightenment, with jhana as basis, and this was how it occurred for the Buddha. And yes, it was praised by the Buddha as being of a higher kind of attainment than enlightenment without jhana as basis. But nowhere did the Buddha recommend the choosing of this as a path (to the exclusion of enlightenment without jhana). Nor did he recommend the development of samatha at the expense of the development of insight. > =============== > One would aspire to understand the reality of dhammas in any case, but the fact that jhana is a great base for the development of insight for those who can develop jhana is worth knowing about, and it is a major kusala path. That makes it hard for me to understand why one would want to fight against it. > =============== J: I'm not against the development of samatha, and never have been. It's just that I don't think the Buddha was suggesting 'enlightenment with jhana as basis' as a path to be *chosen*. Samatha is to be developed, and insight is to be developed. But whether enlightenment when it comes is with jhana as basis or not is a matter about which nobody ahs any choice. > =============== > >...and the failure to keep the development of that understanding uppermost in one's mind will result in its decline or loss. > > If one follows the Buddha's instructions, one is inclined to keep insight foremost in the mind in every circumstance, 24/7, 365 days a year. > =============== J: Experience should tell you that insight cannot be continuously maintained by dint of following an 'instruction'. > =============== That does not mean we have to ignore the full breadth and import of his teachings and how the parts coordinate. > =============== J: Indeed, we should pay more attention to the other parts of the teachings (as I think I suggested in an earlier post). Each sutta needs to be seen as part of the whole body of work. Jon #113617 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:47 pm Subject: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa jonoabb Hi KenO (113492) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > ... > KO: If we dont learn from mundane level how do you go to supramundane level. > :-) So you are saying you could straight away go to supramudane level without > going to mundane level first. Even those nama and rupa you are learning how are > all mundane level. Are you saying that such mundane level are not impt. > =============== J: You were suggesting that the sati, viriya and concentration that arises during (mundane) jhana were mundane path factors (see your message # 109976). I was pointing out that these mental factors arise with all kinds of kusala; they can only be considered path factors when they arise with a moment of satipatthana. Of course, all levels of kusala are important. But kusala of the level of satipatthana is the kusala that is taught only by a Buddha. > =============== Or are > you saying the panna, and jhana factors that arise in jhana are different in > characteristics when panna arise in other activities like learning and listening > to dhamma > =============== J: The characteristic of a given mental factor is the same whatever the level of kusala. In the case of panna, for example, it's characteristic is always to see clearly as truly is. But panna that accompanies samatha bhavana understands present kusala as kusala and present akusala as akusala, whereas panna of the level of vipassana sees the true nature of an arisen dhamma. Jon #113618 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 12:52 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Alex (113540) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Jon, all, > ... > By radical impermanence what I've meant was the teaching of "trillions of dhammas per second". IMHO the point of Buddha's teaching was to remove all craving tanha. To remove craving you need to see the drawbacks of the object of craving. That trillions of dhammas arise and fall per second is not that painful by itself. > =============== J: To my understanding, the impermanence of dhammas makes them unsatisfactory (dukkha) in the sense that they cannot be a final refuge. Whatever we see as satisfactory or worthwhile about life in samsara is ultimately something that falls away as soon as it has arisen. > =============== But the body aging, becoming sick, loosing its vigor and vitality, experiencing more age related pain and degenerative diseases - that is painful and can serve a good reason not to be attached to the body. > =============== J: Agreed, but this conclusion becomes obvious to most people sooner or later in life anyway; it's not something that needs a Buddha to explain ;-)) In the Buddha's teaching, the body of a healthy young person (still growing, hence no visible 'aging') is as 'unsatisfactory' as that of someone who is visibly aging. > =============== >A: What do we do when the suttas clearly talk about contemplations >that would be considered "conceptual" ? Should we ignore those >kinds of contemplations? If so, why? > ex: > "[6] "Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground one day, two days, three days dead bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'..." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html > =============== J: Thanks for the sutta passage. First, this is not being given as a contemplation to be *done*; it describes the reaction of someone when seeing a corpse. Secondly, as the commentary I quoted recently explains, it is an understanding of dhammas as elements that forms the basis for this reaction/contemplation. > =============== > [1] "'The perception of the unattractive, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end':... > > [2] "'The perception of death, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end': > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an07/an07.046.than.html > =============== J: I would see these as references to the perceptions of the unattractive and death by a person developing insight. Jon #113619 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 1:41 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >A: By radical impermanence what I've meant was the teaching of >"trillions of dhammas per second". IMHO the point of Buddha's >teaching was to remove all craving tanha. To remove craving you need >to see the drawbacks of the object of craving. That trillions of >dhammas arise and fall per second is not that painful by itself. > > =============== > > J: To my understanding, the impermanence of dhammas makes them >unsatisfactory (dukkha) in the sense that they cannot be a final >refuge. Whatever we see as satisfactory or worthwhile about life in >samsara is ultimately something that falls away as soon as it has >arisen. Basically I agree with what you've said above. I just believe that recollection on major changes (aging, sickness, bodily pain, death, etc) is a very powerful tool to cut lust and belief in ownership of the body. > > =============== > But the body aging, becoming sick, loosing its vigor and vitality, >experiencing more age related pain and degenerative diseases - that >is painful and can serve a good reason not to be attached to the >body. > > =============== > > J: Agreed, but this conclusion becomes obvious to most people >sooner or later in life anyway; it's not something that needs a >Buddha to explain ;-)) Even a healthy and young body is subject to aging, aging related sickness, death and various other unpleasant things. Most people do their best to avoid contemplating these things. They don't want to remove all craving, they think that desire is good. My parents (to my shock) seem to think that desire (tanha) is good. It seems that the most common wrong view is to think that desire is good. While "aging, sickness & death" is obvious to most people, they typically ignore it and think about positive, life-affirming ideas. They don't see the danger in tanha. A good Buddhist reflects on these obvious things as much as possible in order to remove tanha toward body, possessions and life. >J:Thanks for the sutta passage. First, this is not being given >as >a contemplation to be *done*; it describes the reaction of >someone >when seeing a corpse. Is that reaction a contemplation? Something that occurs? Isn't the arduous path of meditation and dhutanga practice a reaction of someone who has seen the danger of craving and samsara? It is something that occurs due to appropriate causes & conditions. But it does occur. With metta, Alex #113620 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 4:17 pm Subject: The 4 Noble Truths! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 4 Noble Truths are the Core of Buddhism! 1: This is Suffering! Suffering is of three kinds: a: Obvious suffering, which is any bodily pain and any mental sadness. b: Suffering due to change includes also pleasant feeling as this indeed also becomes quite disappointing, when it inevitably changes, fades, and vanishes. c: Suffering due to construction is all that is conditioned, since all this thus later inevitably will fall apart. This also includes any object which induces a neutral feeling. This 1st Noble Truth, that points out that all worldly indeed ultimately speaking is Suffering, has to be fully understood in all aspects... 2: Craving is the Cause of Suffering! a: Craving for sensing forms, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, & mental states. b: Craving for becoming. (ex: May I become rich, forever young, famous...) c: Craving for non-becoming (ex: May I not become sick, nor old, nor dead!) This Second Noble Truth on the Cause of Suffering has to be eliminated... 3: Absence of Craving is the End of Suffering! a: Not craving any sense stimuli of any kind... b: Not craving for any kind of becoming this or that in the future... c: Not craving any non-becoming, but accepting all the ills that will come... This 3rd Noble Truth on the End of Suffering has to be accomplished! 4: The Noble 8-Fold Way is the Method to End Suffering! Which Noble 8-fold Way has to be developed in order to end all suffering? Right View (samm-ditthi) Right Motivation (samm-sankappa) Right Speech (samm-vc) Right Action (samm-kammanta) Right Livelihood (samm-jva) Right Effort (samm-vyma) Right Awareness (samm-sati) Right Concentration (samm-samdhi This Fourth Noble Truth on the Way to End Suffering has to be completed. <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113621 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 4:55 pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. sarahprocter... Dear Nina (& Phil), --- On Sat, 19/2/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >> I'm going to Thailand in March and will have a chance to meet >> friends and Acharn Sujin for the first time and discuss Dhamma. .... S: Yes, Phil's coming to Kaeng Krajan with us and I'm really looking forward to meeting him. I was so glad when he agreed a couple of weeks ago, but didn't mention it, because I was afraid he'd change his mind if I did and preferred to let him spill the beans which he has:-) I'm sure everyone will be interested to hear his report afterwards. > -------- > N: Thank you Phil for your kind words and appreciation of my books. > Wonderful that you go to Thailand in March. Don't worry about your > mindframe, it is fine, also when you do not agree, or also when you > do not agree. The latter case can be very inspiring to consider > things over for oneself. Let us hear about your trip, I am very > interested, ... S: I completely agree that when friends disagree it can be very inspiring and helpful for us all. The Dhamma needs a lot of deep consideration and just agreeing with what we're told without a lot of questioning is not the way. As for the mindframe, for all of us it changes from moment to moment - kusala, akusala, vipaka, kiriya, more akusala - all conditioned dhammas regardless and none belonging to oneself. Phil, just a couple of weeks til we meet at long last in Bangkok! Bring a list of all your pet peeves:-) Jon's looking f/w to meeting you briefly too. (Unfortunately, he can't come to KK because of work unless anything unexpected changes....) Metta Sarah ====== #113622 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 5:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, --- On Sat, 19/2/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >N: Yes, posting on dsg is also helpful in this respect. No time for feeling low for a long time, just a short time. .... S: As we all know, we're so very fortunate to have heard and have confidence in the Dhamma at any time, including difficult times. And yes, there's always an opportunity to help and encourage others here in our own ways. At such times of help or kindness, no "poor me". ------- >N: Thank you and our regards to your mother. We were talking about her, wondering how she would spend her time apart from her early morning swim. ... S: Right now, she's preparing a curry for our lunch. She gets books from the library, walks a long the beach, looking at all the activity. Sometimes we have "adventures" - take a bus or ferry to another beach or to somewhere like the Botanic Gardens in the city. We sit on our balcony and chat, watch a little TV or do a crossword in the evenings. Yesterday evening we invited some of our neighbours in for "ginger beer or ginger beer" on the balcony which she enjoyed. This morning we had coffee out with some of my ocean swimming group. She's looking very well and healthy after "de-frosting" here. I'll share this letter about the funeral with her - she likes the letters which have some personal or daily life details with the Dhamma:-) .... ------- >>S: Pls let us know how it went (I thought of you this week) and how your sister manages. -------- >N: Outwardly she kept well, but who could know her cittas. ... S: We can appreciate her attitude at what must be such a difficult time for her. ... >N:It was difficult with her partner's family, who wanted to take over the funeral and did not mention her at all in the speeches, except one grandson. My sister's children had a chance to speak also and did very well. ... S: A difficult time for everyone and understandable, the approach of her partner's family. ... >Now here is a lesson in equanimity or impartiality and I just read from the Perfections to Lodewijk at that time:< The perfection of equanimity is evenmindedness, it is non-disturbance by controversial conduct of people or by trying events. If we do not habitually develop satipa.t.thaana, we are easily affected by attachment and aversion, and the citta is not calm. We encounter outside objects which cause sadness and distress. Our unhappy mood is conditioned by unpleasant objects which appear through eyes, ears, nose, tongue and bodysense. > .... S: Yes, good reminders on equanimity. Appreciating kamma and its result at this moment of seeing and hearing for all is a great help too in this respect, as we know. Of course, it only comes through the development of right understanding. .... >Afterwards we were sitting together with my sister and her children at the same table and I realised how difficult it is not to be partial, we would be inclined to take my sister's side, against the family of her partner. Lodewijk and I discussed this matter and we found the reminder from the perfections very useful. ... S: Yes, the reminder is so helpful - equanimity and metta for all, regardless of "the side" or way of behaving of others. Tests all the time of equanimity and metta - we don't have to go anywhere special or do anything unusual to have such opportunities. I appreciate your and Lodewijk's good reminders. Please share any more details and reminders you're finding helpful. We can all learn from them. Metta Sarah ======= #113623 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:04 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Sarah and Ken H, > Op 14-feb-2011, om 9:51 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > > > K:>That's a good way of ending any conversation. DSG's equivalent > > of Amen. :-) > ------ > N: I like this remark. Kh Sujin always, always brings us back to the > present moment. The only way to develop understanding. > ------- > > ... > > S: So much of our everyday chatter is just curiosity.... everyday, > > sama lobha, isn't it? > > > > I forget if I mentioned that yesterday I had a little chat with my > > mother trying to explain what cittas are. It's helpful for me to > > bring these terms back to the real basics at this moment. > ------ > N: How good. You may bring in Survey , the beginning about citta. It > is very basic. Ch 7, the beginning, p. 51. With your added explanations. > For example: > eyes, it seems as if there are many people living together in > this world, at a certain time and in a particular location. > However, if there is clear comprehension of the characteristic > of the element that experiencesthe dhamma that arises and > sees the object that appears at that momentone will know > that, while there is seeing just for a short moment, there is > only the world of seeing. Then there are no people, other > living beings or different things. At the moment of seeing, > thinking about shape and form has not yet occurred; thinking > of a story about what is seen has not yet happened. > However, when we think of the world, with its beings, > people or different things, we should know that this is only a > moment of citta that thinks about what appeared to citta that > sees, about visible object. Seeing occurs at a moment > different from thinking about what appears. For everyone > citta arises just for a moment, then it is succeeded by the > next one; this happens continuously. Thus, it seems that the > whole wide world is there, with its many different people > and things. But we should have right understanding of what > the world is. We should know that realities appear one at a > time, and that they appear only for one moment of citta. > Since cittas arise and fall away, succeeding one another very > rapidly, it seems that the world does not disintegrate, the > world lasts, with beings, people and many different things. In > reality the world lasts just for one moment, namely, when > citta arises and cognises an object, just for that moment, and > then it falls away together with the citta. > I enjoyed reading this too. It is so nicely explained. I'm glad I have a copy of Survey, thanks to you, and I will have to remember to read some more of it soon. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113624 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 7:09 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Nina > > Honestly, I felt it is extremely difficult to explain to jhanas believers > there are dry insightors and to dry insightors that there jhana practioners. > Buddha taught different ways to reach the goal and I don't understand why this is > so difficult to accept. I think you are very smart to put it that way. I am open to accepting these two paths, even though I am inclined to "vote for" jhana. I accept that dry insight may be the way for some, and I also admit that it is very difficult for most people these days to cultivate jhana. Buddha taught not to be attached to views and not to create schisms in the sangha, yet we are very attached to what we think is right and argue with people who disagree. It's human nature, but hopefully we also push each other to reach more clarity sometimes. For instance, Jon has got me reading parts of the Visuddhimagga in order to back up my points, and that is leading me to learn some more about mindfulness and jhana practice. So, one thing leads to another... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113625 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:24 pm Subject: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > My turn to have a go at catching up. Week 1 at the new job is now behind me. Your break is over ;-)) > > (113217) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: After all, there's a world of difference between the statement "If there is X, then Y will be the result" and the statement "If you want to achieve Y, then do some Xing". > > > > There are quite a few instances in which he spoke according to the latter formula as well, in the form of, for instance, "if a bhikku wants to develop X, he should put the achieving of X in his meditation." That's not an exact quote form, but I have quoted that sutta before. As usual I can't find it again. > > =============== > > J: And when you do come across it you may find that it doesn't quite match your recollection of it ;-)) I'm fairly confident that the Buddha never said, in the context of the development of the path, "If you want to achieve Y, then do some Xing", or anything like it. I remember it clearly enough to say it was in that form. He said rather stridently, and gave a number of different examples one after the other, of the qualities that one could willfully put into the meditation if they wanted to develop this or that quality. It was almost as if he anticipated the later rise of Tony Robbins. :-))) We discussed it here just a few months ago - maybe someone will remember this sutta...? > > =============== > > I disagree that his other teachings were already known. > > =============== > > J: Well when I said it was the world of dhammas that the Buddha became enlightened to and taught about, I meant the whole of the teachings on insight/satipatthana, the 4 Noble Truths DO, etc. Attainments in the areas of samatha, sila and dana were already known (although not to the level of detail known by the Buddha). Well that is a lot of what Buddha did - he not only added the clear teaching on anatta and satipatthana - his unique contributions - but also clarified and integrated the working of concentration, insight, absorption and the higher states of consciousness, such as the formless attainments, with a level of clarity never seen before. Those integrations and greater detail of knowledge were almost as important if not equally important as his original contributions. For instance, if jhana had been known as a kusala form of absorption and a beneficial state to achieve in its own right, as it was in yoga and other disciplines, then it was only Buddha who pointed out that one could use the jhanas to develop insight by suppressing defilements and cultivating mindfulness even while the mind was deeply concentrated. His technical understanding of how to use and cultivate samatha/jhana and sati/satipatthana together is one of his most skillful contributions. In a sense you can't really separate out his understanding of the "old tools" such as jhana, and the "new tools" such as satipatthana. He himself called it the "eightfold path," not the "set of new and old tools which you can choose from." Jhana/concentration was an intrinsic ingredient in the full development of insight and wisdom, and he showed where it fit in the system, along with everything else. > > =============== > The application of anicca, anatta and dukkha to the conventional world has enormous impact on anyone who takes it seriously, which means not just in passing, and the meditation techniques he specified were an amazing evolution in specificity and detail, as well as principle, from the former techniques. > > =============== > > J: I agree that reflection on anicca, dukkha, anattaa as regards the conventional world can have quite an impact on a person. But was that the path to release from samsara taught by the Buddha? I don't think it was (although I'm not sure whether you're saying that this kind of reflection regarding the conventional world is the actual path or is more in the nature of preliminary or preparatory work; where do you stand on this point?). Where I stand is that I think there is a dual use of conventional applications of the teachings. I think they are part of the stepping stones of the path - and in that sense not merely "preliminary." It's where everyone lives and begins to contemplate the Dhamma. So I think conventional understanding of the path has a definite place in the path, and not just ultimate reality. And secondly, I think that conventional contemplation and conceptual understanding of the elements of the path can be converted at any time into direct insight via a moment of discernment. As is often said here, a moment of panna or vipassana can arise any time. I think that conventional insight and mindfulness practice create the potential for unanticipated conversions into more direct seeing. So in that sense it *is* the path. We just never know when it is going to strike. > > =============== > > What does "shadows of dhammas" mean? It means that there is a relation, albeit an obscured and distorted one, between conventional perception and the perception of actual dhammas, and that they exist on a continuum of delusion-enlightenment. As one sees conventional objects more specifically, clearly and as they actually form up in the moment, they break down into dhammas in the same way that conventional objects break down into atomic and sub-atomic particles in physics. > > =============== > > J: The number of conventional objects is infinite, whereas the number of kinds of dhammas that can be object of insight is finite and is relatively small in number. I don't see exactly what the significance of that is. One doesn't have to know every single object to gain insight, so the number of them is not of vital importance. In learning about concepts one can eventually see what they are and then it doesn't matter how many or varied of them happen to arise. I also don't subscribe to the notion that we are going to see "a finite number of dhammas" in some pure form where they are not associated with other factors, accumulations, various cetasikas, tendencies, situations, etc. So there are infinite combinations of kammas, cetasikas and accumulations that will arise with the various cittas and rupas and these are just as infinite in number as the various concepts. It is seeing the nature of them that is important, not having a clear ennumeration of the catalogue. Someone in another context which I can't remember said "See one detail of a certain kind and you understand all details of that kind." I think that's pretty appropos. For instance, in seeing the difference between a nama and a rupa, one clear understanding of what makes the rupa a rupa and the nama a nama and there is some insight "spread around" to the understanding between all namas and rupas. The insight applies itself to whatever arises in a general way, probably moreso the more clear it becomes, but still not a matter of numbers of variations of the type. > > =============== > There is no recognizeable relationship between subatomic particles and the objects which are composed of them, but we can study and recognize that these particles represent the reality - the paramatha dhammas - of the objective world. > > =============== > > J: I'm afraid I don't follow this. Sub-atomic particles can only be recognised and studied with the assistance of scientific instruments; otherwise there is only be a kind of 'thinking about' sub-atomic particles. Same with dhammas. They can only be recognized and seen directly with the microscope of the sotapanna. Pariyatti is likewise "studying about" is it not? The analogy is almost form-fitting. I'm not sure why you don't follow it. > In any event, this is not consistent with the way dhammas are described in such suttas as 'The All'. We can adjust our seeing and look at our experience as namas and rupas, and eventually we can see that, rather than general objects that seem to last over time. It doesn't change the reality of visible object that we think it is more than that. It just adds concept to the perception. It makes sense to me. The All implies that it is dhammas that we are seeing when we think we are seeing something else. So there's a direct relationship there. > > =============== > > I believe there's a similar relation of actuality between what we perceive as conventional reality and the dhammas which they represent in a distorted or veiled way. To see them as two completely unrelated separate worlds makes absolutely no sense of either world. It leaves awakening from within the conventional world as a magical illogical event that is not based on recognizing the true nature of samsara, but on simply ignoring it and waiting for a reality that is wholly other to magically descend. There is no development in such a vision, just happenstance based on conditions that happen to accumulate for no particular reason except for other random happenings. > > =============== > > J: There's nothing of 'happenstance' about the way that hearing about the world of dhammas can condition a beginning understanding of that world, first at the intellectual level and then at a more direct level. Well, you said 'a beginning understanding of the world.' That is my point. It is *this* world that we begin to understand when we see that our experience is made up of dhammas not concepts and that it is a direct experience, not one that needs to be conceptually interpreted. That is what I am talking about, not that the relationship of the Dhamma to panna and insight is an arbitrary one. I don't think our relationship to *this world* and what happens to us here, the kammas we put into play and the resultant experiences, are beside the point in the development of insight, any more than studying Dhamma is. It's not on a totally separate track but is part of this life and our awakening to what is really taking place in *it.* > To know more about the 'true nature of samsara' it's necessary to appreciate that the conventional world is not the world in the absolute sense. And in order to see that we have to look at *this* world more closely and see what it really is, not dismiss it in favor of another world that we know through conceptual study. > > =============== > > It is not an unusual view to say that the conventional world is created by imposing concepts on the actuality that is experienced. Remove the conceptual definitions and habits of perception and the true reality is revealed. It is often expressed in metaphors such as seeing a rope and mistaking it for a snake. You really are perceiving something, but you are conceptually misled about what it is and what it's nature is. > > =============== > > J: The problem is not that actuality is conceptualised about (since the enlightened being does this also), but that neither the actuality or the conceptualising is seen for what it is. Exactly. I'm not arguing against discernment and clarity, just about what is the field for such insight and understanding. Is it this world, or is the world of paramatha dhammas a totally separate reality? If so, it is a sort of Platonic view that separates experience into two planes that never intersect. > > =============== > > No, it would take us directly into the present moment instead of waiting for panna to arrive magically and present us with a wholly other reality. The idea would be that what is taking place in the moment *now* is already there - its' not another world, it's this one, but we are not perceiving it correctly. One then corrects perception rather than removing one's vision from the world of experience and burying it in the concepts of books that talk about another reality. > > =============== > > J: What is the relationship between this 'correcting of perception' and panna? Which comes first, would you say? I wouldn't be able to give them an absolute causal order. I think that the practice of mindful discernment leads to development of vipassana and panna, and the unfolding of panna leads to greater clarity of mindfulness. A kusala cycle of mutual influence I think. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113626 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:36 pm Subject: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113217) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Don't you think that constant attention to pariyatti from Dhamma books takes you away from the present perception and into a conceptual universe? If you're not attending the senses mindfully, what kind of moment are you being presented with? A conceptual, philosophical one. That is indeed "taking one away from the...dhammas appearing at the present moment." > > =============== > > J: Your question assumes that since I'm not 'doing' meditation I must be 'doing' pariyatti ;-)) That assumption is a mistaken one (but you are quite correct in suggesting that if I was, then it'd be taking me away from the present moment ;-)) That seems like a very fine semantic distinction to me. You may not be "doing it" but you are studying and discussing Dhamma and the presumption is that will lead to greater pariyatti and eventually direct discernment of dhammas. So it's in play, whether being "done" or just "happening." How would you describe that process of development? > > =============== > > Well it's not at all true that the presently occurring dhammas have nothing at all to do with the "monitor" that you are perceiving. If you are perceiving light or color or movement on what we call the "monitor," you are only perceiving those because they are arising as objects of the senses within the realm of what we call "monitor." The fact that "monitor" is a concept does not prevent what we all the "monitor" to be actually composed of those dhammas of light, color and movement. Saying "it has nothing to do with" takes you *away* from the color and movement and into a concept about concepts. Stick with the monitor and you are perceiving what is really there - color, movement etc. and with enough understanding that takes the place of the concept of monitor. They are the same reality perceived and understood differently. It's not a separate world, it's this one in its reality and realization. > > =============== > > J: Yes, it's of course correct to say that the concept of 'monitor' is formed up on the basis of the visible object currently being experienced. But my point was that it's not possible to come to understand more about visible object by focusing on, or analysing or deconstructing, the conventional object known as monitor. If you look at what is in front of you as visible object then you are going towards more understanding. The fact that it is called "monitor" in its accumulated apprehension doesn't take away from the visible object being present at any moment. Sure, if you mistake the concept for the object then you don't have understanding. If you separate them and understand the rupa and that which apprehends it, then you have more understanding. > > =============== > > That's one way of looking at it. There's nothing there to indicate that the person is already skilled in samatha. When the anapanasati sutta says that "He breathes in, calming bodily fabrications," anyone can do that. They may calm down a little or a lot, but it's not an advanced instruction. > > =============== > > J: The first part of the Anapanasati Sutta describes the persons present; from memory, they were all monks of some considerable attainment. As i mentioned to you before, the intro to the sutta mentions the opposite - that there were advanced monks, some of whom were training 10 or more monks, and others who were training 30 or 40 monks. These monks being trained are described as "new monks," ie, beginners. The place was rank with beginners studying anapanasati under the guidance of the more experienced monks. Here's the passage from the anapanasati sutta: "On that occasion the elder monks were teaching & instructing. Some elder monks were teaching & instructing ten monks, some were teaching & instructing twenty monks, some were teaching & instructing thirty monks, some were teaching & instructing forty monks. The new monks, being taught & instructed by the elder monks, were discerning grand, successive distinctions." > > =============== > > The Visudhimagga talks about counting breaths, and by anyone's estimation that is a beginner's way to start paying attention to breath with mindfulness, not for advanced practitioners. > > =============== > > J: The mention of counting breaths is quite some way into the section of the Vism. If you pay regard to all the preceding material, it is clearly not a beginning step. > > But more crucially, the Vism does not say that counting breaths leads to calming a restless mind and generating kusala. It mentions the counting of breaths as a stage of development, i.e., in one who is well on the way already. That is not what that section of the Vism says, as I have recently quoted at length in another response to you. It says explicitly that it is a beginning technique in anapansati - the very first in a series of 7 stages - that is used for the purpose of fixing the attention to the breath as object. Once that early purpose is satisfied, counting is dispensed with and the monk goes on to a more advanced practice. It is mentioned that the monk should get rid of the "minor impediments" beforehand, that is true, but in terms of breathing practice it is step 1. > > =============== > > > The purpose is to indicate how, for those experienced and skilled in samatha bhavana based on the foulness of the body, vipassana bhavana is something else yet again. > > > > Don't quite get this. Can you re-quote the relevant stanza and explain a bit more? > > =============== > > J: Er, will have to go back and find your original post. Will get back to you after I've dug it up. You have a short respite on this one ;-)) Well thank the bodhisattas. I must be experiencing a brief moment of positive vipaka. Quite rare these days. Thank you as well. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113627 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 8:59 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Nina, (Rob E, Ken O, Alex, Howard & all) I just want to go through your comments in order to understand what it is you'd like me to raise with K.Sujin: --- On Thu, 17/2/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > N: Yes, usually after a passage of hearing a gradual > discourse we > read that the listener attained enlightenment. It may > happen that the > Buddha spoke to someone who had never heard the Dhamma > before. But he > was ready for it. No mentioning of previous jhaana > practice. How > could there be opportunity for it? .... S: Yes - maybe in previous lives (like for all of us), but not as basis for enlightenment, hence the right concentration arising with the lokuttara magga citta which experiences nibbana is only equivalent in strength to the first jhana .... > When we read in some suttas that right concentration is the > four > jhaanas, it may be that this is referring to the lokuttara > Path where > people who had practised jhaanas could experience nibbaana > with > samaadhi of the level of even the fourth jhaana. .... S: As I understand, if it is lokuttara right concentration at the level of the 4th jhana, it is because, by conditions, the 4th jhana cittas arose immediately before the enlightenment process and the insight in that enlightenment process experienced the jhana citta. This conditioned the lokuttara citta to have the same intensity of appana samadhi (absorption concentration). Likewise, if it was 3rd, 2nd or 1st jhana. It depends on the accumulations and conditions at the time of enlightenment and the process of cittas in which enlightenment occurs. From "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" (appendix 1): "When lokuttara citta of one of the stages of enlightenment arises, it can have jhaana of one of the stages of jhaana as base or foundation, that is, the jhaanacitta that was object of satipa.t.thaana. In that case, the magga-citta and the phala-citta are lokuttara jhaanacittas accompanied by the jhaana-factors of the jhaanacitta that was their base, and thus, there are forty lokuttara cittas...." From the Abhidhammatthavibhaavinii, comy to Abhidhammatthasangaha, ch 1, 38: "...Therein when insight leading to emergence [of the transcendant path] occurs to one who attains and emerges from whichever jhaana, from the first jhaana [to the fifth], and observes formations, that [jhaana] is the foundation jhaana as it is the basis for insight leading to emergence. [note: insight leading to emergence (vu.t.thaana-gaaminii vipassanaa) is discussed at Vism 661-66 (ch XX1, #83-110)]. When it occurs to one observing whatever jhaana, that [jhaana] is the observed jhaana..." "Herein for one who produces the path by attaining one of the five jhaanas, emerging from it and observing various formations, the path is similar to whichever of the five jhaanas is this foundation jhaana..." a little later: "Thus, the one who practises bare insight must have all the factors of jhaana, for, since he lacks the foundation jhaanas, etc., there is no fixing [niyamaabhaavato][of the factors] on their acount and the path can only be fivefold in accordance with the insight. Even in the case of one who has attained jhaana, but does not make jhaana the foundation, but observes various formations, the path produced must also be fivefold in accordance with the insight. This is the essence of the conclusins drawn from the commentaries, etc..." .... N:>As I said, > lokuttara > citta is always accompanied by samaadhi of the level of at > least the > first stage of mundane jhaana, because the object > experienced is > nibbaana. .... S: Yes, as discussed many times. B.Bodhi gives a good summary in his guide note to #30, ch 1, CMA: "Nevertheless, no matter what explanation is adopted, for bare insight meditator and jhaana meditator alike, all path and fruition cittas are considered types of jhaana consciousness. They are so considered because they occur in the mode of closely contemplating their object with full absorption, like the mundane jhaanas, and because they possess the jhaana factors with an intensity corresponding to their counterparts in the mundane jhaanas. "The supramundane jhaanas of the paths and fruits differ from the mundane jhaanas in several important respects. First, whereas the mundane jhaanas take as their object some concept, such as the sign of the kasina, the supramundane jhaanas take as their object Nibbaana, the unconditioned reality. Second, whereas the mundane jhaanas merely suppress the degilements while leaving their underlying seeds intact, the supramundane jhaanas of the path eradicate defilements so that they can never arise again. Third, while the mundane jhaanas lead to rebirth in the fine-material world and thus sustain existence in the round of rebirths, the jhaanas of the path cut off the fetters binding one to the cycle and thus issue in liberation from the round of birth and death......" ... >Thus, imho, this does not mean that mundane > right > concentration is the same (and always) as one of the four > stages of > mundane jhaana. It could not be, because the object has to > be a > present naama or ruupa. How else could insight be developed > and the > three characteristics be realised of conditioned > realities? .... S: Not at all. Just as the supramundane jhana cittas differ markedly from the mundane jhana cittas in nature as discussed above, but can be compared in terms of intensity, hence the use of 'jhana', so the mundane right concentration in the development of satipatthana also differs markedly from mundane jhana in quality (as well as intensity, not being appana). As we know, only right concentration of the path of insight can be referred to as adhi-citta, or higher concentration. .... > I would like to ask Sarah to check this with Kh Sujin next > time. ... S: Would you clarify exactly what the question or point you'd like me to raise is as I know you're familiar with all that I've written and quoted. ... > Because often such questions as Howard asked come up. The > sutta could > be an exhortation to people who could develop jhaana to > continue so > that they could have lokuttara cittas accompanied by jhaana > factors > of the different stages. This is an attainment higher than > the > attainment of those with dry insight. .... S: Perhaps you'd give me the quote again. Surely it just means an encouragement to develop insight according to ones accumulations, regardless of whether the object is jhana citta or any other dhamma? I don't think the Buddha ever urged anyone to have lokuttara cittas of a particular kind, but just described the various kinds of enlightenment including the highest kinds. If you give me the quote again, I'll be glad to raise it with your and Howard's comments now that I understand them. .... >And as the teachings > declined > there were no longer arahats with the four discriminations > and with > lokuttara cittas accompanied by jhaana factors. ... S: Again, I just read this as a description of the decline of the Buddha sasana rather than a particular urging to a particular kind of enlightenment. After all, what mundane dhammas arise, what the objects of insight are and what kind of lokuttara cittas arise is completely anatta, out of anyone's control. Thanks for your patience as I've been "writing out loud" as I go. Metta Sarah ====== #113628 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:07 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Modes of Materiality epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113249) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > I admit that some of it actually might require that, but if Buddha says "We should strive to eradicate the defilements" we don't have to wonder too strenously what he meant. It's obvious in such a case. > > =============== > > J: Yes, but like many of your paraphrases of passages from the suttas, the statement "We should strive to eradicate the defilements" is an interpretation of what was said rather than an actual quote ;-)) It's in the right spirit. But anyway, here's a quote from Dhp XVIII: "Make an island for yourself! Strive hard and become wise!" And another from DN 16: the Parinibbana Sutta: ""Impermanent, subject to change, are component things. Strive on with heedfulness!" Those were the Buddha's last words - an instruction, an admonition, a command. > > =============== > Some cases may not seem so obvious and then we may have to do more investigations, but not everything is like that. > > > > I don't think "Breathing in long, he is aware that he is breathing in long" requires a deep reinterpretation. > > =============== > > J: Well for a start, without the context of the sutta as a whole, there could be no chance of having any idea what was meant by that passage. Haven't we both read it? What do you think the context is? It is the preliminary, first instruction in the sutta that is involved with the actual exercise of being mindfully aware of the breath. That's the context. More ambitious and subtle instructions follow in due course. > But taking the passage at face value, it seems more like a description of a person who has gained some proficiency than a recommendation for a practice by a beginner who has yet to master the basics, wouldn't you say ;-)) Actually I would not say that. Identifying long from sort breaths is a gross and basic practice and would be a way of training someone for more subtle practices, as actually does take place in the sutta. It's the first instruction in mindfulness of breathing practice, for beginners. > > =============== > > I wouldn't deny the helpfulness and usefulness of the commentaries in balancing one's individual opinions and views of sutta and other parts of the Dhamma, but questions remain, such as: > > > > 1. After considering the commentaries, does one return to the sutta to fully encounter its meaning again, or does one leave the suttas behind to rest in the commentaries? Big difference there. > > =============== > > J: In practice though it's not a matter of 'returning' to the sutta, since the commentaries are typically a phrase-by-phrase explanation of the sutta text. So one never actually 'leaves' the sutta. That's not my experience, even with a random sample of a few commentaries. Crossing the flood has a commentary that is far removed from anything the sutta says. From the sutta: ""Tell me, dear sir, how you crossed over the flood." "I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place." "But how, dear sir, did you cross over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place?" "When I pushed forward, I was whirled about. When I stayed in place, I sank. And so I crossed over the flood without pushing forward, without staying in place."" We are told about the commentary's interpretation: "Commentary informs us that the Buddha teaches the devata in terms of the paradox in order to subdue her pride." The description goes on to say that this is in order to teach her about right effort. I agree with the second part. The first statement may or may not be true, but it certainly has nothing to do with what the Buddha says in the sutta. It is a commentary that is ascribing a totally different motive to the Buddha than the teaching he gives in the sutta. In my opinion, the sutta has something very important to teach, and it's not a personal lesson to the devata about her pride in asking a simple and clear question, but is about right effort. It describes a middle way approach to samsara, not fighting it and not succumbing to it. > > =============== > > 2. Does one have some critical understanding of the role and limitations of the commentaries, or does one take them as the single authority on the Buddha's teachings? > > =============== > > J: To me, it's not a matter of accepting or not accepting the commentaries as the final authority, but of identifying what the commentarial position is. And what status does that position have for you, once identified? That is my question. > > =============== > > 3. Is one certain that their own view of the commentaries is accurate? If we are worried about our understanding of sutta on its face, we may also fail to understand the actual role, significance and meaning of the commentaries. > > =============== > > J: Yes, and for this reason there are then the sub-commentaries to explain the commentaries. You see, they thought of everything ;-)) Yes, I see it's "commentaries all the way down." No problem with infinite regress there. ;-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113629 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 9:41 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing sarahprocter... Hi Alex (& Howard), I thought these were very apt comments (#113465) and particularly liked this quote you gave below: --- On Sat, 12/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >>P. S. Getting more serious, when I eat do you two get full? When I >>sleep, do you become rested? Does my kamma lead to your vipaka? A:>Different causes lead to different results. Causes differentiate results. >Some precise suttas do avoid self/other dichotomy and focus on causes and results. There are suttas in SN12 where Buddha refuses to answer questions such as "is suffering causes by self/other/both/fortuitious" and instead focus on causes & conditions. Example sutta: ================================================================= <...> "'The one who acts is the one who experiences [the result of the act]' amounts to the eternalist statement, 'Existing from the very beginning, stress is self-made.' 'The one who acts is someone other than the one who experiences'[2] amounts to the annihilationist statement, 'For one existing harassed by feeling, stress is other-made.' Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. ... From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress & suffering. "Now from the remainderless fading & cessation of that very ignorance comes the cessation of fabrications. ...From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.017.than.html =============================================================== >So when speaking precisely the Buddha avoided self/other dichotomy. >And you are well aware of all the suttas that state that one shouldn't consider any of 5 aggregates to be "I, me, mine". ex: MN44 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.044.than.html .... S: In B.Bodhi's translation of SN 12:17 we read: " 'Kassapa, [if one thinks,] 'the oen who acts is the same as the one who experiences [the result],' [then one asserts] with reference to one existing from the beginning: 'Suffering is created by oneself.' When one asserts thus, this amounts to eternalism...." Here Bodhi adds notes from the commentaries: "Spk: If at the beginning (one thinks), 'The one who acts is the same as the one who experiences (the result),' in such a case the belief (laddhi) afterwards follows, 'Suffering is created by oneself.' And here, what is meant by suffering is the suffering of the round (va.t.tadukkha). Asserting thus, from the beginning one declares eternalism, one grasps hold of eternalism. Why? Because that view of his amounts to this. Eternalism comes upon one who conceives the agent and the experiencer to be one and the same." "Spk-p.t: Prior to the belief that suffering is created by oneself there are the distortions of perception and of mind (sa~n~naacittavipallaasaa) in the notion, 'The one who acts is the same as the one who experiences (the result),' and then a wrong adherence to these distortions develops, namely, the belief 'Suffering is created by oneself' (a distortion of views, di.t.thivipallaasa)." Continuing with the text: "But, Kassapa, [if one thinks,] 'The one who acts is one, the one who experiences [the result] is another, '[then one asserts] with reference to one stricken by feeling: 'Suffering is created by another.' When one asserts thus, this amounts to annihilationism." Notes from the commentary: "Spk: If at the beginning (one thinks), 'The one who acts is one, the one who experiences (the result) is another,' in such a case afterwards there comes the belief, 'Suffering is created by another,' held by one stricken by - that is, pierced by - the feeling associated with the annihilationist view that arises thus: 'The agent is annihilated right here, and someone else ('another') experiences (the results) of his deeds.' Asserting thus, from the beginning one declares annihilationism, one grasps hold of annihilationism. Why? Because the view one holds amounts to this. Annihilationism comes upon him." Continuing from the Sutta: "Without veering twards either of these extremes, the Tathaagata teaches the Dhamma by the middle: 'With ignorance as condition, volitional formations [come to be]; with volitional formations as condition, consciousnes.........Such is the origin of the this whole mass of suffering." Note from the commentary: "Spk: The Tathaagata teaches the Dhamma by the middle without veering to either of these extremes - eternalism and annihilationism - having abandoned them without reservation. He teaches while being established in the middle way. ***What is that Dhamma? By the formula of dependent origination, the effect is shown to occur through the cause and to cease with the cessation of the cause, but no agent or experiencer (kaaraka, vedaka) is described."*** Exactly as Alex pointed out here, I appreciate this last sentence above in particular. Many thanks for this discussion, Alex and Howard. Metta Sarah ======= #113630 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- On Mon, 14/2/11, Vince wrote: >>S: a)"According to the Comy., the sixteen defilements are finally abandoned by > the noble paths (or stages of sanctity) in the following order: > "By the path of stream-entry (sotapatti-magga) are abandoned: (5) > denigration, (6) domineering, (7) envy, (8) jealousy, (9) hypocrisy, (10) fraud. <...> V:>I don't know... on my side I cannot see in these Suttas a mention about thesotapanna is unable to break precepts due to the presence of the rest. However it can be also a matter of interpretation. <...> ... S: let's see if this quotes from B.Bodhis's Guide to CMA, Ch IX, #38 helps: "A stream-enterer is one who has entered the stream that leads irreversibly to Nibbaana, that is, the Noble Eightfold Path. A stream-enterer has cut off the coarsest three fetters - personality view, doubt, an adherence to rules and rituals; he has unshakeable confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha; and he is free from the prospect of rebirth in any of the woeful realms. Of the four taints (aasava), he has eliminated the taint of wrong views, and of the fourteen unwholesome cetasikas he has eliminated wrong view and doubt, and according to the Commentaries, also envy and avarice. He has freed himself as well from all degrees of defilements strong enough to lead to rebirth in the woeful planes. His conduct is market by scrupulous observance of the Five Precepts: abstinence from taking life, stealing, sexual misconduct, false speech, and use of intoxicants." .... >thanks so much for your references and thoughts ... S: Likewise, I appreciate your comments, questions and further consideration of these points. Metta Sarah ===== #113631 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Sun, 13/2/11, Robert E wrote: >very nice to hear, Sarah. Regards to your mom! ... S: Passed on. You have an admirer of your writing! ... >Yes, I still like "it's gone" very much. If I think of that sometimes now, it's refreshing to know that the slate is clear and we have a chance to start over again at each moment. ... S: Exactly! ... >Even though the usual 'stuff' arises again, there is a micro-moment here and there where the mental and emotional atmosphere seems nice and clear. And then 'it's gone' again. :-) ... S: Gone again and another opportunity for awareness and understanding to develop now:-) "Letting go..." and "it's gone" can be helpful for everyone, I'm sure. A friend in Bangkok told us last time about how she'd once been in a boat with K.Sujin and had been telling the latter a long story about some problem. KS had just listened patiently and at the end of the story, she simply said: "When are you going to let go?". The friend said this was a really helpful wake up call for her. Metta Sarah ======= #113632 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Wed, 16/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >> A:> Well, it seems to me that meditation is better than doing >something akusala. > .... > S: How does one judge what activity is kusala and what akusala? For >example, you'd say that "meditation" as in sitting quietly, >focussing on the breath or sensations is kusala and that washing >dishes is akusala. What determines what is kusala and what is >akusala? ... A:>When properly samatha-ing, ... S: What do you mean by this? ... >one abandons 5 hindrances, and for the longer one abandons the hindrances, the better. .... S: It's still an idea of doing something by a Self, isn't it? Metta Sarah ======= #113633 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:25 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Robert K and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: <. . .> > > > > > Thus, through the sequence of mind-moments, the flow of consciousness continues uninterrupted LIKE THE WATERS IN A STREAM ."" <. . .> > Dear Ken > The quote seemed self-explanatory perhaps if you first detail where Howard and you interpret it differently I can add my two cents. -------- KH: This `flow of consciousness' that `continues uninterrupted' is just a concept. I said to Howard it was the same concept that was normally referred to as "Jon" "you" or "I" etc. I'll let Howard present his side of the argument if he wants to, but he sees the "stream" as having vitally important connotations. Important enough to make satipatthana more than just a description of presently arisen dhammas. Ken H #113634 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Pt), --- On Tue, 15/2/11, Ken H wrote: >Thanks for the additional pointers on jhana absorption and the divine realms. So the reason the Buddha didn't visit his former jhana teachers was not that he couldn't communicate with them in their new realms, but because there were no sense objects there for them to learn about. ... S: It's all a little beyond me - I think both points are relevant. Maybe something else to raise in Bkk. I just came across this quote in the comy to the Abhi Sang, Ch 3, 70 which accords with your understanding, I think: "The first path does not arise in formless existence since it does not arise for disciples without the condition of [hearing] another's voice, and Buddhas and Paccekabuddhas do not occur other than in the human realm; the smiling [consciousness] does not arise since there is no body; and the form-sphere [consciousness] do not arise because, by virtue of their cultivation of dispassion for materiality, formless beings are without desire for the jhaanas which have form-sphere objects....." ... ---------------- <. . .> >>S: So much of our everyday chatter is just curiosity.... everyday, sama lobha, isn't it? ---------------- >KH: Sama lobha, that's a nice sounding name. I presume it means equanimous attachment. Innocuous enough but not the path, and therefore not safe. ... S: Sama just means 'ordinary', ordinary attachment. As you say, no attachment is 'safe'. "Equanimous attachment" - that's a new one!! ... ------------------ >> S: I forget if I mentioned that yesterday I had a little chat with my mother trying to explain what cittas are. ------------------ >KH: They are easy to explain, aren't they, and at the same time almost impossibly hard. But your mother is in good hands. :-) .... S: Thanks, but children trying to explain to parents is seldom easy. I have to keep it very brief - "just the changing mind now", "just the citta now" or similar. ... >KH: Not much actual board-riding lately – due to my various difficulties. But I have bought a kayak, which is fun and good exercise. ... S: That's a good idea - probably good for the knee too. I'm planning to buy a bicycle sometime soon as we seem to be managing fine here without a car. Meanwhile lots of ocean swims with the "Bold and Beautiful" group. I'm still the slowest:-) Metta Sarah ======= #113635 From: sarah abbott Date: Sat Feb 19, 2011 10:42 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Sat, 19/2/11, Ken O wrote: >>S: Just curious, can you quote from (not give your paraphrase from!) any DSG message which says that "panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts" or something very similar. I don't remember ever having read anyone say this - especially not any long-time "regulars". >KO: I dont think I need to explain much because many a times I always look a the email stating concepts cannot use for development since concepts does not have the three characteristics. ... S: In other words, no one has suggested "panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts" as you said. What you now mention are different points entirely. We have all talked at length about pariyatti leading to patipatti. Pariyatti refers to the right understanding of concepts about dhammas arising now, having heard/read the Teachings. As you say, without such wise consideration, without such pariyatti, there will not be any patipatti. There's no disagreement on this point. As you will also agree, concepts don't have ti-lakkhana and cannot be the objects of satipatthana or vipassana or enlightenment. As for your further comments below, my one comment is that what we hear/read/consider of the Dhamma is for understanding, not for "using". I don't know if this is just a matter of terminology. Metta Sarah .... >I have yet met in the commentarian text that said panna that arise with concepts is not the same as panna that arise with nama and rupa (except in vipassana level) nor did the commentarian text ever claim that panna that arise with concepts cannot be used for the development to enlightment, cannot be used for the understanding of the three characteristics. On the contrary, many a times, concepts are also used for development, similarly for nama and rupa. the understanding of nama and rupa is to help the understanding of not self and not to say concepts cannot be used for development.. this understanding throught the Abhidhamma is of great value, of great beneficial to the understanding of not self. Similarly in the suttas where conventional terms where concepts are used to understand dhamma is of great value, benficial. ========= #113636 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 4:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Sarah ... S: In other words, no one has suggested "panna cannot arise with citta that have concepts" as you said. What you now mention are different points entirely. KO: Oh you have to read previously what Ken H wrote to me, that panna cannot arise with concepts, not sure when and saying I bring new ideas of dhamma :-) We have all talked at length about pariyatti leading to patipatti. Pariyatti refers to the right understanding of concepts about dhammas arising now, having heard/read the Teachings. As you say, without such wise consideration, without such pariyatti, there will not be any patipatti. There's no disagreement on this point. As you will also agree, concepts don't have ti-lakkhana and cannot be the objects of satipatthana or vipassana or enlightenment. KO: That I would not totally agreed. I agreed for vipassana level and enlightment that objects are dhamma but for satipatthana I dont. The text started as concepts and the text has never said that satipatthana cannot be a concept unless it refers to vipassana. As I said earlier, on the contrary it started as concepts as also indicated in the commentarian text as well. Now since panna can arise with concepts, so is there any wrong about practising meditations and if you think it is wrong so in what way why is it wrong. Ken O #113637 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 4:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa ashkenn2k Dear Jon >> KO: If we dont learn from mundane level how do you go to supramundane level. >> :-) So you are saying you could straight away go to supramudane level without >> going to mundane level first. Even those nama and rupa you are learning how are >> >> >> all mundane level. Are you saying that such mundane level are not impt. >> =============== > >J: You were suggesting that the sati, viriya and concentration that arises >during (mundane) jhana were mundane path factors (see your message # 109976). > >I was pointing out that these mental factors arise with all kinds of kusala; >they can only be considered path factors when they arise with a moment of >satipatthana. > >Of course, all levels of kusala are important. But kusala of the level of >satipatthana is the kusala that is taught only by a Buddha. KO: Nope, the text never said that they are considered path factors when they arise with a moment of satiipatthana unless you are saying satipatthana at that moment is vipassana. When did in the commentariain text said that only nama and rupa appear then it is satipatthana. The commentaries when describing, satipatthana would normally start as a concept and not nama and rupa and indicate the understanding of nama and rupa as an important factor as well. >> =============== >Or are >> you saying the panna, and jhana factors that arise in jhana are different in >> characteristics when panna arise in other activities like learning and >>listening >> >> to dhamma >> =============== > >J: The characteristic of a given mental factor is the same whatever the level of > >kusala. In the case of panna, for example, it's characteristic is always to see >clearly as truly is. But panna that accompanies samatha bhavana understands >present kusala as kusala and present akusala as akusala, whereas panna of the >level of vipassana sees the true nature of an arisen dhamma. KO: Panna that arise with samantha bhavana is only for knowing the difference in kusala and akusala, I don't know where you get this from because I have yet seen this in the text. I konw there are two vehicles stated clearly in the Visud, so the serenity vehicle should not be valid basing on your assumption. Ken O > #113638 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 5:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Rob E it is great that you read Visud, pse also read the commnetaries texts of Right View, Mindulness and Distraction of thoughts. It can be found in access to insight. I have previously started the study of jhanas in DSG where I put important factors to jhanas like virtue, mindfullness and comprehending of dhamma and explain in turn the importance of each to support the fruition of jhanas. With virtue, one is calm as one is without remorse from aksuala conduct with mindffullness, one is guarded, one is proctected against akusala cittas With comprehension, one develops understanding of not self Ken O > >I think you are very smart to put it that way. I am open to accepting these two >paths, even though I am inclined to "vote for" jhana. I accept that dry insight >may be the way for some, and I also admit that it is very difficult for most >people these days to cultivate jhana. > > >Buddha taught not to be attached to views and not to create schisms in the >sangha, yet we are very attached to what we think is right and argue with people > >who disagree. It's human nature, but hopefully we also push each other to reach >more clarity sometimes. For instance, Jon has got me reading parts of the >Visuddhimagga in order to back up my points, and that is leading me to learn >some more about mindfulness and jhana practice. So, one thing leads to >another... > >Best, >Robert E. > >= = = = = = = = > > > #113639 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 5:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E to add on this topic, when I failed to kill, I dont commit to kill. Just like a hunter who brings his arrow to shoot a deer but miss, there is no act of killing but there is still kamma. There is kamma of ill will in the mind door though there is no kamma in the body door. >I will end with a story that contradicts all of us, from 'The Autobiography of a > >Yogi,' about the life of Paramahansa Yogananda, a very famous figure in the >Hindu tradition of Kriya Yoga. Yogananda was sitting with his teacher, and he >raised his hand to swat a fly, then thought better of it and stopped. His >teacher said "You may as well kill the fly, as the anger and intention of the >act has already taken place, and the karma has already been created." KO: He is half correct. right on the ill will but not on the killing. A monk would not encourage any violence or killing and not even in thoughts, it is against the Buddha's teaching as show in the parable of the saw Ken O > > >Hi Howard. > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > >> The fact that I "failed to kill" is a matter of happenstance. However, as >> I understand you, you are saying that even in such a case, the one who >> commits the act has a fuller intention that carries fuller kamma than the one >> who fully wants to commit the act but fails to do so. Do I have that >> right? >> --------------------------------------------- >> IMO, in a moral sense that one HAS engaged in killing. As far as what >> is within the power of the perpetrator, it was complete. What inadvertently >> occurs isn't morally relevant. >> --------------------------------------------- > >Well, I disagree to an extent with both you and Sarah, even though you both >disagree with me for perhaps different reasons. It seems to me that the act >itself has relevance beyond the intention. I may find that I'm wrong in the >future, but intuitively it does not seem right to me. On this point I agree with > >the law - if one succeeds in taking a life that is a lot more relevant for the >one who dies! If I fail, even though I tried as hard to kill as possible, the >failure makes it less severe than if I succeed. > > >The Abhidhamma view seems to reach an inevitable conclusion - there are no acts, > >per se. Deeds are not really 'active' but only seem so; they are really >experiential, like all dhammas. That means that in reality there is no self and >no other, there are only arising dhammas for various streams of cittas and they >don't really touch each other as beings. If you kill someone you experience the >namas and rupas of intending and killing; the 'other person' experiences the >unpleasant vipaka of 'being killed,' so you are only convenient objects of >experience for each other, to match each individual's vipaka from their own >kamma. No real beings to kill or be killed. > > >Your view seems to be that act is relevant, but that the intention that >culmintes in such an act is where the kamma resides, and if the full intention >to kill is enacted, then it is beside the point whether the person is actually >killed or not, as regards kamma and the moral weight that the "killer" takes on. > >My view is that the intentions are extremely important, but the acts themselves >also have consequential weight in their own right, and can be akusala/immoral in > >their own right. To me, the consequences to "others" increases the moral >importance of the intention and the act. > >I will end with a story that contradicts all of us, from 'The Autobiography of a > >Yogi,' about the life of Paramahansa Yogananda, a very famous figure in the >Hindu tradition of Kriya Yoga. Yogananda was sitting with his teacher, and he >raised his hand to swat a fly, then thought better of it and stopped. His >teacher said "You may as well kill the fly, as the anger and intention of the >act has already taken place, and the karma has already been created." > >Best, >Robert E. > >= = = = = = = = = = > > > #113640 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. nilovg Dear Sarah (and Howard), thank you for all the quotes, an impressive list and I am going to keep them in my file. Very good, much appreciated. I give you a quote and perhaps Howard can help, or Alex? Kindred Sayings V, book I, sutta 8, Analysis which goes over all the Path factors. S: Would you clarify exactly what the question or point you'd like > me to raise is as I know you're familiar with all that I've written > and quoted. > ... > > Because often such questions as Howard asked come up. The > > sutta could > > be an exhortation to people who could develop jhaana to > > continue so > > that they could have lokuttara cittas accompanied by jhaana > > factors > > of the different stages. This is an attainment higher than > > the > > attainment of those with dry insight. > .... > S: Perhaps you'd give me the quote again. Surely it just means an > encouragement to develop insight according to ones accumulations, > regardless of whether the object is jhana citta or any other > dhamma? I don't think the Buddha ever urged anyone to have > lokuttara cittas of a particular kind, but just described the > various kinds of enlightenment including the highest kinds. > > If you give me the quote again, I'll be glad to raise it with your > and Howard's comments now that I understand them. > .... #113641 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Robert) - In a message dated 2/20/2011 1:26:01 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Robert K and Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: <. . .> > > > > > Thus, through the sequence of mind-moments, the flow of consciousness continues uninterrupted LIKE THE WATERS IN A STREAM ."" <. . .> > Dear Ken > The quote seemed self-explanatory perhaps if you first detail where Howard and you interpret it differently I can add my two cents. -------- KH: This `flow of consciousness' that `continues uninterrupted' is just a concept. I said to Howard it was the same concept that was normally referred to as "Jon" "you" or "I" etc. I'll let Howard present his side of the argument if he wants to, but he sees the "stream" as having vitally important connotations. Important enough to make satipatthana more than just a description of presently arisen dhammas. Ken H =================================== I've already commented on this: Streams of consciousness are important as they involve relationship. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113642 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Sarah and Nina there are jhanas that are mundane right concentration and supradmundane. So it depends, the stock formulae are at times mundane right concentration. so we cannot asssume it is supradmundane jhanas until we look at the commentary. At times the commentary is refering to mundane right concentration and at times supradmundane. So not all jhanas in the sutta are supradmundane Ken O > >From: Nina van Gorkom >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Sunday, 20 February 2011 23:38:54 >Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. > > >Dear Sarah (and Howard), >thank you for all the quotes, an impressive list and I am going to >keep them in my file. Very good, much appreciated. >I give you a quote and perhaps Howard can help, or Alex? >Kindred Sayings V, book I, sutta 8, Analysis which goes over all the >Path factors. sensuality, aloof from evil states, enters on the first trance... >etc. This is stock for the description of the jhaanas. >There are many such suttas, and if one is not careful one may >misunderstand. >Nina. > #113643 From: Ken O Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 7:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Where/How is memory stored? ashkenn2k Dear Alex > >> Yes, I know that sanna cetasika does that. But if it is momentary, >> the difficulty is in explaining how memory is retained from moment >> to moment. Why do we forget and then some time later remember >> things that have happened long ago? >------ KO: sana marks or notes everything that dhamma experiences when it arise momentary. Without fail it will record. When one recall a pleasant memory, it is sanna that remembers the feelings that accompanied with the concepts or dhamma. Why we forget - Buddha has mentioned that why some people cannot remember the suttas even though it was spoken to them a few times, it is because of our sensual thoughts that cause this. Why we remember, there are a few factors which I think was mentioned in Qn of Malinda on sati. It could be because of familiarity etc >-------- > >> A:Was that memory being passed with EVERY citta until it surfaced >> and gave its effects? Did I understand this correctly? >------- >N: I would not put it that way, it is far more complex. Several >unknown factors can condition the fact why we remember something. >------ KO: yes all objects that citta experience including cetasikas that follow with the rising of citta are noted or marked by sanna from life to life that is why Arahant could remember their past lives because of sanna. Ken O #113644 From: "philip" Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 5:08 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Sarah, Nina and all Yes, I'm looking forward to it. You know, even though the Dhamma is so very central to my life, I've only had a few talks "live", three times with Rob K and with James when he spent a couple of days at my place. So it'll be great. My peeves have settles down. I think the internet agitates them, because I am always struggling with the addiction so am not in a good state of mind to discuss patiently. Face to face I am a mild-mannered, easy going person. Also, "Perfections" has settled a lot of my peeves. A quote I love: "We need courage so that we are diligent and turn away immeditately from akusala. If we are too slow in turning away frmo akusala, it will later on become more difficult or even too late do do so, as must have happened life after life." If Acharn Sujin had answered this way when asked by Nina about a person who was worried about the danger of commiting transgressions, how much better it would have been that saying "it has already fallen away" as she did. I find the book on the Perfections is all about knowing kusala from akusala, knowing the benefits of the first and the dangers of the second, that discrimination. And there are good quotation about how we have to know what degree of kusala is suitable for us to develop, I just find a lot more that is cognizant of different people (so to speak) with different needs, not always plunging to panna that knows anatta, less insistence on things like "what good is it to know kusala from akusala if it is not known that all dhammas are not-self", that was another thing that put me off a lot. Anyways, really I'll be laid back and just enjoying the experience of spending time with people who are devoted to DHamma, such a rare treat for me. I'll continue to abstain from participating here, though, it's not good for me. Hope everyone is well! Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Nina (& Phil), > > --- On Sat, 19/2/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > >> I'm going to Thailand in March and will have a chance to meet > >> friends and Acharn Sujin for the first time and discuss Dhamma. > .... #113645 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 4:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation truth_aerator Hello Sarah, KenH, all, > A:>When properly samatha-ing, > ... > S: What do you mean by this? Suppressing the 5 hindrances to allow wisdom to cut off defilements while they are weak. >A:one abandons 5 hindrances, and for the longer one abandons the >hindrances, the better. > .... > S: It's still an idea of doing something by a Self, isn't it? ANything, or almost anything can be done with an idea of a self. Even eating food or drinking water can be done with a wrong idea of a Self. This doesn't mean that one shouldn't eat or drink (and thus die). It simply means that actions need to be done appropriately and without wrong views. This is especially true with kusala deeds. They are good to do. Just don't hold wrong views. Even though there is no freedom of will, and things happen the only possible way they ever could occur given those circumstances - actions do occur. Some mental actions (such as meditation) is more beneficial for awakening than others (simply washing dishes or going to marketplace, strip club, whatever). Meditation does occur, and as everything, it is fully conditioned and beyond control. But this occurrence IS very beneficial for the path, which is why it was described by the Buddha. With metta, Alex #113646 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:49 pm Subject: The 1st Noble Truth! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 1st Noble Truth: All this is Suffering!! The blessed Buddha once said: One should dwell reflecting on all phenomena as mental states in the light of these Four Noble Truths. How does one do so? One sees, understands, and knows it as it verily is: All this and such is suffering! Craving is the cause & origin of all suffering! The total absence of all craving is the ceasing of all suffering! This Noble 8-fold Way is the only method to eliminate all suffering! And what, Bhikkhus, is this 1st Noble Truth of Suffering? Birth is suffering, ageing is suffering, decay is suffering, death is suffering. Sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, & discontent are suffering. Being joined with any disliked is suffering. Being separated from any liked is suffering. Not getting what one wants is suffering. Getting what one does not want is suffering. In short, the five clusters of clinging are suffering. And what, Bhikkhus, is birth? In whatever being & group of individuality, there is birth, coming into being, emergence, appearance, manifestation of the 5 clusters clusters of clinging, development of the ability to sense, that, Bhikkhus, is called birth... And what, Bhikkhus, is ageing? In whatever being & group of individuality, there is ageing, decaying, broken teeth, grey hair, wrinkled skin, shrinking & fading away, weakening of the ability to sense, that, Bhikkhus, is called ageing... And what, Bhikkhus, is death? In whatever being & group of individuality, there is a passing away, cut off, disappearance, death, dying, an ending, a breaking-up of the clusters, a loss of the body, a loss of the mind, that, Bhikkhus, is called death... And what, Bhikkhus, is sorrow? Whenever, by any kind of tragedy, one is feeling pain, sorrow, frustration, distress, internal misery, or internal sadness, that Bhikkhus, is called sorrow. And what, Bhikkhus, is lamentation? Whenever, by any kind of misfortune, anyone is affected by something sad and there is crying out, grieving, moaning, wailing & weeping, that is called lamentation... And what is pain? Whatever bodily painful feeling, bodily unpleasant feeling, whatever painful or unpleasant feeling resulting from bodily contact, that is called pain... And what, Bhikkhus, is sadness? Whatever mental painful feeling, mental unpleasant feeling, all frustration resulting from mental contact, that, Bhikkhus, is called sadness... And what, Bhikkhus, is discontent? Whenever, by any kind of anguish, one is disappointed, dissatisfied, feeling discomfort, dismay, uneasiness, frustration, that is called discontent... And what Bhikkhus, is being joined with the disliked? Here whoever has unwanted, undesirable and disliked sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches or mental states, or whoever are forced into association, & dependence to enemies, that is called being joined with the disliked... And what is being separated from the liked? Here whoever has what is wanted, liked, and pleasant sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, mental states, or whoever enjoys company of well-wishers, mother or father, brother or sister, younger or elders, friends or colleagues, and then is loosing this company, connection, or union, that is called being separated from the liked... And what is not getting what one wants and getting what one not wants? In beings subject to birth, ageing, decay, sickness & death, this wish arises: "Oh may we not meet any birth, ageing, decay, sickness & death." But such freedom cannot be gained by naive wishing. In all beings prone to sorrow, lamentation, pain, sadness, stress & frustration this childish wish arises: "Oh may we not be afflicted by any sorrow, lamentation, pain, or sadness", despite none such freedom ever can be won by mere wishing. That is not getting what one wants, while getting what one not wants... And what, Bhikkhus, are the five clusters of clusters of clinging? The five clusters of clusters of clinging are as follows: The cluster of clinging to all kinds of form, The cluster of clinging to all kinds of feeling, The cluster of clinging to all kinds of perception, The cluster of clinging to all kinds of mental constructions, The cluster of clinging to kinds of consciousness. These are the five clusters of clusters of clinging, that all are suffering. And that, Bhikkhus, is called the 1st Noble Truth of Suffering... <...> Source (edited extract): The Long Speeches of the Buddha. Digha Nikya. Book II [308-] Thread: The Foundations of Awareness. Mahsatipatthna Sutta 22. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=251033 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113647 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 5:32 pm Subject: Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? kenhowardau Hi Sarah, Regarding sama lobha: --------- > S: Sama just means 'ordinary', ordinary attachment. <. . .> "Equanimous attachment" - that's a new one!! --------- KH: It was the best I could come up with. My online search of the Pali Text Society's Pali English Dictionary produced 41 results for sama. They were mostly compound words with sama in them, none of which helped me very much. There was no mention of sama lobha. Sama by itself seemed to mean "calmness, tranquillity, mental quiet" which I decided would be the same as neutral (equanimous) vedana. Apparently not! :-) ---------- S: I'm planning to buy a bicycle sometime soon as we seem to be managing fine here without a car. ---------- KH: Great minds think alike! I have been bicycling a lot lately on our mainly-deserted beach. I don't know if I would risk it in traffic, though. Maybe just buy a car. :-) Ken H #113648 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:48 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. kenhowardau Hi Ken O, -------------- <. . .> > KO: Oh you have to read previously what Ken H wrote to me, that panna cannot arise with concepts, not sure when and saying I bring new ideas of dhamma :-) --------------- KH: I get lots of things wrong on DSG, but that is not one of them. I consistently say panna *can* understand concepts of dhammas. What panna can't understand is concepts of concepts. Concepts of tables falling apart, for example, cannot be rightly understood as anicca, dukkha and/or anatta. As for bringing in new ideas (of table-study etc.), I shouldn't blame you for that, Ken. Formal meditation was already well established before you or I ever heard the Dhamma. It is our job now to expose formal meditation for the fraudulent interloper that it is. :-) Ken H #113649 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 9:17 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113250) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > I find it somewhat bothersome when we dismiss the parts of the teachings that we have decided are not that useful or are not the real teachings, and go for the part we think is most important. If the Buddha spoke about it, it may be worth considering. > > =============== > > J: I think you've misunderstood my comment. I was not dismissing the passages you were referring to, but saying that there was more to them that you were suggesting. Just "more to," or "different?" The question is not whether one can also get lessons on namas/rupas in such a passage, but whether you include or dismiss the conventional teaching that is being explicitly given. I think it's easy to mistake the Buddha's added comments on dhammas, which he probably was trying to point out whenever possible, as a summary or statement that dhammas is *all* he is talking about, when the body of a given sutta is about a conventional area. > Just to recap (since you may well ask me to ;-)). We were discussing the following passage from the Satipatthana Sutta and its commentary: > > ***************** > Sutta: > [6] "Furthermore, as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground one day, two days, three days dead bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'... > > Commy: > "This has been stated: By the existence of these three: life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [vianam], this body can endure to stand, to walk, and do other things; by the separation of these three however this body is indeed a thing like that corpse, is possessed of the nature of corruption, is going to become like that, will become swollen, blue and festering and cannot escape the state of being like that, cannot transcend the condition of swelling up, become blue and festering." > ***************** > > There was then the following exchange between us: > > ***************** > J: To my reading, the terms life [ayu], warmth [usma], consciousness [vianam], are references to dhammas. > > R: Well you can translate as you wish, and the commentators can too. It seems to me that here the commentator echoes the Buddha in his own preferred language. However, there is no doubt about the Buddha's point: we are to give up the illusion of immortality which we all adopt to enjoy our lives, and see that our body is impermanent and corruptible and that it will enjoy the same fate as a corpse. By contemplating this, not casually, but seriously, we take away the illusion of sameness, solidity and incorruptibility of the body and self. > ***************** > > So it's not a matter of me/the commentaries dismissing anything said by the Buddha, but rather a difference of interpretation. You would see the passage as a disquisition on the mortality of beings, while the commentaries see it as a teaching on understanding the true characteristic of arising dhammas. I am not convinced that this is what is even in the commentary. When the commentator says that "by these three the body" will indeed dissolve, turn blue, etc., he is making a nifty combination in my view - discussing the qualities of the dhammas involved, AND also saying that because of the nature of these dhammas and these qualities, the body [a conventional object that people cling to conventionally] will not last and will come to resemble the corpse. To me that is a neater point - to not only see that the body is really not a body but is a collection of dhammas, but also to see that by the nature of these dhammas the body will also come to represent those dhammas by likewise transforming into an altered state, showing its impermanence and inability to last. In case you think I'm spinning my wheels here, let me review what the commentary said as you quoted: "...by the separation of these three [dhammas] however this body is indeed a thing like that corpse..." So the commentary is saying that the *body,* a conventional object, has a certain relation to these specified dhammas. It keeps them together and their lack tears it apart. "...is possessed of the nature of corruption, is going to become like that, will become swollen, blue and festering and cannot escape the state of being like that, cannot transcend the condition of swelling up, become blue and festering." The commentary then continues to talk about, not the dhammas, but the *body,* and the resultant state that it will reach *because of* the influence of those dhammas. Surely we can agree that *dhammas* do not become blue or festering...? So the commentator must be talking about the fate and appearance of the conventional body. The commentary is skillfully and seamlessly moving between the paramatha and conventional views of reality to show the interdependence of the two. I will grant you that it is a one-way interdependency. The dhammas and their nature have a very definite outcome in terms of how we experience conventional objects, but conventional objects have no corresponding affect on dhammas, since dhammas are actual and conventional objects are merely experienced, but not objectively real. But I believe that what happens, and what the commentary is acknowledging very clearly in my view, is that it is because of the nature of dhammas that are *experienced but experienced indirectly* by deluded conceptually-influenced perception that we get a kind of indirect result as regards the conventional objects. While the conventional objects are not real per se, they show a parallel course to that charted by the dhammas. Because "life, warmth and consciousness" are not arising within this particular set of dhammas, the resultant object which is an amalgam of impressions given to perception in a secondary sort of way, through deluded concept, gives the appearance of a body that is coming apart, turning blue, etc. Deluded experience "B" echoes actual experience "A." Deluded consciousness will see the body as a solid object that is undergoing changes, but what is actually happening is that particular dhammas are arising or not arising, and because of this, certain other qualities that are dependent on them are arising or failing to arise. The deluded consciousness that experiences the dissolution of the body is seeing a solid object come apart instead of individual dhammas arising and falling away, but it still gets "a version" of the result of the dhammas that are present in the "experiential stream." The commentator seems to acknowledge the relation of this dual reality, and the importance that Buddha placed on the fact that this changing of the conventional body cannot be changed and that it must come to resemble the corpse. In doing so, there seems to be an acknowledgement that this understanding of the inevitability of the falling away and decay of one's own body is a mundane insight that is a part of the path, rather than only the view of dhammas being the path. > > =============== > > > J: The question of just what *is* the Buddha's message is one we are all engaged in. > > > > That is only a problem if one refuses to read what he actually said without engaging in a removed interpretation. He spoke quite clearly about a lot of things. > > =============== > > J: As I've commented before, your understanding of the Buddha's word is equally an interpretation. I don't believe that's true. I don't think that taking words literally is the same degree of interpretation as giving an alternate explanation that is not in the original words, or is not as closely tied to the original words. I think there's a much greater leap in saying "he really meant this" then looking closely at what he did actually say. There is a degree of interpretation in reading any language at all, but that is not a sufficient factor to say that *all* interpretations, both close ones that stick to the language that is given, and far-flung intreprations that impute a different subject-matter to what is said are the same degree of interpretation. That is just not true. > It's not a case of your view being the Buddha's actual words and mine being an 'interpretation' (read 'putting words into the Buddha's mouth') ! ;-)) I think we could take a close look at this sutta and see who is substituting words for the Buddha's words, and who is looking at the words themselves as they are given and sticking closely to the meanings of those words. Leaving aside historical meanings and differences in translation, I would use the rule that in lieu of other evidence the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. That would be the explanation that attempts to take the basic most inherent meaning of the words that are given, rather than giving an explanation that requires a more complex explanation or that is further away from the words. If the more complex or further explanation is to be taken as the correct one, evidence has to be given for why this is the case. That is straighforward enough. For instance, if the Vism says "The practitioner should only count breaths until he has gained the ability to firmly fix the mind on the breath, then he should abandon this technique," [to paraphrase,] then the closest explanation is what is actually said. If I say "What I got out of this is that the meditator counts the breaths to fix the mind on the breath. When this is accomplished he stops and moves on to another technique" I am sticking to exactly what is said and what it obviously means by definition. It's a simple statement so it's not confusing at all. If you were then to say "What this really means is that he who has already had experience with samatha takes up this technique when he is already quite advanced," and there is nothing in the passage that says that, then your explanation is a greater and further off interpretation of what is actually said, and that being the case, you need some other source of evidence why your explanation is correct. Buddhaghosa didn't say it, so if it's the case, what is the evidence? The same is true with these suttas. If Buddha really meant that his talk was about the dhammas that arise and not about the mortality and dissolution of the body, what is the evidence? I'm sticking to what Buddha actually said, you are not in this case. Even in the commentary, the commentator makes the point while discussing the dhammas involved that the body will turn blue and bloated - that is about the body, *not* about the dhammas, and that is not in passing, but is the point that your passage from the commentary rests on. It's the point that is made, that without the dhammas involved the body turns blue and bloated, which is not a property of dhammas but of the body as a conventional object. So how do you take this into account, and what is the evidence that your interpretation, which is further removed from the preponderance of the actual words, and the points that are made by them, is correct? > > =============== > > > J: I think you'll find that in most if not all suttas the teaching went beyond what you call the realities of life for worldlings. In some, the reference to dhammas/the teaching at the level of satipatthana is a somewhat oblique one, but that would be because that was all the then listeners required in order to 'get it'. > > > > That is one interpretation, and one that does not surprise me as it supports your way of looking at things. I like to give weight to the words that are said in the way they were said, rather than weighting them myself. If Buddha says "Right understanding leads" then I have to accept it; and if Buddha says "Our own body will wind up just like this corpse" then I accept that in the light in which it is said, not translate it into dhammas immediately. I may expect that somewhere along the line, but not in that particular teaching. > > =============== > > J: But the Buddha didn't actually say that ("Our own body will wind up just like this corpse"). What he said was, > "as if he were to see a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, bloated, livid, & festering, he applies it to this very body, 'This body, too: Such is its nature, such is its future, such its unavoidable fate'..." > > That is not an instruction to us to reflect on our own mortality. It's a description of how a person with well-developed insight reacts (automatically) to the situation described. > > In my view it's not the intention of this passage that we should try to emulate the monk being so described. > > > =============== > > Please explain to me how that is a straw man. If every time the Buddha says "Old age, sickness and death" you say "He is really talking about dhammas" that is not a straw man; one is ignoring everyday life as we know it. Taking every element that you consider conceptual and replacing it with a dhamma is indeed denying the teachings on everyday life for worldlings. We don't perceive momentary dhammas, and if you substitute theoretical correct understanding of dhammas - a separate world as you say - for what we do experience, you are denying the teachings on everyday life and what we do experience as worldlings. > > =============== > > J: As mentioned before, the Buddha himself made the connection by saying "in short the 5 aggregates of clinging are suffering" Nobody is denying the connection. You are in fact denying the connection by saying there are only dhammas being discussed, and not the conventional objects that the Buddha is explicitly talking about through most of the sutta. I never said that the Buddha is not talking about, mentioning, or tying his subject into the reality of dhammas. I think he is talking about both and using them interchangably. You are saying that the talk about conventional objects and the conventional path are at best preliminary, and are not really the path. I am saying that the Buddha spoke about the conventional path and tied it into the paramatha understanding at certain points. When he talks about the 5 kandhas, that applies to both conventional and paramatha objects. It's all about the 5 kandhas and anatta, but one can understand this both in life as we experience it and on the level of individual dhammas. And the Buddha ties ultimate reality into everyday reality with great skill. That's why he gave the suttas and didn't only give the Abhidhamma. It is the sutta correspondencies that create the bridge for worldlings to understand both their life and the reality of dhammas, as their awareness unfolds. Anyway, I look forward to your response - when you have the time. Thanks for all the exercise! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #113650 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg Dear Philip, What you write here is a very good topic for discussion. Very useful. You can tell her what you find helpful of the perfections. Nina. Op 20-feb-2011, om 14:08 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > If Acharn Sujin had answered this way when asked by Nina about a > person who was worried about the danger of commiting > transgressions, how much better it would have been that saying "it > has already fallen away" as she did. I find the book on the > Perfections is all about knowing kusala from akusala, knowing the > benefits of the first and the dangers of the second, that > discrimination. #113651 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 20, 2011 10:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 20-feb-2011, om 7:15 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > "Letting go..." and "it's gone" can be helpful for everyone, I'm > sure. A friend in Bangkok told us last time about how she'd once > been in a boat with K.Sujin and had been telling the latter a long > story about some problem. KS had just listened patiently and at the > end of the story, she simply said: "When are you going to let go?". > The friend said this was a really helpful wake up call for her. ----- N: very good. As soon as we are reminded to be aware of the present reality like seeing now, there is already a letting go, one does not think of one's problems. These are stories and thinking about them does not help. Nina. #113652 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 1:14 am Subject: [dsg] Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 4. nilovg Dear Han and friends, Ch 4, no 4. Recapitulation: The Dispeller of Delusion explained different meanings of arisen, upanna. It explained by giving details of the meanings of arisen, that akusala that arises is not eradicated by the magga-citta, since akusala citta cannot occur at the same time as the magga-citta. But the magga-citta on arising annihilates defilements so that there is no more opportunity for their arising. ---------- The Dispeller of Delusion continues: And this, too, is said: If he abandons past defilements, he therefore destroys what is destroyed, causes to cease what has ceased, causes to go away what has gone away, causes to subside what has subsided; the past which is non-existent, he abandons... If he abandons future defilements, he therefore abandons what is not born, he abandons what is not produced, he abandons what is not arisen; he abandons what has not appeared. The future, which is non- existent, he abandons... If he abandons present defilements, one therefore who is greedy abandons greed, one who is hateful abandons hate, one who is deluded abandons delusion, one who is bound abandons pride, one who is held abandons views, one who is distracted abandons agitation, one who has not found his aim abandons uncertainty, one who is obdurate, abandons inherent tendency; dark and bright states occur simultaneously, and there is defiled development of the path... Therefore is there no development of the path, is there no realisation of fruition, is there no abandoning of defilements, is there no comprehension of the Law [N: the Dhamma]?... [on the contrary,] there is development of the path, there is realisation of fruition, there is abandoning of defilements, there is comprehension of the Law. Like what? Just as a young tree... [etc.] (Pa.tisambhidhamagga II, 217 f.). In the Paa.li [N: the text] the [simile of the] tree with unborn fruit is given. But it should be illustrated by the tree with born fruit. For just as though there were a young mango tree with fruit, and men were to eat some of its fruit and, knocking the rest down, were to fill baskets [with them], and then another man cut it down with an axe; in that case, neither its past fruits are destroyed by him nor the future and the present ones. For the past ones are not destroyed since they were eaten by the men, and those in the future, being as yet unproduced, he cannot destroy; but when [the tree] is cut down, since there are no fruits at that time, the present ones too are not destroyed. But it is those which would appear on the tree due to essence of earth and water if the tree had not been cut down that are destroyed then. For those which are unborn do not come to be born, those which are unproduced do not come to be produced, those which have not become manifest do not become manifest. So indeed the path does not abandon the past, etc. kinds of defilements nor does it not abandon them. Those defilements whose arising would have taken place if the aggregates had not been fully understood by means of the path which has arisen- those defilements which are unborn do not come to be born, which are unproduced do not come to be produced, which have not become manifest do not become manifest. Again this meaning should be explained by way of the medicines drunk by a newly-pregnant woman for the purpose of not giving birth, or for the purpose of allaying the illnesses of the sick. ******** Pali text: Vuttampi ceta.m Ha~nci atiite kilese pajahati, tena hi khii.na.m khepeti, niruddha.m nirodheti, vigata.m vigameti attha"ngata.m attha"ngameti. Atiita.m ya.m natthi, ta.m pajahati. Ha~nci anaagate kilese pajahati, tena hi ajaata.m pajahati, anibbatta.m, anuppanna.m, apaatubhuuta.m pajahati. Anaagata.m ya.m natthi, ta.m pajahati, ha~nci paccuppanne kilese pajahati, tena hi ratto raaga.m pajahati , du.t.tho dosa.m, muu.lho moha.m, vinibaddho maana.m, paraama.t.tho di.t.thi.m, vikkhepagato uddhacca.m, ani.t.tha"ngato vicikiccha.m, thaamagato anusaya.m pajahati. Ka.nhasukkadhammaa yuganaddhaa samameva vattanti. Sa.mkilesikaa maggabhaavanaa hotipe tena hi natthi maggabhaavanaa, natthi phalasacchikiriyaa, natthi kilesappahaana.m, natthi dhammaabhisamayoti. Atthi maggabhaavanaape atthi dhammaabhisamayoti. Yathaa katha.m viya, seyyathaapi taru.no rukkho ajaataphalope apaatubhuutaayeva na paatubhavantiiti. Iti paa.liya.m ajaataphalarukkho aagato, jaataphalarukkhena pana diipetabba.m. Yathaa hi saphalo taru.nambarukkho, tassa phalaani manussaa paribhu~njeyyu.m, sesaani paatetvaa pacchiyo puureyyu.m . Atha~n~no puriso ta.m pharasunaa chindeyya, tenassa neva atiitaani phalaani naasitaani honti, na anaagatapaccuppannaani naasitaani. Atiitaani hi manussehi paribhuttaani, anaagataani anibbattaani, na sakkaa naasetu.m. Yasmi.m pana samaye so chinno, tadaa phalaaniyeva natthiiti paccuppannaanipi anaasitaani. Sace pana rukkho acchinno, athassa pathaviirasa~nca aaporasa~nca aagamma yaani phalaani nibbatteyyu.m, taani naasitaani honti. Taani hi ajaataaneva na jaayanti, anibbattaaneva na nibbattanti, apaatubhuutaaneva na paatubhavanti, evameva maggo naapi atiitaadibhede kilese pajahati, naapi na pajahati. Yesa~nhi kilesaana.m maggena khandhesu apari~n~naatesu uppatti siyaa, maggena uppajjitvaa khandhaana.m pari~n~naatattaa te kilesaa ajaataava na jaayanti, anibbattaava na nibbattanti, apaatubhuutaava na paatubhavanti, taru.naputtaaya itthiyaa puna avijaayanattha.m, byaadhitaana.m rogavuupasamanattha.m piitabhesajjehi caapi ayamattho vibhaavetabbo. -------- Nina. #113653 From: "philip" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 1:53 am Subject: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Nina Thank you. You know, when I first heard about the paramis I was so attracted and wanted to know how to perfect the mind. Now Dhamma has been reduced for me to avoiding kusala and developing kusala, not so much thought about "perfections." But it is a great book, and I can still hear Lodewijk's voice reading it though I haven't listened for about 2 years! That earnest voice of Lodewijk reading is the physical intimation, isn't it, the rupa created by kusala citta. If there is anyone who hasn't listened to it, I really recommend it. Very stirring! http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/#book Ok, I will sign off now. I'm sorry I won't be meeting you this time (I assume, Sarah would have mentionned to me if you were coming) but I look forward to writing to you about my trip to Thailand. I am also wondering if I can meet Han, I think he is in Bangkok, isn't he? That would be great! Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip, > What you write here is a very good topic for discussion. Very useful. #113654 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 2:03 am Subject: Dhamma in Sri Lanka 2. nilovg Dear friends, Continuation of Kh Sujin's Lectures in Sri Lanka. Dhamma in Sri Lanka (2). Seeing only sees what appears through the eyesense. When we consider this there can gradually be a firmer understanding of what appears through the eyesense so that it can be seen. That is its characteristic, only that, and then it falls away. We have to hear this many times because we cling to what is seen. We cling all the time to the objects appearing through the six doors. We do not know that they fall away, and we do not know that they are dhammas. What is akusala does not belong to anybody, it is an element that has arisen already. Why should we have aversion about it, it can only be experienced through six doors. It can be understood as a dhamma. Do no have expectations about when one will understand this. Little by little there can be understanding and that is the development of pa~n~naa. Seeing is a dhamma, hearing is a dhamma, thinking is a dhamma. When realities are understood as dhamma, there is nobody at all. Can there be a self who is thinking? When something is known as dhamma there is nothing else that appears at the same time. When hardness appears, we know in theory that it is dhamma, but is the characteristic of hardness really known? It is not I who knows, but sati-sampaja~n~na (sati and pa~n~naa) that has arisen. If this does not arise, characteristics of realities cannot be known. There is understanding of the level of listening and of the level of understanding characteristics of realities. ------------ Nina. #113655 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 2:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. nilovg Dear Phil, Op 21-feb-2011, om 10:53 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I'm sorry I won't be meeting you this time (I assume, Sarah would > have mentionned to me if you were coming) but I look forward to > writing to you about my trip to Thailand. I am also wondering if I > can meet Han, I think he is in Bangkok, isn't he? That would be great! ------- N: Yes, do write about your trip. I miss my visits to Thailand, but Lodewijk's health is not so that he can manage. And also for me it is too much now. Do meet Han, Sarah has his telephone number. We met him last time and we were delighted to talk to him face to face. Sarah kindly arranged meeting him in their hotel and for Lodewijk this was also a highlight of his visit to Thailand. Nina. #113656 From: han tun Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 6:20 am Subject: Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 4. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: Recapitulation: The Dispeller of Delusion explained different meanings of ‘arisen’, upanna. It explained by giving details of the meanings of ‘arisen’, that akusala that arises is not eradicated by the magga-citta, since akusala citta cannot occur at the same time as the magga-citta. But the magga-citta on arising annihilates defilements so that there is no more opportunity for their arising. [Han]: Thank you very much, Nina, for your above recapitulation. The quotes from The Dispeller of Delusion [8. Classification of the Right Efforts, paragraphs 1455 to 1461] are also very useful. In particular, I like paragraph 1459, where the simile of the tree with unborn fruit was illustrated by the tree with born fruit. The only question that may be raised is, what if the tree with born fruit is cut down before the fruits are eaten by the people? Here, I think the possible explanation might be when the tree is cut down (comparable to the arising of magga citta) there could not be any fruits (comparable to akusala cittas) left on the tree, as the akusala citta cannot occur at the same time as the magga citta. Respectfully, Han #113657 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:53 am Subject: Sangiitisutta, sutta 10. nilovg Dear friends, (10) Sa'ngiitisutta.m Walshe DN. 33.2.3(10) 'Seven stations of consciousness: Beings (a) different in body and different in perception; (b) different in body and alike in perception; (c) alike in body and different in perception; (d) alike in body and alike in perception; (e) who have attained to the Sphere of Infinite Space; (f) ... of Infinite Consciousness; (g) ... of No-Thingness {pp.228-9: DN 15, 33. 'Aananda, there are seven stations of consciousness *352 and two realms. *353 Which are the seven? There are beings different in [ii 69] body and different in perception, such as human beings, some devas and some in states of woe. That is the first station of consciousness. There are beings different in body and alike in perception, such as the devas of Brahmaa's retinue, born there [on account of having attained] the first jhaana. That is the second station. There are beings alike in body and different in perception, such as the Aabhassara devas. *354 That is the third station. There are beings alike in perception, such as the Subhaki.n.na devas. That is the fourth station. There are beings who have completely transcended all perception of matter, by the vanishing of the perception of sense-reactions and by non-attention to the perception of variety; thinking: "Space is infinite", they have attained to the Sphere of Infinite Space. That is the fifth station. There are beings who, by transcending the Sphere of Infinite Space, thinking: "Consciousness is infinite", have attained to the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness. That is the sixth station. There are beings who, having transcended the Shere of Infinite Consciousness, thinking: "There is no thing", have attained to the Sphere of No-Thingness. That is the seventh station of consciousness. [The two realms are:] The Realm of Unconscious Beings and, secondly, the Realm of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception.} --------- (CSCD 332. <ti aakaasaana~ncaayatanuupagaa. Aya.m pa~ncamii vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti. <nti vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanuupagaa. Aya.m cha.t.thii vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti. <ti aaki~nca~n~naayatanuupagaa. Aya.m sattamii vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti.) --------- N: Quote from my studies of Visuddhimagga, Ch XVII, 148. The stations of consciousness are sevenfold. (D.iii,253), -------- N: The Tiika adds as an example: beings different in body and different in perception (sa~n~naa). The Visuddhimagga refers to D. III, 253, dealing with differences of citta and of bodily characteristics of beings who are born. Details are mentioned in the Co. to the Great Discourse on Causation, translated by Ven. Bodhi. The Co explains: Seven variations are mentioned. 1. As to diverse in body and in perception, these are humans, some devas (of the six classes which are of the sensesphere), and some spirits in lower realms. Then other variations are mentioned which pertain to different births as a result of different stages of jhaana. 2. Those born in the ruupa-brahma plane as the result of the first jhaana are diverse in body but identical in sa~n~naa. Thus, they are born with the ruupaavacara vipaakacitta that is the result of the first jhaana. Their bodies are different and their lifespan is different according as their attainment of jhaana was limited, medium or superior. 3. Those born as the result of the second and third jhaana are the same in body, but different in sa~n~naa. An example is the gods of streaming radiance, devaa aabhassaraa. 4. Born as result of the fourth jhaana. They are uniform in body and sa~n~naa. 5, 6 and 7 are respectively birth in the aruupa-brahma planes as the result of the aruupa jhanas that have as subject: space is infinite, consciousness is infinite and there is nothing. These are born without ruupa. As we have seen, humans are diverse in body and diverse in perception. We read in the Co. to the Great Discourse on Causation: The pa.tisandhi-citta may be triple rooted: accompanied by alobha, adosa and pa~n~naa, or double-rooted, that is without pa~n~naa. When one is born without pa~n~naa one cannot in that life attain jhaana or enlightenment. People are born with different capacities and this is due to kamma. Some beings have a short lifespan and others a long lifespan and this is due to kamma. Kamma that produces rebirth-consciousness in the human plane is kusala kamma, but as we have seen, there are many degrees of the kusala vipaakacitta that is rebirth-consciousness. In the course of life there are other kammas that produce desirable and undesirable results. Some persons are born ugly, some handsome. When one is born ugly, akusala kammas of the past have an opportunity to produce undesirable results during life: someone may hear unpleasant sounds when others ridicule him. When someone is born handsome, others may respect him or listen to him. Good and bad deeds that are committed at present can have a far reaching effect on future lives. Kamma produces result not only at the moment of rebirth, but also in the course of life. When we consider this we can be exhorted not to be neglectful but develop kusala and pa~n~naa as much as we are able to. ------- Nina. #113658 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:55 am Subject: sangiitisutta,sutta 10. mistake. nilovg Dear friends, by mistake sangiitisutta was sent out, I wanted to wait for Connie. Nina. #113659 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:33 am Subject: Everything that happens in life is OK? szmicio Dear All, What's the goal of life? Isnt it to have more understanding? Does the goal is, to have less wrong view? I am so forgetful, that I even could not honestly say to myself I am practicing Dhamma. I would be glad to hear more on kamma and vipaka. How you lead your daily life, so u could say I am practicing Dhamma? Best wishes Lukas #113660 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 2:20 pm Subject: Craving Causes Suffering! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 2nd Noble Truth: Craving is the Cause of Suffering! The blessed Buddha once said: One should dwell reflecting on all phenomena as mental states in the light of these 4 Noble Truths. How does one do so? Here, one sees, understands, and knows this, as it verily is: All this and all such is suffering ! Craving is the cause and origin of all that suffering! Absence of craving is the complete ceasing of all suffering! The Noble 8-fold Way is the method to eradicate all suffering! And what, monks, is the 2nd Noble Truth on the Cause of Suffering? It is that Craving , which gives rise to rebirth, drenched with lust and greed, finding fresh attraction first here, then there: that is to say sensual craving, craving for becoming into existence, & craving for no-becoming of any being. And where does this craving arise and manifest itself? Wherever in the world there is anything attractive and pleasant, it is right there & then, on the very spot, that this craving arises and manifests itself... And what is there, in this world, that are attractive and pleasant? The eye, in this world, are attractive and pleasant, the ear, nose, the tongue, the body, the mind are attractive and pleasant, and there this craving arises & puts down its roots. Sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, & mental states are attractive and amusing, and there craving emerges & establishes itself. Visual consciousness, auditory consciousness, olfactory consciousness, taste consciousness, body consciousness, and mental consciousness in this world are attractive & alluring, and there this craving come up and implants itself. Eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mental-contact in this world are attractive and tempting, & here this craving begins and reveals itself. Any feeling born of eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue- contact, body-contact, mind-contact in the world are appealing & fascinating, and right there this craving occurs & installs itself. The perception and experience of any sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, & thoughts are quite interesting and captivating, and there this craving arises & imbibes itself. Intention, wishing, wanting and hoping for certain sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, thoughts, and mental ideas are enthralling & intriguing, and there this craving arises and substantiates itself. The craving itself, the drive, the push & rush for various sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, and many mental-objects in this world is attractive and seductive, and there this craving also arises and consolidates itself. Thinking of any sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, and mental-objects in this world are attractive & tantalizing, & craving arises & manifests itself. Prolonged pondering on certain sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles and the manifold diversity of mental objects in this world are indeed attractive and enticing, and therefore this craving also arises, manifests, establishes enhances, habituates, ingraves and reinforces itself... And all that, is called the 2nd Noble Truth on the Cause of Suffering... <.....> Source (edited extract): The Long Speeches of the Buddha. Digha Nikya. Book II [306-314] Thread: The Foundations of Awareness. Mahsatipatthna Sutta 22. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=251033 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113661 From: nichicon cp Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 7:26 pm Subject: Sangiitisutta, sutta 10. nichiconn Dear friends, CSCD 332. <ti aakaasaana~ncaayatanuupagaa. Aya.m pa~ncamii vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti. <nti vi~n~naa.na~ncaayatanuupagaa. Aya.m cha.t.thii vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti. <ti aaki~nca~n~naayatanuupagaa. Aya.m sattamii vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti. Walshe DN. 33.2.3(10) 'Seven stations of consciousness: Beings (a) different in body and different in perception; (b) different in body and alike in perception; (c) alike in body and different in perception; (d) alike in body and alike in perception; (e) who have attained to the Sphere of Infinite Space; (f) ... of Infinite Consciousness; (g) ... of No-Thingness (as Sutta 15, v.33). {pp.228-9: DN 15, 33. 'Aananda, there are seven stations of consciousness *352 and two realms. *353 Which are the seven? There are beings different in [ii 69] body and different in perception, such as human beings, some devas and some in states of woe. That is the first station of consciousness. Thre are beings different in body and alike in perception, such as the devas of Brahmaa's retinue, born there [on account of having attained] the first jhaana. That is the second station. There are beings alike in body and different in perception, such as the Aabhassara devas. *354 That is the third station. There are beings alike in perception, such as the Subhaki.n.na devas. That is the fourth station. There are beings who have completely transcended all perception of matter, by the vanishing of the perception of sense-reactions and by non-attention to the perception of variety; thinking: "Space is infinite", they have attained to the Sphere of Infinite Space. That is the fifth station. There are beings who, by transcending the Sphere of Infinite Space, thinking: "Consciousness is infinite", have attained to the Sphere of Infinite Consciousness. That is the sixth station. There are beings who, having transcended the Shere of Infinite Consciousness, thinking: "There is no thing", have attained to the Sphere of No-Thingness. That is the seventh station of consciousness. [The two realms are:] The Realm of Unconscious Beings and, secondly, the Realm of Neither-Perception-Nor-Non-Perception.} Olds [ 7.10 ] Seven footholds of consciousness:[ 7.10 ] There are beings, friends, diverse in body, diverse in perception suchas man, some gods and some on the path to ruin. This is the first foothold of consciousness. There are beings, friends, diverse in body, similar in perception, such as the gods in the Brahma group.[7.10.1] This is the second foothold of consciousness. There are beings, friends, similar in body, diverse in perception, suchas the gods of the Abhassara. This is the third foothold of consciousness. There are beings, friends, similar in body and similar in perception, such as the gods of the Subhaki.nhaa. This is the fourth foothold of consciousness. There are beings, friends that, passing past all perception of materiality, leaving behind perception of reaction,[7.10.2] averting the mind from perception of diversity, thinking 'Unending is space,' experience the Realm of Space.[7.10.3] This is the fifth foothold of consciousness. There are beings, friends that, wholly passing past the Realm of Space, thinking "Unending is Consciousness,' experience the Realm of Consciousness. This is the sixth foothold of consciousness. There are beings, friends that, wholly passing past the Realm of Consciousness, thinking 'There are No Things There,' experience the Realm Where There is No Thing There.[7.10.4] This is the seventh foothold of consciousness. RDs [ 7.10 ] Seven stations of consciousness.7.10 There are beings, brethren, who are diverse both in body and in mind, such as mankind, certain devas and some who have gone to an evil doom. This is the first station (or persistence) for [re-born] consciousness.7.10.1 Other beings are diverse of body, but uniform in mind, such as the devas of the Brahma-world, reborn there from [practice here of] first [Jhaana]. Others are uniform in body, diverse in intelligence, such as the Radiant Devas. Others are uniform both in body and in intelligence, such as the All-Lustrous Devas.7.10.2 Others there are who, by having passed wholly beyond all consciousness of matter, by the dying out of the consciousness of sense-reaction, by having turned the attention away from any consciousness of the manifold and become consciousonly of 'space as infinite' are dwellers in the realm of infinite space. Others there are who, by having passed wholly beyond the realm of infinite space and become conscious only of consciousness as infinite are dwellers in the realm of infinite consciousness. Others there are who, having passed wholly beyond the realm of infinite consciousness, and become conscious only that 'there is nothing whatever,' are dwellers in the realm of nothingness. Such are the remaining stations of consciousness. *walshe: 352 RD makes heavy weather of this in his note. These are the 'places' or 'states' in which conscious rebirth takes place. The stations also occur at AN 7.41 (not 39, 40, as stated by RD). 353 Ayatanaani: normally translated as 'spheres', is here rendered 'realms' to avoid confusion with the 'spheres' of Infinite Space, etc., included among the seven 'stations'. Glossed as nivaasana.t.thaanaani 'dwelling-places', they clearly differ from the station as being where unconscious (or not fully conscious) rebirth takes place. 354 Cf. DN 1.2.1 {p.75: DN 1, 2.1. 'There are, monks, some ascetics and Brahmins who are partly Eternalists and partly Non-Eternalists, who proclaim the partial eternity and the partial non-eternity of the self and the world in four ways. On what grounds?} **olds: deleted ***rd: 7.10Cf. 1, II, sviii; Vol. II, p.66. 7.10.1Vi~n~naa.na.t.thiti, rendered resting-place of cognition in Vol. II, p. 66 7.10.2Two of the Ruupa spheres, 'above' that ofthe Brahmaas, 'below' the Pure Abodes (cf. 5, xvii.). Cf. above, I, 30 f.; III, 26, 82. the last four are the Aruupa devas. best wishes, connie #113662 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:36 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113387) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: If you're referring to kamma and vipaka, only the mental factor of intention is kamma. > > > > Well, if you take into account that kamma patha can not take place as the completion of kamma unless the action is completed, I'd say that the action component is extremely important in such a case. Would you disagree that kamma patha makes a big difference and is not just a mental factor? > > =============== > > J: In the context of kamma (as cause) and vipaka (as result), both are mental dhammas. Kamma is the mental factor of cetana, while vipaka is the consciousness that experiences an object through one of the sense-doors. Well that's interesting. I'm not really clear about it, but my understanding is that kamma patha is dependent on the *action being completed.* For instance, if someone intends to murder someone else, AND they carry out the action of killing, BUT they fail to complete the murder successfully, kamma patha has not been completed, and the kamma involved doesn't carry the the full weight that the completed action would. Would you disagree with this? [I think I got this from Sarah, so you can let me know who wins this dispute. :-)) ] As for vipaka, that's a uniquely dhamma-oriented translation of vipaka. Again, I'm not an expert, but my understanding and I think most people's understanding is that vipaka is the result that the person encounters as the result of their kamma. If kamma is intention, and the vipaka is the resultant experience, then of course that involves the cittas that experience the "unpleasant or pleasant sensory objects" are involved, but whatever the concrete aspects of the experience are, such as being born in unpleasant circumstances, are also part of the vipaka, are they not? > > =============== > > > On the same subject, all the links in the Dependent Origination are actual dhammas. > > > > Would you like to review them with me...when you have time...? > > > > :-) > > =============== > > J: Yes, I'd be happy to. Thanks! I'll look forward to that. Best, Robert E. = = = = = #113663 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:42 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jon, Rob E, > Op 14-feb-2011, om 15:20 heeft jonoabb het volgende geschreven: > > > J: To my reading, the terms life [ayu], warmth [usma], > > consciousness [vianam], are references to dhammas. > > > > R: Well you can translate as you wish, and the commentators can > > too. It seems to me that here the commentator echoes the Buddha in > > his own preferred language. However, there is no doubt about the > > Buddha's point: we are to give up the illusion of immortality which > > we all adopt to enjoy our lives, and see that our body is > > impermanent and corruptible and that it will enjoy the same fate as > > a corpse. By contemplating this, not casually, but seriously, we > > take away the illusion of sameness, solidity and incorruptibility > > of the body and self. > > > > J:So it's not a matter of me/the commentaries dismissing anything > > said by the Buddha, but rather a difference of interpretation. You > > would see the passage as a disquisition on the mortality of beings, > > while the commentaries see it as a teaching on understanding the > > true characteristic of arising dhammas. > -------- > N: Following with attention your discussion. I am involved, having > just seen the corpse of my sister's partner and tomorrow is the > cremation. Just thinking about my own immortality is not enough. It > is the teaching on understanding the true characteristic of arising > dhammas, and this is what the Buddha taught for fortyfive years. I am > thinking of Kh Sujin's:' just as this moment'. Citta that appears, or > feeling, or ruupa, they all go, go, go. They appear just for a moment > and then gone. This helps much more than contemplating: I also have > to die. Because these are only words. But insight has to be developed > of present dhammas, and this is so powerful that it can eventually > lead to eradication of clinging to life. But as Jon also said; it is > a gentle eroding. Well, I appreciate what you are adding to the discussion. I think that in a sense we might make too hard a distinction between the conventional object and the dhammas. If I see a corpse, especially someone I know, the shock of impermanence and lack of control hits one very hard. I think at those moments of seeing one who we care about who has died, what we are being hit with *are* the rupas and reactive namas that stream from that event. We are not really seeing "a body" as a concept. However, inbetween, as you have said before, concepts and thoughts arise and they take turns with the contact with rupas and moments of perception. So I think we are taking the impact of the dhammas, but we only realize it to some extent, because we are also thinking about the person, the memories and associations, and many feelings arising as well. But I think that both are present, the momentary direct experiences that have an impact and the intervening thoughts and concepts that make them more confused in our minds. I like to try to look at the whole picture, and not make such a radical break between pure experience and mixed experience, since that is not so clearly separated in our experience as worldlings. If we also understand that it is the actual dhammas that are making the real impact, that is especially valuable because maybe we can start to look at what those are and how they occur. So I can see your point as well. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113664 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E & all, > > --- On Sun, 13/2/11, sarah abbott wrote: > R:>I wonder if there is some discussion of what is considered "rite and ritual" somewhere...? I know meditation gets thrown in there by dear friend Ken H., and by others in looking at that category. > ... > S:> We all mean different things by "meditation". If it is bhavana - the development of right understanding, the development of samatha and vipassana, then it is not silabbataparamasa. If however we have an idea of "meditation" as being a particular posture, a particular technique, a particular form of activity as being the path, then it is silabbataparamasa, but we've discussed this before:-) There's a MN sutta I'd like to quote from for you, but it'll have to be later.... > .... > S: (later!) from my previous post #99295, this is what I was thinking of: > > From MN 77, Mahaasakuludaayi Sutta, ~Naa.namoli,Bodhi transl.: ... > "However, Udaayin, there are five other qualities because of which my disciples honour, respect, revere and venerate me, and live in dependence on me, honouring and respecting me. What are the five?" > > S: The sutta then proceeds with a description of: > > 1. The Higher Virtue > 2. Knowledge and Vision > 3. The Higher Wisdom > 4. The Four Noble Truths > 5. The Way to Develop Wholesome States, beginning with the Four Foundations of Mindfulness. > **** > S: Also of relevance on "meditation" is another sutta in MN, which I've also quoted from before in #38683: > > MN 50, Maaratajjaniiya Sutta, refers to a group of ascetics with wrong view and practice: > > " 'These bald-pated recluses, these swarthy menial offspring of the > Kinsman’s feet, claim: 'We are meditators, we are meditators!' and with > shoulders drooping, heads down and all limp, they meditate, premeditate, > out-meditate, and mismeditate. ... > MN 108, Gopakamoggallaana Sutta, also uses the same terms in: > > "'What kind of meditation did the Blessed One not praise? Here Brahmin, > someone abides with his mind obsessed by sensual lust, a prey to sensual > lust, and he does not understand as it actually is the escape from arisen > sensual lust. While he harbours sensual lust within, he meditates, > premeditates, out-meditates, and mismeditates…'" > > S: This is a little long. Just enjoying having access to our texts whilst in Sydney for a short while longer! Thanks for these quotes. It's good to get more information on the ways in which Buddha regarded meditation, both correct and misguided approaches. I'm glad you are enjoying your texts! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113665 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:59 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- On Sat, 12/2/11, Robert E wrote: > >> S: I would say the emphasis is on sati-sampajanna, awareness with right understanding leading to vipassana, regardless of the nama or rupa appearing whilst engaged in anapanasati or any other time. > > = = = = = = = > > R:>I'm interested in sati-sampajanna - would the right understanding be different from the awareness? It seems like clear mindfulness of the object would have right understanding, but maybe it is a separate quality...? > ... > S: Yes, sati is awareness and sampajanna is panna or right understanding (samma ditthi). Awareness is aware and right understanding understands. There can be awareness without understanding, such as at moments of kindness or generosity, but there cannot be any right understanding without awareness. Both are path factors that have to be developed. Only right understanding can know the characteristic of awareness and the characteristic of understanding when they are experienced. I appreciate this clarification, and just note in reviewing it again, that sati + sampajanna ---> vipassana. Would that be correct, that when mindfulness and right understanding arise together it leads to direct insight? ... > >>S: ...Yes, the path is about detachment, "letting go", understanding what appears, rather than what we'd like to appear. > > R:> Yes, I like that point very much. Even just noticing that what is happening now is "not what you'd like to appear" is educational. It's funny to see that, even though you can't change 'what is,' you can get involved in wanting it to be different anyway. A strange quality of the mind. > ... > S: So gradually, panna (right understanding) can know the difference between awareness of what is experienced vs attachment which would like it another way or which clings to it. Thanks for this point as well. That must be a relief if and when it happens, to stop craving for a moment and see what is actually present. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113666 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 10:13 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > > Hi Howard and Sarah, > > Interrupting briefly: Jumping into your interruption for a moment: :-) > --------- > <. . .> > > > S: The idea that there is anything other than these particular dhammas is an illusion. > > > H: I don't claim that there is anything beside these. > -------- > > KH: That's a good start. > > ---------------------- > > H: What I claim is that these arise and cease within streams of such, > ---------------------- > > KH: (!) But isn't a stream "something besides"? If a stream really existed it would have to be classified as "other than" a single-moment dhamma wouldn't it? How do you distinguish between my experience and yours? Are we experiencing the exact same dhammas at the same time? My understanding is that while one citta arises at a time and experiences one object, that is only true for one living being. I may be experiencing hardness while you are experiencing movement or something else, isn't that correct? If you are asleep and I am awake, you may be experiencing bhavanga cittas while I am experiencing sound rupas and visual rupas, etc. So we don't have the same experiences, therefore we have different sets of cittas arising "at the same time" even though a given citta only arises one at a time with one object. Whether you call them streams or not, it is impossible to distinguish the experience of one individual from another without such a way of referring to them. If you want to talk about cittas in a way that is in line with anatta you have to talk about parallel or different sets of cittas occurring at the same time. Again, my cittas, so to speak, don't create kamma for you to experience. If "you" are born in good circumstances as a result of your kamma, and "I" am born in unpleasant circumstances because of my kamma, we are not the same person and we don't suffer the same experiences, do we? Therefore, while anatta acknowledges that there is no self or entity, it does not eradicate the individual experiences that we have as organisms or the independence of one person's kamma from another. Do you agree with the above? If not, how do you explain the differences between millions of individuals' separate experiences, kamma, physical appearances, etc., and how would you distinguish them? > ------------------------------- > > H: the dhammas in the streams being closely interrelated, with namarupic streams being distinguishable among themselves. It IS possible to distinguish you from Jon, for example, > ------------------------------- > > KH: Whether you call "Jon" "I" and "you" namarupic streams, sentient beings, abiding entities or concepts-of-self, it's all the same thing. > > ------------------------------------------------------ > > H: and it is not meaningless for you to speak of "I" and of "you" when talking to him. > ------------------------------------------------------ > > KH: It is not meaningless in the conventional sense, but conventional meaning is immaterial to satipatthana. In satipatthana, dhammas are indistinguishable from each other; they contain no concept of "Jon" "I" "you" etc, or anything pertaining thereto. > > And that's the sort of understanding we should be working on. There is no point in trying to find links between dhammas and concepts. > There aren't any! So if one person awakens and becomes an arahant, do we all awaken at the same time because of his/her attainment? What you are trying to say, I think, is that for the individual who experiences dhammas there are no conceptual distinctions made; not that my cittas are indistinguishable from yours, which is clearly not the case, even for arahants. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = #113667 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 10:19 pm Subject: Re: the commentaries. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > I just came across a text about the weight of the commentaries that > has been discussed before. Rob K quoted this one. > The Commentaries hold great weight in the Theravada. > IB Horner (past president of the Pali text Society) writes ""The > prime object of every Commentary is to make the meanings of the > words and phrases in the canonical passages it is elucidating > abundantly clear, definite, definitive even....This is to preserve > the Teachings of the Buddha as nearly as possible in the sense > intended, and as conveyed by the succession of teachers, > acariyaparama. Always there were detractors, always there were and > still are "improvers" ready with their own notions. Through friends > and enemies alike deleterous change and deterioration in the word of > the Buddha might intervene for an indefinite length of time. The > Commentaries are the armour and protection against such an > eventuality. AS they hold a unique position as preservers and > interpreters of true Dhamma, it is essential not only to follow them > carefully and adopt the meaning they ascribe to a word or phrase > each time they commnet on it. They are as closed now as is the Pali > canon. No aditions to their corpus or subtractions from it are to > contemplated, and no commentary written in later days could be > included in it.""endquote Horner. pxiii Clarifier of the Sweet > Meaning" PAli Text Society 1978. Thank you, that is an impressive statement. How were the commentaries originally created, collected and codified? Was it during the early councils or sometime later? I am interested in how they were certified and attached to the canon. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113668 From: Vince Date: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: let's see if this quotes from B.Bodhis's Guide to CMA, Ch IX, #38 helps: > "A stream-enterer is one who has entered the stream that leads irreversibly > to Nibbaana, that is, the Noble Eightfold Path. A stream-enterer has cut off > the coarsest three fetters [...] His conduct is market by scrupulous > observance of the Five Precepts: abstinence from taking life, stealing, > sexual misconduct, false speech, and use of intoxicants." but these are commentaries of commentators, not sources. They build a direct relation between the eradication of these three fetters and a full observance of precepts. It doesn't sound logical while there is presence of the rest of non-eradicated fetters and also attachment. Neither these commentators give sources justifying this relation. On the contrary, one can read: "At the moment of attaining sight, one abandons three things: identity-views, uncertainty, & any attachment to precepts & practices. One is completely released from the four states of deprivation, and incapable of committing the six great wrongs." This is from Sutta Nipata. Snp 2.1. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.01.than.html "Incapable of committing six great wrongs" is not "incapable of breaking precepts". Maybe there are other sources, I don't know. It would be really useful. Take the example of Nanda Sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.3.02.irel.html Here, Buddha promise five-hundred nymphs to Nanda if he don't leave the order. It shows how the moral behavior should be a precept because we ignore the results of our actions. Precepts are a provisional tool until sila is perfectly established by a complete eradication of fetters. A sotapanna would be unable to break precepts in any conceivable situation if he would be able to know the results of all actions, even beyond death. But this is not the case. Think in the possibility of influence of a Vinaya context in these commentaries. One would understand much better these words from B.Bodhi or M.Sayadaw. Note the difference if we say: - "His conduct is market by scrupulous observance of the Five Precepts" or - "His conduct is market by observance of the Five Precepts" Sure the observance of precepts is established but the success in any situation it's another thing. For sure, a sotapanna bhikkhu by means an scrupulous observance, he can observe how precepts are observed without be broken. This is a different environment. In example, Why a real need to lie in such environment? But think in a lay sotapanna who is in London or Bagdag; he/she would observe how precepts are observed but sometimes they should be broken in order to avoid greater errors and dukkha to third people and herself. Beyond that, Don't you see the clear contradiction between Snp 2.1. and those commentaries? best, #113669 From: Vince Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina cerovzt@... Dear Nina you wrote: > When we think of a finger it seems to stay. When we think of movement > it seems quite a time that this takes place. ok, so here maybe is the core of the error in what I said. When we think in conditionality also we think in cause and effect, and from here there is a linear time which becomes implicit in our common understanding So we see 2+1=3 but we forget the 2,1,3 are three phenomena. We are putting the + and = in order to relate all them. This relation is not false but it can cover the understanding of the three phenomena as realities by themselves despite that conditionality for their arising. In fact you are right; the + and = are not realities, and it's the same with movement. Movement is not rupa but just a relation; there is nothing between photograms. > No time to think: first there is this citta then that. now sounds more clear to me... (I hope) Vince. #113670 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 1:09 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Ken H. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Hi Howard and Sarah, > > > > Interrupting briefly: > > Jumping into your interruption for a moment: > > :-) ----------- Hi Robert, Let's hope someone butts in on your jump into. :-) --------- <. . .> > > KH: But isn't a stream "something besides"? If a stream really existed it would have to be classified as "other than" a single-moment dhamma wouldn't it? > > > RE: How do you distinguish between my experience and yours? ---------- KH: That's just it: I have been arguing that there is no distinction. ---------------- > RE: Are we experiencing the exact same dhammas at the same time? ---------------- KH: In satipatthana that sort of question does not arise. ---------------------- > RE: My understanding is that while one citta arises at a time and experiences one object, that is only true for one living being. ---------------------- KH: Yes, there is only one citta for every object-of-citta. ------------------------------------ > RE: I may be experiencing hardness while you are experiencing movement or something else, isn't that correct? If you are asleep and I am awake, you may be experiencing bhavanga cittas while I am experiencing sound rupas and visual rupas, etc. ------------------------------------- KH: Yes, one citta for every object. There is no need to call it mine or yours; it arises, functions, and falls away regardless of whatever we call it. -------------------------- > RE: So we don't have the same experiences, therefore we have different sets of cittas arising "at the same time" even though a given citta only arises one at a time with one object. -------------------------- KH: Every citta has inherited its nature from the [immediately preceding] citta that conditioned it. Nothing is lost: the process works perfectly well without anyone to control it. ------------------------------------ > RE: Whether you call them streams or not, it is impossible to distinguish the experience of one individual from another without such a way of referring to them. ------------------------------------ KH: That's right; any such distinguishing is just a concept. ------------------------------ > RE: If you want to talk about cittas in a way that is in line with anatta you have to talk about parallel or different sets of cittas occurring at the same time. ------------------------------- KH: They are all anatta. --------------------------------------- > RE: Again, my cittas, so to speak, don't create kamma for you to experience. If "you" are born in good circumstances as a result of your kamma, and "I" am born in unpleasant circumstances because of my kamma, we are not the same person and we don't suffer the same experiences, do we? Therefore, while anatta acknowledges that there is no self or entity, it does not eradicate the individual experiences that we have as organisms or the independence of one person's kamma from another. --------------------------------------- KH: At times such as these it is good to recall the Visuddhimagga verse that begins, "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found". It applies to every occasion. In this case, for example, we can say, "Mere birth exists, no one is born: there is kamma, but no doer of the kamma: vipaka happens, but there is no organism it happens to." ------------------- > RE: Do you agree with the above? If not, how do you explain the differences between millions of individuals' separate experiences, kamma, physical appearances, etc., and how would you distinguish them? ------------------- KH: It is obvious: the present citta was conditioned by its immediately preceding citta, and it, in turn, is providing conditions for another citta to immediately succeed it. ----------- <. . .> > > KH: There is no point in trying to find links between dhammas and concepts. > There aren't any! > > > RE: So if one person awakens and becomes an arahant, do we all awaken at the same time because of his/her attainment? ------------ KH: Again, just remember the Visuddhimagga verse ("Nibbana is, but not the man that enters it") and apply it to the present case, there is no arahant who enters nibbana, and there are no "rest of us" who are left behind. ---------------------- > RE: What you are trying to say, I think, is that for the individual who experiences dhammas there are no conceptual distinctions made; not that my cittas are indistinguishable from yours, which is clearly not the case, even for arahants. ---------------------- KH: When a satipatthana-citta experiences a dhamma it knows there is no self contained in that dhamma, nor anything pertaining to a self. Ken H #113671 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 22-feb-2011, om 6:42 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > But I think that both are present, the momentary direct experiences > that have an impact and the intervening thoughts and concepts that > make them more confused in our minds. I like to try to look at the > whole picture, and not make such a radical break between pure > experience and mixed experience, since that is not so clearly > separated in our experience as worldlings. If we also understand > that it is the actual dhammas that are making the real impact, that > is especially valuable because maybe we can start to look at what > those are and how they occur. So I can see your point as well. ------- N: I think you expressed very well that there is a mixture in our experience as worldling. Of course we think of a person when looking at a corpse of someone we used to know. That is how it happens. And we can learn gradually to be aware of just a moment of dhamma. We have to learn, and this depends on our listening to Dhamma.To be sincere, it does not come yet naturally to me. But I see the value of Dhamma and I wish (chanda) to learn. ------- Nina. #113672 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 12:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: wisdom and doing upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Robert) - In a message dated 2/22/2011 4:09:40 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, kenhowardau@... writes: KH: When a satipatthana-citta experiences a dhamma it knows there is no self contained in that dhamma, nor anything pertaining to a self. ================================ Ken, it seems to me that you are making cittas into agents/knowers/cognizers/little beings/little selves that are born, exist momentarily, and are annihilated. It seems to me that you are shrinking "persons in the large" to "persons in the small". It is a very good step, but it still is a kind of self-view. There are knowings, un-owned and impersonal. Some of these are related to earlier ones that led by varied forms of conditionality to these, related by recollection in some cases. It is the varied instances of relatedness and memories that serve as basis for concepts of beings. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #113673 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 7:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 4. nilovg Dear Han, Op 21-feb-2011, om 15:20 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > In particular, I like paragraph 1459, where the simile of the tree > with unborn fruit was illustrated by the tree with born fruit. The > only question that may be raised is, what if the tree with born > fruit is cut down before the fruits are eaten by the people? Here, > I think the possible explanation might be when the tree is cut down > (comparable to the arising of magga citta) there could not be any > fruits (comparable to akusala cittas) left on the tree, as the > akusala citta cannot occur at the same time as the magga citta. ------ N: Thank you for drawing my attention to the two similes of the young tree with unborn fruit and the tree with born fruit. I have to think it over, it is not so easy. I put them together: 1:This is compared to a tree which does not produce fruition yet. When its roots have been cut off there is no opportunity for the production of fruition. Evenso, in the past that has gone there is no production of fruition. In the future there is no oportunity for the arising of fruition. At the present time there is no arising either of fruition. ------ 2: For just as though there were a young mango tree with fruit, and men were to eat some of its fruit and, knocking the rest down, were to fill baskets [with them], and then another man cut it down with an axe; in that case, neither its past fruits are destroyed by him nor the future and the present ones. For the past ones are not destroyed since they were eaten by the men, and those in the future, being as yet unproduced, he cannot destroy; but when [the tree] is cut down, since there are no fruits at that time, the present ones too are not destroyed. But it is those which would appear on the tree due to essence of earth and water if the tree had not been cut down that are destroyed then. For those which are unborn do not come to be born, those which are unproduced do not come to be produced, those which have not become manifest do not become manifest. ----------- The difference is in the second one where there were mangos produced but these were eaten and taken in baskets. My conclusion is the same one as in the first case: there are no more opportunities for the arising of akusala. But why there are two different similes I do not know yet. ------- Nina. #113674 From: Ken O Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 9:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Ken H To dimiss or to say there is no formal mediation, one must show concrete evidence from the text. Honestly, I have yet come across the text saying there is no formal mediation. Yes to Jon and you, may say in the Visud on concentration is a described behaviour due to their accumulation and not a prescribed behaviour. However, many text do not support it is a described behaviour, why because of it is a precise way of doing the meditation, because the person take up a subject from his teacher. There is a clear and concise method to do it. That is why I told Rob E, this is due to the way we interpret the commentaries. Though I do not have text said these are prescribed behaviour but the mounting text showing a methodology of meditation which I cannot ignore and pointing to a formal meditaiton like meditation of foulness. The second departure from the understanding of commentaries between DSGers and me is the understanding of the term satipatthana. DSGers believe satipatthana only takes on nama and rupa as objects which I felt this is not the correct intepretation of the satipatthana suttas. Satipatthana starts from concepts - be it breathing or corpse or the 32 parts of the body, there are all concepts. The nama and rupa part starts at feelings onward and this part always mistaken by the meditators that it is for everyone. This feeling part onwards are for those who have reach jhanas on the breathing subject as said in the commentaries. The only time I read breathing is treated as nama and rupa, I forget which text already, is only applicable after one has reach vipassana stage and not beforehand. Also to say formal medition is an intentional behavoiur and intentional means self. then why do people travel all the way to foundation to listen to dhamma, isn't that intentional also. Why do we read books and go email to discuss dhamma, aren't these actions are intentional behaviour. If one said these are all accumulated behaviour, why cant their formal meditaion are also their accumulated behaviour. So what is wrong, the accompany kusala or aksuala cetasikas or the intentions. KH: What panna can't understand is concepts of concepts. Concepts of tables falling apart, for example, cannot be rightly understood as anicca, dukkha and/or anatta. KO: Every conditioned dhamma falls apart, not just concepts. concept dont have the real characteristics of conditioned dhamma does not mean it cannot help one to understand the meaning of not self. Concepts are used extensively in the commentarian to remove lust by comtemplating the unlovely on the lovely and to understand impermanance of material possesion or dhamma. also in order to understand the real characteristic, that require insight at nama and rupa level. There is no direct experience until one is there, what one experience now are just shadows of the real thing, the nimittas, or in order words, the concepts of the real dhamma. So how could one practise the direct experience To say panna cannot understand concept of concepts, then we have to go to the basic mind process. A series of mind process produce the concepts, and it is not possible to have concepts of concepts because at any one time Citta has only one object or a concept at a time. The concept of the citta can been very big or very small, it depends on the experiece with the outside world. regarding why I say that that you dont believe concepts cannot have insight is because of this old email on 16 september =============== Dear Ken H > >For example, it helps to explain why the Buddha agreed to teach. The texts tell >us his decision was motivated by compassion, and it's interesting, isn't it, >that they should say compassion rather than insight? I think it fits in with >your perspective. The decision to teach was made when a concept (sentient >beings) was the object of the Buddha's consciousness. Therefore, insight could >not arise at that moment. But compassion could. > KO: New theory on Buddha. :-) . Ken O > >From: Ken H >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Monday, 21 February 2011 12:48:38 >Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. > > >Hi Ken O, > >-------------- ><. . .> >> KO: Oh you have to read previously what Ken H wrote to me, that panna cannot >>arise with concepts, not sure when and saying I bring new ideas of dhamma :-) >--------------- > >KH: I get lots of things wrong on DSG, but that is not one of them. I >consistently say panna *can* understand concepts of dhammas. > > >What panna can't understand is concepts of concepts. Concepts of tables falling >apart, for example, cannot be rightly understood as anicca, dukkha and/or >anatta. > > >As for bringing in new ideas (of table-study etc.), I shouldn't blame you for >that, Ken. Formal meditation was already well established before you or I ever >heard the Dhamma. > > >It is our job now to expose formal meditation for the fraudulent interloper that >it is. :-) > >Ken H > > > #113675 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:57 pm Subject: Stopping Craving Ends Suffering! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 3rd Noble Truth: Ceasing of Craving Stops Suffering! The blessed Buddha once said: One should dwell reflecting on all phenomena as mental states in the light of these Four Noble Truths. How does one do so? Here, one sees, understands, and knows this as it verily is: This and such is suffering! Craving is the cause and origin of all suffering! Absence of craving is therefore the ceasing of all suffering! This Noble 8-fold Way is the method to eradicate all suffering! And what, monks, is the 3rd Noble Truth on the Ceasing of Suffering? It is the complete fading away, ceasing, elimination, and eradication of all craving . It is the relinquishing release from craving, the detaching liberation from craving. And how is such freeing removal of craving, how is such ceasing of craving gained? Wherever in the world there is anything attractive and pleasant, it is right there and right then, on the spot, that this craving is deliberately left behind & ceases... And what is there in this world, that is attractive and pleasant? The eye, in this world, is attractive and pleasant, the ear, the nose, the tongue, the body, the mind is attractive and pleasant, and there this craving ceases and gradually fades away. Sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, and mental states are attractive & amusing, & there this craving ceases & bit by bit comes to an end. Eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, nose-consciousness, tongue-consciousness, body-consciousness, mental-consciousness in this world is attractive & alluring, and there this craving ceases and finally finish. All Eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue-contact, body-contact, mental-contact in this world is attractive and tempting, and there this craving ceases and slowly leave off. Any feeling born of eye-contact, ear-contact, nose-contact, tongue- contact, body-contact, mind-contact in the world is appealing & fascinating, and right there this craving ceases and steadily die away. The perception and experience of any sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, & thoughts is quite interesting and captivating, and there this craving ceases & grows dim. Intention, wishing, wanting and hoping for certain sights, sounds, smells, tastes, touches, thoughts, ideas and mental states is enthralling & intriguing, and there this craving ceases and dissolves itself. The craving itself, the drive, push & rush for various sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, & many mental-objects in this world is attractive and seductive, and there this craving also ceases & progressively eliminates itself. Thinking of any sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, and mental-objects in this world is attractive & tantalizing, there this craving ceases & falls off drop by drop. Prolonged pondering on certain sights, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles & the manifold diversity of mental objects in this world is attractive & enticing, & there this craving also fades away, is stilled, ceases, & is finally all eliminated... And that, bhikkhus, is called the 3rd Noble Truth on the ceasing of Suffering... The extinguishing of the Fire of Craving (Tanh ) ceases all Suffering! <....> Source (edited extract): The Long Speeches of the Buddha. Digha Nikya. Book II [306-314] Thread: The Foundations of Awareness. Mahsatipatthna Sutta 22. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=251033 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #113676 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 8:58 pm Subject: Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E > > You are right to say Buddha had an effect on his listeners and bring them to > enlightenment. I would like to explain more on whether there are dry > insightors. To talk about dry insightors, we have to talk about jhanas > attainers of wisdom. The standard stock formulae for jhanas are > > 1st to 4th Jhanas, then the mind is directed to knowledge of pasts live, 2nd > knowledge of reappearance and appearance of living beings and 3rd knowledge of > the destruction of taints. Or some other suttas will show to the level > of formless jhanas. Now when one wish to attain jhanas, then the mind should > be concentrated and not distracted. That is the 1st question. Though there > are Arahants who are known to enter jhanas while listening to Buddha. So how do > these 1000 monks become enlightened after listening to Buddha discourse if there > are a need for to enter jhanas. Even if they have practise jhanas with their > previous teachers, they still need to enter concentration to be in jhanas > because in our stock formulae as seen in the sutta, one need to go through 1st > to 4th, then able to attain the three knowledges. So how are they able to do it > when they are listening to Buddha discourses. > > > http://www.mahindarama.com/e-tipitaka/Majjhima-Nikaya/mn-56.htm > Maybe that is not convincing. this is an interesting sutta on the admirable > householder Upali > Then the Blessed One gave the householder Upali the gradual Teaching starting > with giving gifts, becoming virtuous, about the heavenly states, the dangers of > sensuality, the vileness of defiling things, and benefits of giving up. Then the > Blessed One knew that the mind of the householder Upali was ready, malleable, > free of hindrances, lofty and pleased and the Blessed One gave the special > message of the Enlightened Ones: Unpleasantness, its arising, its cessation and > the path to the cessation of unpleasantness. Like a pure, clean cloth would take > a dye evenly. In that same manner, the dustless, stainless eye of the Teaching > arose to the householder Upali, seated there itself. Whatever rises has the > nature of ceasing. The householder Upali, then and there mastered that Teaching, > knew and penetrated it. Doubts dispelled become self confident attained that > state where he did not want a teacher, any more, in the Dispensation of the > Blessed One (* 1). He said. ‘Venerable sir, we will go now, there is much work > to be done.’ ‘Householder, do as you think it fit.’ > > > that is about dry insightors, yes some may argue he may have learn jhanas from > the Jains who he supported previously. But if one is insisted on such notions, > then there is nothing much I can say. Buddha ways are not confine to > one method to develop and reach Enlightenment. Well I think you have made a good point that at least one doesn't have to be in formal jhana *at the time of* enlightenment. I would also agree that if the mind is "lofty and free" after having been given the gradual teachings *by the Buddha in person* that one might be in condition to reach enlightenment directly when the Buddha gives you the 4 noble truths. I still think we cannot minimize the significance of those who were given the path directly by the Buddha. To be in the presence of the Awakened One has an effect that we can't easily understand. I don't know if one can achieve dry insight without ever having contacted the jhanas. I do agree that under the right conditions one can reach enlightenment directly without being in jhana at the time, at least in some cases. And I also agree that enlightenment can be reached by dry insight in some cases, but I do not know whether those that do so have never had jhana in past life or not. I just don't know that, and I don't think that Buddha said anything too definite about whether this was an absolute necessity or not. I am open to there being more than one way to reach enlightenment, but beyond that there are a lot of uncertainties. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113677 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 9:15 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Dear Rob E > > > > >I didn't mean negative in that sense. I meant "negative" in the sense of > >"negating," that anatta does not mean that something is there, but that > >something is not there. Ken H. describes anatta as a "positive characteristic of > > > >dhammas," meaning it is an actual characteristic that can be discerned. I am > >saying that it is a characteristic of absence rather than presence. Anatta means > > > >that a dhamma is not self or part of self. The "not" is the characteristic and > >there is no such thing as an "anatta" that can be directly see, except in the > >absence of self. Hope that makes sense. > > > > KO: yes Ken H is right that anatta is a charactersitic of dhamma and not in the > situation due to the absence of self. It is suble difference but an important > difference. that is why Buddha say his dhamma is visible, be directly known. > In order to directly known, one has be able to experience. To experience it then > there must be a presence and not an absence. Maybe this is not a good logical > analysis to explain why anatta is a characteristic of dhamma and not an absence > of a self. > > > And another way, in the first place, there is no self that exist so how is there > an absence of self. This could not have happen. there must be a presence before > we could say there is an absence. No, when one dispels an illusion, one points out that the thing that was thought to exist does not. It doesn't have to exist first to be absent. I can have a concept of a unicorn and say "there is no such thing" and free the mind from such a conception. I don't have to produce a unicorn before I can say it is "absent," so I think your logic is not correct on that particular point. > There is another way to look at it, it the sequence of explaining of not self in > dhammas where it starts with impermanence, then to suffering then to not me, not > I and not myself. all this sequence is on dhamma. > > Even then with the three descriptions, I have yet find a good way to explain the > this difference so that people could understand better. I think it would be worthwhile to check carefully whether the reason it is difficult to explain anatta as a positive characteristic is because it is impossible for it to be the case. One is talking about concept only to say that a "not-self" is a positive characteristic, and that is what anatta means - no self, or not self. We can't invent it into something that it is not. The teaching on anatta is a teaching on the absence of self, and nothing else. When we say that a dhamma is "not my self and not a part of my self" as Buddha taught, after showing that dhammas were not subject to control and could only be a source of dissatisfaction, we cannot then say that this "not-self-ness" is a positive characteristic. To say something is an experienceable characteristic one has to be able to describe what it is that is experienced when one experiences it, otherwise it is really a made-up idea that does not refer to anything actual. You have to at least be able to say what that could possibly mean. When one experiences anatta, one experiences that the dhamma in question is *not a self* and *not a part of self.* And that is all. That is not a "thing," it is a discerning of the truth about dhammas. There is a difference between a characteristic that is observable as a thing that is present, like vittakha touching the object to know it, that is something that actually takes place, and a characteristic that is an observation or knowing of the truth about something. Sometimes the truth about something is not something that takes place, but something that is discovered to not take place, or not be there. And that is what anatta is as a characteristic. I understand the basic idea of anatta, which literally translates I believe as "not-self," "non-self" or "no self." I don't think there is any other way to translate that into English or the equivalent form in any other language. So if you say it is a positive characteristic of a dhamma - and the above *is* what it means - you are then faced with the issue: "What does it mean to say that 'no self' is a positive characteristic. How would one experience 'no self' as a positive presence. When 'no self' is present, what is present? If you cannot answer these questions with a sensible answer then you are not talking about something that exists at all, but just a false and general idea based on another idea - that all the characteristics of dhammas have to be *something,* they cannot be a description of a condition that is based on something else. In other words, for anatta to have its natural meaning: 'no self,' or 'not self' which is not the word *I* gave to describe it, but the word the Buddha gave to describe this condition or characteristic, you have to start with the natural belief that all humans have that a self *does* exist. Without the illusion of self, 'no self' is nonsense. There is no way to turn it into some other characteristic, because it doesn't have another meaning. It simply means "There is no self, and the existence of a self is an illusion that causes clinging, delusion and suffering." That is the meaning of anatta and that is it. Dhammas are discovered to not have any core entity and to not be part of any form of self. That is the discovery that frees one from attachment to dhammas, and that is why Buddha talked about it, period. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113678 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 9:28 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. A little more on anatta. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > KO: yes Ken H is right that anatta is a charactersitic of dhamma and not in the > situation due to the absence of self. It is suble difference but an important > difference. that is why Buddha say his dhamma is visible, be directly known. > In order to directly known, one has be able to experience. To experience it then > there must be a presence and not an absence. Mahasi Sayadaw talks about the four false concepts of self that the Buddha's teaching on anatta dispels, and which Buddha addressed in the great discourse on anatta, the Anattatakkhaṇa Sutta: - - - - - - - - - - - - "There are four kinds of self clinging arising out of belief in self: 1) Sāmi attā ("controlling self') clinging: believing that there is a living entity inside one's body who governs and directs every wish and action, that it is this living soul which goes, stands up, sits down, sleeps, and speaks whenever it wishes to. The Blessed One taught the Anattatakkhaṇa Sutta particularly for removing this sāmi attā clinging. Now, as this Sutta was taught to the Group of Five, who had already become Stream Enterers, may it not be asked whether a Stream Enterer is still encumbered with self clinging? At the stage of Stream Entry the fetters of personality-belief (sakkāyadiṭṭhi), doubt (vicikicchā), and adherence to rites and rituals (sīlabbataparāmasa) have been completely eradicated, but a Stream Enterer is not yet free from asmi-māna, the I-conceit. To take pride in one's ability, one's status -- "I can do; I am noble" -- is conceit. (A Stream Enterer's conceit relates only to the genuine qualities and virtues he or she actually possesses, it is not false pride based on non-existing qualities and virtues). The Stream Enterer has, therefore, to continue with the practice of insight in order to remove the fetter of conceit. When insight knowledge (vipassanāāṇa) is considerably developed, this I-conceit becomes attenuated and is partially removed by the Path of Once Returner (Sakadāgāmi); the Path of Non-Returner (Anāgāmi) further weakens it, but it is only the final Arahatta Path that completely eradicates the I-conceit. Thus we may take it that the Blessed One taught the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta in order to bring about total eradication of the I-conceit lingering in the Group of Five. 2) Nivāsī attā ("continuous self') clinging: belief that there is a living entity permanently residing in one's body. Most people believe that they exist permanently as living beings from the moment of birth to the time of death. This is nivāsī-attā clinging. Some hold that nothing remains after death; this is the wrong view of' annihilationism. Yet others believe in the wrong view of eternalism, which maintains that the living entity in the body remains undestroyed after death and continues to reside in a new body in a new existence. It was with clinging to the I-conceit in mind that the Blessed One taught the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta. That is to say, to eradicate the I-conceit which still remained fettering the Group of Five monks and other Noble Ones; and to remove the two wrong views (of self sakkāyadiṭṭhi', and attachment to rites and rituals sīlabbataparāmāsa) as well as the I-conceit of ordinary common worldlings. So long as we cling to the belief that there is a permanent living entity or a soul, we hold that our body is amenable to our control. The Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta was delivered to remove not only the sāmi attā clinging but also the nivāsī attā clinging. Once the sāmi attā clinging is removed, other types of self clinging and wrong views are simultaneously eradicated. 3) Kāraka attā ("active agent self") clinging: belief that there is a living entity, a soul, that effects every action, physical, vocal and mental. This kāraka attā clinging is more concerned with saṅkhārakkhandha, the aggregate of volitional formations. We shall deal with it more fully when we come to the aggregate of volitional formations. 4) Vedaka attā ("experiencing self") clinging: belief that it is self which feels sensations, pleasant or unpleasant. This form of clinging is concerned with the vedanak-khandha, the aggregate of feelings, which we will take up fully in the next chapter. That the aggregate of materiality is not self or a living entity has been adequately expounded, but it still remains to explain how meditators practicing vipassanā meditation come to perceive the nonself and uncontrollable nature of the body." - - - - - - - - - In my view, it is because of clinging to belief in these deeply rooted aspects of self that the Buddha taught the doctrine of anatta to dispel these delusions and free those on the path from clinging to a false view of self. It is true that all dhammas have the characteristic of anatta - which is the characteristic of lacking any self or connection to self. If we were to turn the lack of a self into a positive characteristic we would truly be taking this lack of self and turning it into a different kind of self, a "non-self" which we would say actually exists. That defeats the entire purpose of insight into anatta which is to fully and thoroughly understand that *there is no lasting or personal or eternal or any other kind of self,* period. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113679 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 9:52 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E > > > > >Can you explain a little more about how kamma is not intention but is "will or > >an act?" > > KO: I felt I should explain kamma. Kamma in Abhidhamma as IMHO has these > functions, to co-ordinate the other cetasikas, to accumulate and to will. kamma > is dependable on akusala or kusala cetasikas that arise in with it. So when > there is killing, kamma must arise with dosa. for eg killing is a bodily > actions and not a mental action though the cetasikas that arise is dosa. It is > this dosa that accompany the citta that condition the body rupa (intimation) to > act in such a way through the bodily door. > > > In the Expositor, when a aksuala kamma is done by the bodily door like killing, > stealing, false speech, the mental thoughts like illwill, covetuous and wrong > view is negligible. Likewise, during aksuala committed by mental door, the > bodily door is negligible. To me, there is a logic to it as well, which result > should kamma produce if there are two punishment to one action, if we > include the mental door kamma being counted together with akusala kamma that are > commited through the bodily door. > > > > >Also, I understand what you said about kusala and akusala cetasikas determining > > >the quality of the act; that makes sense. But I wonder why certain acts, such as > > > >killing, etc., are *always* akusala if it is only dependent on accompanying > >cetasikas. I'm still struggling with that idea. Buddha said not to drink > >alcohol. He didn't say "alcohol is okay with kusala cetasikas." Can you explain > > >this? Thanks. > > KO: Honestly I have no answer for this. It is something we have to accept with > faith that such actions are accompany by such aksuala cetasikas. Maybe you have already given the explanation above: "So when > there is killing, kamma must arise with dosa. For killing is a bodily > actions and not a mental action though the cetasikas that arise is dosa. It is > this dosa that accompany the citta that condition the body rupa (intimation) to > act in such a way through the bodily door." If dosa and akusala cetasikas accompany the citta that conditions the body rupa to act in such a way, perhaps a completed evil act such as killing is the evidence that the intentional kamma for that act was present and caused that act to go forward as it did. And Buddha understood that the kamma patha for that sort of act could never be performed unless that akusala kamma was present behind it. A nice explanation for the kamma-pathas from what-buddha-said.net: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I. The tenfold disadvantageous courses of action (akusala-kamma-patha): *3 bodily actions: killing, stealing, unlawful sexual intercourse; *4 verbal actions: lying, slandering, rude speech, foolish babble; *3 mental actions: covetousness, ill-will, evil views. disadvantageous mental courses of action comprise only extreme forms of defiled thought: the greedy wish to appropriate others' property, the hateful thought of harming others, and pernicious views. Milder forms of mental defilement are also disadvantageous, but do not constitute 'courses of action'. II. The tenfold advantageous course of action (kusala-kamma-patha): *3 bodily actions: avoidance of killing, stealing, unlawful sexual intercourse; *4 verbal actions: avoidance of lying, slandering, rude speech, foolish babble; i.e. true, conciliatory, mild, and wise speech; *3 mental actions: unselfishness, good-will, right views. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113680 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 10:19 pm Subject: Kusala intention (was, Re: The clansman who is a beginner ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113388) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > Leaving that aside, there is a certain logic to the idea of kamma, which is that certain kinds of causes and conditions will lead to certain kinds of results, and that basic situation is not a mystery. ... What I don't quite relate to, or immediately have confidence in, is that the conditions and how they accumulate and arise is *so* mysterious and comvoluted that no one can ever predict anything, and it is all just too complicated to make any sense to our simple minds. ... The idea that everything gets thrown into latency and it may not come up at all until fourty-thousand lives later, or whatever, is fine and may be true, but I don't really have a reason to think it is true with no evidence to support it. I'd rather stick to a version of kamma that shows a path to more kusala, as gradual as it may be, and that makes some sense of our present thoughts and actions. ... > > =============== > > J: So you're happy with the idea of kamma and vipaka as long as it works the way you think it should ;-)). No, I think that's a bit of a straw man. I don't want kamma to conform to my expectations, but if there's a mysterious and not-so-obvious process at play, and that is fine, it requires a better explanation than just the obvious. I think that is a fair expectation. It is just like commentaries that say that an explanation of body parts is really about the Four Great Elements. I would need to know how that conclusion was drawn before I could immediately understand that to be the case. Do you think that is unreasonable? > You seem to be implying that the results of a given action should be experienced within the same lifetime as the action, so as to make it more easily verifiable, perhaps ;-)) No and yes. I don't imply that vipaka *should* be experienced within the same lifetime as the action, but if it is delayed for such a long time and there are all sorts of accumulations lying in wait for multiple lifetimes, I'd like to know how that works so that it is understandable. And I don't mean a blow-by-blow explanation, but just what puts that principle into play in a general way. I also *do* think, and it is obviously true, that this situation makes the relationship of kamma to vipaka less verifiable. If you are saying that anyone who follows the Dhamma shouldn't need any verification, I would say that sort of defeats the Buddha's call to "come and see" for oneself. I think it can be rather overly convenient for those who subscribe to a certain philosophy to be able to say "Well we'll never be able to prove or disprove it since we won't see the results for a few million years. Sorry about that!" An explanation of why that is so *does* go a longer way towards filling that gap, if it makes sense of the long delays. > > =============== > > I'm also happy to entertain the more complicated version of "kamma incessantly delayed" which seems to go along with "direct experience of dhammas on semi-permanent hold" if someone can give me a reasonable explanation of why it is supposed to work that way. > > =============== > > J: Not really delayed, just not as immediate as you think it should be. No, again a bit of a straw man. I would say: "not immediately enough to verify the system during this lifetime." Again, if the explanation is adequate to the subject matter, that may fill the gap, but *something* has to justify a system that does not reveal its outcomes in any manner that we can easily follow. Again, do you think that is an unreasonable expectation? > > =============== > I just don't see the "come and see" attitude of Buddha to the Kalamas as being well expressed in a philosophy in which *everything* that can be experienced of kusala and the path happens later, and nothing that happens now is evidence of anything. > > =============== > > J: One of the epithets used by the Buddha to describe the Dhamma is that of 'ehipassiko' sometimes translated as 'inviting one to come and see', suggesting that it is verifiable by direct experience. > > This does not however mean that every aspect of the teachings is immediately verifiable by all. It means only that there is a least some aspect that is verifiable by anyone. For example, that the object experienced through a sense-doors is a dhamma unique to that sense-door. Yes, well I can accept the idea that not *everything* is immediately experienceable by *everyone,* but if we cannot discern dhammas directly at the present time, and we are told that hardly anyone can, and we cannot see the results of kamma, conditions, tendencies or accumulations perhaps for thousands or millions of lifetimes from now, then what at the moment is there to "come and see?" Can we come and see anything? What is Buddha calling us to get off our worldling complacencies and "come see" right now? My explanation is that he is not asking us to wait for thousands of lifetimes to see ultimate realities directly, but that he is inviting us to experience the fruits of practice *now* by engaging the teachings in a very active way. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113681 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 10:27 pm Subject: Re: Meditation (was, The clansman ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113390) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: You are saying that the Buddha was recommending the doing of those things despite the fact that it would necessarily involve a lot of akusala on the part of the person undertaking the 'practice'. > > > > That's your interpretation not mine, > > =============== > > J: It was more a question than an attempt to put words into your mouth ;-)). You said the Buddha "clearly did instruct people to do specific things in specific cases, and in general encouraged followers to 'try hard,' 'keep going until you reach the goal' and other conventional things that a coach might say." > > As you see it, would someone taking that instruction to heart and practising the doing of specific things be likley to have more kusala than aksuala during the course of that practice? In my opinion, if the person took the Buddha seriously and believed what he said, and followed his instructions on that basis, rather than with a will to personally achieve goal a or b under his own plan of control, there would be a lot of kusala involved. With faith in the Buddha's teachings, he would patiently engage the practice and experience the joy of being on the path. Nothing wrong with that in my view. Many monks have taken just that approach, and many householders have too, and experienced joy in doing so. > > =============== > and not verified by the Buddha, who never said -- never -- never-ever -- "don't purposely follow the path because if you do you will be invoking an akusala sense of control and self-view." > > =============== > > J: Neither did the Buddha ever say "Do this form of practice and it'll bring you lots of kusala" ;-)) Not true. "Strive unceasingly," "apply yourself with great energy" just as I have done - paraphrasing what both I and Alex have recently quoted, and "you will soon experience the fruits of the practice." If you go back a few posts to Alex's last few posts, you'll see the exact words that add up to the above. Buddha did talk that way quite a bit. > > =============== > I mean, I understand that this is *your* view, and I have no problem with that, but it remains that the Buddha never ever said anything like that, so I'm not sure what makes you think that seeing conventional effort, intention and action as akusala is Buddhist in nature. What did the Buddha say to make you think that this is his view, that conventional Right Effort, Right Intention, Right Action and Right Livelihood -- the Action portion of the teachings -- is akusala? > > =============== > > J: Obviously Right Effort is, by definition, effort that is kusala. So when the Buddha spoke about Right Effort, he would not have been including any effort that was akusala. That wasn't my point. My point was not that it was kusala, which is great, but that such conventional "action and effort" was a legitimate part of the path. To put it another way, such worldly effort and intention is kusala, which one would think otherwise about if one thought that only discerning dhammas and understanding Dhamma was the path. > We agree on that point. Where we differ is the extent to which kusala can be induced to arise by virtue of having the intention that it should. So to what extent is that possible, and do you agree that Buddha included that "action" part of the path in the Noble 8fold path, as listed above? > > =============== > > I don't think that would be consistent with his general teaching. > > > > Where does it contradict his general teaching. Have you got a quote from sutta handy? > > =============== > > J: I'm thinking of, for example, the teaching that all dhammas are anatta. I don't see any problem with doing stuff and understanding all that is done as anatta at the same time. This idea that action and anatta are like oil and water has a logic that I don't understand. It seems like a philosophical predisposition that any doing is automatically self-view. I don't believe that to be the case. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113682 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:17 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---- <. . .> > H: Ken, it seems to me that you are making cittas into agents/knowers/cognizers/little beings/little selves that are born, exist momentarily, and are annihilated. ---- KH: The other names are harmless enough, but I would never think of a dhamma as a self. A self, if it existed, would be something *other than* a dhamma. ------------------- >H: It seems to me that you are shrinking "persons in the large" to "persons in the small". It is a very good step, but it still is a kind of self-view. ------------------ KH: No, I am not shrinking concepts into a dhammas. Dhammas came first. All else is delusion created by dhammas. ------------------------ > H: There are knowings, un-owned and impersonal. Some of these are related to earlier ones that led by varied forms of conditionality to these,related by recollection in some cases. It is the varied instances of relatedness and memories that serve as basis for concepts of beings. ----------------------- KH: If these "knowings" you talk about are not absolute realities then they must be ultimately meaningless. Ken H #113683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:24 am Subject: Anusayas, two similes. nilovg Dear Han, I have some more thoughts but these are my personal ideas. I wrote: The enjoyment of the fruits could represent defilements. The second simile is a stronger statement since it emphasizes defilements. There may be lots of akusala, but pa~n~naa can be developed so that eventually there is no more opportunity for the arising of defilements , these are completely uprooted, cut down at the root. This is made clear at the end: This passage is an encouragement to develop pa~n~naa which is able to eradicate all germs for defilements. Nina. #113684 From: han tun Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anusayas, two similes. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: I have some more thoughts but these are my personal ideas. I wrote: The enjoyment of the fruits could represent defilements. The second simile is a stronger statement since it emphasizes defilements. There may be lots of akusala, but pa~n~naa can be developed so that eventually there is no more opportunity for the arising of defilements , these are completely uprooted, cut down at the root. This is made clear at the end: This passage is an encouragement to develop pa~n~naa which is able to eradicate all germs for defilements. ----------- [Han]: Thank you very much for your above comments. It is very useful, and I have noted it with gratitude. Respectfully, Han #113685 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 1:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Everything that happens in life is OK? nilovg Dear Lukas, Useful questions, Lukas. Op 21-feb-2011, om 20:33 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > > What's the goal of life? Isnt it to have more understanding? Does > the goal is, to have less wrong view? ------- N: The goal is the development of understanding that can eradicate all defilements so that there will be an end to rebirth which is dukkha. But the nearest goal is the eradication of wrong view. Without the eradication of wrong view there cannot be the eradication of any defilement. We often read about the five spiritual faculties (indriyas) which have to be developed together. The first one is saddhaa, confidence. The sotaapanna has accomplished saddhaa. I heard Kh Sujin say on a recording: If we do not begin gradually to consider seeing right now, hearing right now, sound right now, we shall not know what naama is and what ruupa is. Only when their characteristics appearing right now are known as they are, without any doubt, can later on their arising and falling away, one at a time, be directly understood. -------- > L:I am so forgetful, that I even could not honestly say to myself I > am practicing Dhamma. ------ N: That is very sincere. Truthfulness is an important perfection that should be developed. Forgetfulness is a conditioned dhamma and this cannot be controlled. We cannot say: may it not arise, it arises already. But it can be understood as just a dhamma and at that moment there is not forgetfulness. Usually when we think about forgetfulness we take it for my forgetfulness and it seems to stay. It is only a moment and then another dhamma arises, it may be understanding. When there is understanding of forgetfulness at that moment there is practice of dhamma, but it is not my practice. Also: only for a moment. Whatever appears is only for amoment. -------- L: I would be glad to hear more on kamma and vipaka. ------ N: Is there vipaaka now? There is seeing, that is vipaaka. There is hearing, that is vipaaka. These are only naamas arising because kamma produced them. They are conditioned dhammas. If we do not know what naama is at this moment, kamma and vipaaka are only words. But the Buddha taught us realities, which can be directly understood. Then they are not merely words. --------- L: How you lead your daily life, so u could say I am practicing Dhamma? -------- N: We have to lead our daily life normally, according to our accumulations. That is, a lot of clinging to pleasant objects, a lot of forgetfulness. But slowly, slowly, we can begin to understand that whatever appears is just a dhamma. We do not run away from akusala or ignore it, or believe that we have to move to a quiet place. No, that is not daily life. We should not always think of the future: if I am in favorable circumstances I can be aware of naama and ruupa. That is motivated by lobha. Instead of saying: I am practising Dhamma, I would rather say: beginning to have more understanding of Dhamma. And I would emphasize: 'beginning'. Is that not more realistic? Nina. #113686 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the commentaries. nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 22-feb-2011, om 7:19 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Thank you, that is an impressive statement. How were the > commentaries originally created, collected and codified? Was it > during the early councils or sometime later? I am interested in how > they were certified and attached to the canon. ---------- N: SeeUP, commentaries, especially those written by Sarah. Buddhaghosa came to Sri Lanka where he found the old commentaries in Singhalese and translated those into Pali. See also intro to the Visuddhimagga. He found the old commentaries of Mahaa-atthakata, Mahaa-Paccarii and Kuru.n.di. But these are lost now. ------- an old post I wrote recently: -------- The Visuddhimagga is not a co. but an Encyclopedia Biuddhaghosa wrote. He quoted many texts of the Tipi.taka in it . Very good to make cross references of these, we see the connection between Tipi.taka and commentaries. How they wre certified and codified: see Rob K's forum, where it gives the history of the councils, also those later than the three great Councils. --------- Nina. #113687 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 12:38 pm Subject: Arhatship is possible in this very life! truth_aerator Dear all, Some say that path to awakening takes an incredibly long time. However, what does it say in Sutta Pitaka? SN38.16 Says that if you Practice in accordance with the Dhamma (which is difficult to do) then in no long time you will become Awakened. Comy: SA quotes MN II 96,19-20: "Instructed in the morning, by the evening he will attain distinction (enlightenment); instructed in the evening, by the morning he will attain distinction." This is also said in MN85, that one can achieve Awakening within one day if possessing certain qualities. Compared to this, 7 days to 7 years till Arahatship teaching of satipatthana sutta seems more than reasonable provided you do the hard work. =================================================================== A bhikkhu endowed with these five factors gaining the training from the Thus Gone One in the morning, for whatever cause sons of clansmen rightfully go forth homeless that highest end of the holy life, he here and now, knowing, realizing, will attain in the evening, or advised in the evening would realise the next morning. http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/2Majjhima-Nikaya/Majjhima2/085-bodhirajak\ umara-e1.html =================================================================== SN38.16 Difficult to Do "Friend Sariputta, what is difficult to do in this Dhamma and Discipline?" "Going forth, friend, is difficult to do in this Dhamma and Discipline." "What, friend, is difficult to do by one who has gone forth?" "To find delight, friend, is difficult to do by one who has gone forth." "What, friend, is difficult to do by one who has found delight?" "Practice in accordance with the Dhamma, friend, is difficult to do by one who has found delight." "But, friend, if a bhikkhu is practising in accordance with the Dhamma, would it take him long to become an arahant?" "Not long, friend."&274 ===================================================================== With metta, Alex #113688 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 2:52 pm Subject: The Noble Way! bhikkhu5 Friends: The 4th Noble Truth: The Noble 8-fold Way ceases Suffering! The blessed Buddha once said: One should dwell reflecting on all phenomena as mental states in the light of these Four Noble Truths. How does one do so? Here, one sees, understands, and knows this, as it verily and really is: All this is suffering! Craving is causing all that suffering! Absence of craving ceases all suffering! This Noble 8-fold Way is the only method to cease all suffering! And what, Bhikkhus, is this Noble Truth of the Way to cease all suffering? It is just this Noble 8-fold Way, namely: Right View (samm-ditthi) Right Motivation (samm-sankappa) Right Speech (samm-vc) Right Action (samm-kammanta) Right Livelihood (samm-jva) Right Effort (samm-vyma) Right Awareness (samm-sati) Right Concentration (samm-samdhi) The 8 spokes in the Buddhist wheel each symbolizes a step on the Noble 8-fold Way. And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right View? It is, Bhikkhus, knowing such is suffering, such is the cause of suffering, knowing such is the ceasing of suffering, and knowing such is the way leading to the cessation of suffering. This is called Right View... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Motivation? Being motivated by withdrawal, by good-will, and being motivated by utter harmlessness. This, Bhikkhus and friends, is called Right Motivation... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Speech ? Refraining from any lying, from slandering, from scolding, and refraining from empty gossip. This is called Right Speech... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Action ? Refraining from all killing, from all stealing and cheating, and avoiding all sexual misconduct. This is called Right Action... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Livelihood? Here, Bhikkhus and friends, the Noble Disciple, having given up all wrong livelihood, lives by right livelihood. This is called Right Livelihood... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Effort ? Here, Bhikkhus and friends, one makes a decision, makes an effort, stirs up energy, exerts the mind and strives to prevent the arising of unarisen evil disadvantageous mental states. One makes a decision... and strives hard to overcome any evil disadvantageous mental state that already have arisen. One makes a decision... and strives to develop all yet unarisen advantageous mental states. One makes a decision, makes an effort, stirs up energy, exerts the mind and strives to maintain any advantageous mental states, that already have arisen, not letting them fade away, growing them greater, to the fulfilled perfection of development. This is called Right Effort... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Awareness? Here, Bhikkhus, one dwells considering the body as a group of mere form, alert, clearly comprehending & aware, thereby ending worldly urge & trouble... One dwells considering feelings just as assigned responses, alert, clearly comprehending and aware, thereby ending all worldly urge and trouble... One dwells considering mind & mentality just as ever changing moods, alert, clearly comprehending and aware, thereby ending worldly urge and trouble... One dwells considering all phenomena only as always shifting mental states, alert, clearly comprehending & aware, thereby ending worldly urge & trouble... This is called Right Awareness... And what, Bhikkhus and friends, is Right Concentration ? Secluded from sensual desires, protected from any detrimental mental state, one enters & dwells in the 1st jhna; full of Joy & pleasure born of solitude, joined with directed and sustained thought. Again, with the stilling of directed & sustained thought, one enters & dwells in the 2nd jhna, calmed and assured unification of mind, in joy & pleasure now born of a concentration, which is empty of all thought and thinking! Again, friends, with the fading away of joy, one dwells in equanimity, just aware & clearly comprehending, still feeling bodily pleasure, one enters upon & remains in the 3rd jhna, regarding which the Noble Ones declare: 'In aware Equanimity one dwells in Happiness!'... Again, friends, with the leaving behind of both pleasure and pain, & with the prior fading away of both joy & sorrow, one enters & dwells in the 4th jhna; a serene mental state of still, open and clear awareness, purified by the Equanimity of neither-pain-nor-pleasure! This is Right Concentration... That, Bhikkhus, is called the Way leading to the Ceasing of all Suffering... F<...> Source (edited extract): The Long Speeches of the Buddha. Digha Nikya. Book II [306-314] Thread: The Foundations of Awareness. Mahsatipatthna Sutta 22. http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=251033 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/digha/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113689 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:23 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent tendencies, Ch 4, no 1. sarahprocter... Hi Sarah Jane, --- On Sat, 19/2/11, SARAH CONNELL wrote: >, Nearly bedtime of the day before here. I practice in the Thai tradition and have been learning Thai for the last 5 years but it is "nit noi". .... S: Sounds like you're being very modest! That's interesting. It takes a lot of perseverence to study a language overseas. ... >I also have been taking Dhamma classes at the Wat for the last 4 years and this year has been on the 1st section of the Abhidhamma - the Dhammasangani. Since all the classes are in Thai and my Pali Thai is even worse than my regular Thai so it has been a great challenge. The Wat has the full canon including commentaries and tika in Thai and most of the canon in the PTS English translations. I have been given permission to have full access to these resources. .... S: That's very interesting indeed. There are a few Thai speakers here (not me) and Nina also uses the Thai texts and commentaries a lot, so feel free to mention any points of special interest/difficulty with the studies for further discussion. Actually, most of Jon's and Nina's Thai is Dhamma Thai, I believe. Does the Wat have an English copy of the Atthasalini, the comy to the Dhammasangani? There is a PTS translation and it's very helpful to read along with the Pali. I'm happy to discuss any parts of it anytime. (Having said that, I'm leaving my texts in a week to travel to Bangkok and Hong Kong, but others have the texts too. ... >Over the years I have done other independent study but this DSG has been a real help to me. I don't share much as you all are far ahead of me. Thank you for the gift you all are giving to me. ... S: As you've already indicated above, you're very modest and the sharing is mutual amongst us all, so look forward to any comments/questions anytime. Join in any threads or start your own or just read! I go out swimming in the ocean with a group in the mornings here and I'm the slowest, but people say that even this is encouraging to others:-) Metta Sarah ===== #113690 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Sat, 19/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >""Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent with regard to skillful qualities[1] and unrelenting exertion. Relentlessly I exerted myself, ..." .... S: So, if at this moment, we feel a lot of discontent with our skillful qualities and try hard now to have more skillful qualities, is that kusala, is that skillful? Who would such striving be for? Would there be any metta, any dana or any bhavana involved? ... A:>And =================================================================== >"As — with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the roof of his mouth — he is beating down, constraining, and crushing his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.020.than.html ==================================================================== ... S: Again, now if you clench your teeth and press your tongue against the roof of your mouth, trying to "crush" your mind with awareness, is that kusala, is that skillfull? Really? Again, is there any understanding, any metta, any dana involved? Or is there attachment? .... A:> It does sound like Buddha taught effort and "discontent" with current lack of achievement. ... S: The Buddha taught about the development of the path and satipatthana, not about a discontent and wish for other states to arise, no matter what the text or the translation seems to suggest. We need to read any sutta carefully in the light of anatta and the development of satipatthana. Lots more in "Useful Posts" under "Effort - Right". For example, read the descriptions on wrong effort and right effort from the Dhammasangani. The wording is almost identical. Without the development of right understanding, wrong effort will always be taken for right effort. Metta Sarah ====== #113691 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 4:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >A:""Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent >with regard to skillful qualities[1] and unrelenting exertion. >Relentlessly I exerted myself, ..." > .... >S: So, if at this moment, we feel a lot of discontent with our >skillful qualities and try hard now to have more skillful qualities, >is that kusala, is that skillful? Who would such striving be for? >Would there be any metta, any dana or any bhavana involved? Sarah, are you saying that Buddha taught us to do unskillful things? Striving is impersonal and fully consistent with anatta principle. > =================================================================== >A:"As " with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the >roof of his mouth " he is beating down, constraining, and crushing >his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are >abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind >right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.020.than.html > ==================================================================== > ... > S: Again, now if you clench your teeth and press your tongue >against the roof of your mouth, trying to "crush" your mind with >awareness, is that kusala, is that skillfull? Really? Again, is >there any understanding, any metta, any dana involved? Or is there >attachment? > .... Again, did Buddha told us to do unskillful things? With metta, Alex #113692 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Sun, 20/2/11, Ken O wrote: >>S:As you will also agree, concepts don't have ti-lakkhana and cannot be the objects of satipatthana or vipassana or enlightenment. >KO: That I would not totally agreed. I agreed for vipassana level and enlightment that objects are dhamma but for satipatthana I dont. The text started as concepts and the text has never said that satipatthana cannot be a concept unless it refers to vipassana. As I said earlier, on the contrary it started as concepts as also indicated in the commentarian text as well. .... S: Pre-satipatthana, there has to be the understanding of concepts about present realities - this is pariyatti. However, if it is satipatthana being referred to, this is patipatti, the mundane path that leads to the noble path, removing the bricks of samsara. As for the texts and the commentaries, we need to read carefully. If you read the comy and tika to the Satipatthana Sutta, for example, you'll see that the dhammas referred to as objects of satipatthana are: 1) the rupas of the body ("there can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body"), 2) feelings, i.e. vedana, 3) consciousness, i.e. cittas, beginning with citta rooted in lobha, 4) all dhammas in different classifications, beginning with akusala dhammas, then the khandhas, the ayatanas and so on. ..... K:> Now since panna can arise with concepts, so is there any wrong about practising meditations and if you think it is wrong so in what way why is it wrong. .... S: When panna arises (with concept or reality as object), the citta is always sobhana (beautiful), so no question of there being anything wrong. The question is when "practising meditation", what are the cittas involved? Only panna can know. If there is an attempt to have a different citta experiencing a different object to the one conditioned at this moment, is that kusala or akusala? Metta Sarah ======= #113693 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bhavangacitta & Universal cetasikas. Are they felt? sarahprocter... Hi Ken H (& Alex), --- On Mon, 21/2/11, Ken H wrote: >Regarding sama lobha: --------- > S: Sama just means 'ordinary', ordinary attachment. <. . .> "Equanimous attachment" - that's a new one!! --------- >KH: It was the best I could come up with. My online search of the Pali Text Society's Pali English Dictionary produced 41 results for sama. They were mostly compound words with sama in them, none of which helped me very much. There was no mention of sama lobha. Sama by itself seemed to mean "calmness, tranquillity, mental quiet" which I decided would be the same as neutral (equanimous) vedana. >Apparently not! :-) .... S: Yes, I see now where you got it from. I just looked up visama in the dict and it gives disharmonious as one meaning. I think sama lobha means ordinary attachment, not disharmonious, in the sense that it doesn't hurt others, for example, when we enjoy the sunset or our surfing:-) Just ordinary attachment. On the other hand, visama lobha is disharmonious in the sense that it affects and harms others. For example, if we lie or steal or follow some gross attachments. This is why the sotapanna still has lots and lots of sama-lobha, but not visama-lobha, as I understand. Perhaps Alex can find some Tipitaka references to sama and visama lobha for us. ---------- >>S: I'm planning to buy a bicycle sometime soon as we seem to be managing fine here without a car. ---------- >KH: Great minds think alike! I have been bicycling a lot lately on our mainly-deserted beach. >I don't know if I would risk it in traffic, though. Maybe just buy a car. :-) ... S: Don't worry, I'm planning to stick to the beach path and other off-road tracks....slowly, slowly......only one Path that matters of course, but no need to fear the conditioned, ordinary attachments, eh Alex? Sati anytime! Metta Sarah ========= #113694 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 5:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- On Mon, 21/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >>> A:>When properly samatha-ing, > ... >> S: What do you mean by this? A:>Suppressing the 5 hindrances to allow wisdom to cut off defilements while they are weak. .... S: What are the cittas at moments of "suppressing the 5 hindrances" - kusala or akusala? For example, now it there is a moment of wise reflection on Dhamma, are the hindrances suppressed at such a moment? What about at moments of *attempting* to suppress the hindrances, attempting to reflect on Dhamma, attempting to have wisdom arise? Are those moments also kusala? So "proper" samatha can only refer to moments of kusala, moments of calm arising, not to moments of trying to *do* samatha or "samatha-ing" in a special way at a special time. .... >>A:one abandons 5 hindrances, and for the longer one abandons the >hindrances, the better. > .... > S: It's still an idea of doing something by a Self, isn't it? .... A:>ANything, or almost anything can be done with an idea of a self. Even eating food or drinking water can be done with a wrong idea of a Self. ... S: Can be, but usually isn't. For example, for the person who has never heard of the Dhamma, there are just thoughts about the food, drink and other topics, but no thoughts about there being a Self eating or drinking. Just attachment, like in the case of an animal which is not concerned about the philosophy of life, right view and wrong view. .... A:>This doesn't mean that one shouldn't eat or drink (and thus die). It simply means that actions need to be done appropriately and without wrong views. This is especially true with kusala deeds. They are good to do. Just don't hold wrong views. .... S: Only right view eradicates wrong view. Following various actions, trying not to hold wrong views would be more wrong view, more silabbataparamasa imho. .... A:>Even though there is no freedom of will, and things happen the only possible way they ever could occur given those circumstances - actions do occur. Some mental actions (such as meditation) is more beneficial for awakening than others (simply washing dishes or going to marketplace, strip club, whatever). ... S: It all depends on the citta at any given moment. When you say "actions do occur", what do you mean? Does bhavana (mental development or meditation if you prefer) refer to cittas and cetasikas or does it refer to activities such as sitting on a cushion, counting breaths, being in a forest and so on? If we learn more about cittas, then we think/mind less about conventional activities and mind less whether we're in a traffic jam, market place or quiet forest - just conditioned dhammas regardless. ... A:> Meditation does occur, and as everything, it is fully conditioned and beyond control. But this occurrence IS very beneficial for the path, which is why it was described by the Buddha. .... S: What exactly do you mean here by "mediatation" that is "fully conditioned and beyond control"? Metta Sarah ======= #113695 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 6:10 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation truth_aerator Hi Sarah, all, > >> S: What do you mean by this? > > A:>Suppressing the 5 hindrances to allow wisdom to cut off >defilements while they are weak. > .... > S: What are the cittas at moments of "suppressing the 5 hindrances" >- kusala or akusala? Kusala >For example, now it there is a moment of wise reflection on Dhamma, >are the hindrances suppressed at such a moment? While technically speaking the precise moment of wise reflection is skillful and hindrances are suppressed, the question remains as to "for how long and how strongly the hindrances are suppressed". As it often happens to the untrained mind is that while there may be wholesome moments, they are few and are drowned by kilesas that occur much more. Continuity of wholesome states is important. 1 second of kusala is different from hours of such moments uninterrupted by akusala cittas. >S:What about at moments of *attempting* to suppress the hindrances, >attempting to reflect on Dhamma, attempting to have wisdom arise? >Are those moments also kusala? Attempting to do good is better than complancency and allowing the bad qualities to overwhelm the mind. > > S: It's still an idea of doing something by a Self, isn't it? Then lie on the bed and don't even move a finger. Actions are going to occur, so if they will occur, they better be kusala. Intention will still occur, so it is much better to take the Buddha's word and strive to develop more kusala. >A:>ANything, or almost anything can be done with an idea of a self. >Even eating food or drinking water can be done with a wrong idea of >a Self. > ... > S: Can be, but usually isn't. For example, for the person who has >never heard of the Dhamma, there are just thoughts about the food, >drink and other topics, but no thoughts about there being a Self >eating or drinking. Some people don't think about theory of self, but that doesn't make them wise. Right view does. The more attachment there is when trying to meditate, the harder it will be, and less successful. One needs to stop doing while being aware of presently arisen realities. In sitting meditation it is much easier than when doing worldly chores (such as washing dishes). > S: Only right view eradicates wrong view. Right. And right view sees the danger of akusala and necessity of striving for getting rid of akusala and of all kilesas that cause only dukkha. > S: It all depends on the citta at any given moment. When you say >"actions do occur", what do you mean? That they are fully conditioned cause-effect conditionality. >S:Does bhavana (mental development or meditation if you prefer) >refer >to cittas and cetasikas or does it refer to activities such >as sitting on a cushion, counting breaths, being in a forest and so >on? Cittas and cetasikas. But position of the body can also be an expression of state of citta/cetasikas. >S:If we learn more about cittas, then we think/mind less about >conventional activities and mind less whether we're in a traffic >jam, market place or quiet forest - just conditioned dhammas >regardless. To the extent that one forgets what red or green light means and which pedal is stop and which pedal is acceleration? The primary fault is never in concepts, but in greed/anger/delusion (about 4NT). Wrong theories are just mental expressions of greed and clinging. One wants something so one justifies, imagines, conceives, examines, plans, etc about it. > S: What exactly do you mean here by "mediatation" that is "fully >conditioned and beyond control"? Development of kusala cittas & cetasikas. All beyond control of course. With metta, Alex #113696 From: "philip" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:32 pm Subject: Questions for Nina 1: body intimation as "not suitable for comprehension" philofillet Hi Nina I've been coming up with a lot of questions while re-reading your books, too many to possibly hope to have answered in Bangkok, so perhaps I could try again to find a suitable way to participate at DSG occasionally by just asking questions and not shooting off my mouth. (We'll see how long that lasts!) The first question is something from the book on Rupa, on p.69, that the two kinds of intimation are considered "unproduced" because they are not rupas with their own nature, they are just shapers of other "produced" rupas. I was surprised, because it seems that consciousness of the facial expression, body language of a person can be an interesting and useful way to consider the mutability of citta that produces that intimation. I can't be directly conscious of another person's citta, so the intimation of their facial expression, speech etc seems the only way... Thanks as always for your time. Metta, Phil #113697 From: "philip" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:39 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Rob M and all phil > You know, even though the Dhamma is so very central to my life, I've only had a few talks "live", three times with Rob K and with James when he spent a couple of days at my place. How could I have forgotten to mention the two different occasions I met Rob Moult when he was staying on business in Tokyo? The first time he taught me some very interesting things about the history of Abhidhamma and I remember he taught me a lot about how visual object is proliferated into concepts. The second time we talked about some more personal matters, and he gave me excellent advice. We also talked about metta meditation and how protective it is, something about the devas giving protection, but I can't remember the details now. I hope you and your loved ones are well, Rob. Metta, Phil #113698 From: "philip" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 8:41 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi again > The first time he taught me some very interesting things about the history of Abhidhamma Correction - history of the commentaries on Abhidhamma. Metta, Phil #113699 From: Vince Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina cerovzt@... sorry... I said: > In fact you are right; the + and = are not realities, and it's the same with > movement. Movement is not rupa but just a relation; there is nothing between > photograms. well, now I'm reading the movement is defined as a rupa belonging to the mind-door. That's quite difficult to manage... It would be nice reading some example in a practical way. If we say citta is so fast that cannot be traced, and also we say our experience is "this, then that"... What is "then"?. In a first view it seems to be conceptual.., Why movement is defined as rupa?. How can we fit this in the daily understanding of the experience? thanks! #113700 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 10:08 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 22-feb-2011, om 6:42 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > But I think that both are present, the momentary direct experiences > > that have an impact and the intervening thoughts and concepts that > > make them more confused in our minds. I like to try to look at the > > whole picture, and not make such a radical break between pure > > experience and mixed experience, since that is not so clearly > > separated in our experience as worldlings. If we also understand > > that it is the actual dhammas that are making the real impact, that > > is especially valuable because maybe we can start to look at what > > those are and how they occur. So I can see your point as well. > ------- > N: I think you expressed very well that there is a mixture in our > experience as worldling. Of course we think of a person when looking > at a corpse of someone we used to know. That is how it happens. And > we can learn gradually to be aware of just a moment of dhamma. We > have to learn, and this depends on our listening to Dhamma.To be > sincere, it does not come yet naturally to me. But I see the value of > Dhamma and I wish (chanda) to learn. It is very difficult isn't it? Someone recently said that without chanda one cannot become an arahant. I think it was Ken O. I think that's something many of us have in common here. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113701 From: "philip" Date: Thu Feb 24, 2011 1:29 am Subject: Re: Questions for Nina 1: body intimation as "not suitable for comprehension" philofillet Hi again Nina > The first question is something from the book on Rupa, on p.69, that the two kinds of intimation are considered "unproduced" because they are not rupas with their own nature, they are just shapers of other "produced" rupas. I was surprised, Re-reading my question I see I left out the point, which is because they are "unproduced" they are considered "not suitable for comprehension." Now I guess I can see that if it is a rupa that doesn't have its own nature, it is not suitable for comprehension, there could only be thinking about concepts related to what we perceive as this or that behaviour? Now I'm confused...in any case, I'm sure I will continue to find value in being aware of body language, facial expression, and speculating on the cittas behind them... Metta, Phil #113702 From: "Sarah" Date: Wed Feb 23, 2011 9:57 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. dhammasanna Hi Philip, You will find the reference to Deva protection in the Metta Sutta AN XI,16. ".....one is dear to human beings; one is dear to non-human beings; one will be protected by devas;....." Translation is by Nyanaponika Thera & Bhikkhu Bohhi. I hope this helps. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob M and all > > phil > You know, even though the Dhamma is so very central to my life, I've only had a few talks "live", three times with Rob K and with James when he spent a couple of days at my place. > > How could I have forgotten to mention the two different occasions I met Rob Moult when he was staying on business in Tokyo? The first time he taught me some very interesting things about the history of Abhidhamma and I remember he taught me a lot about how visual object is proliferated into concepts. The second time we talked about some more personal matters, and he gave me excellent advice. We also talked about metta meditation and how protective it is, something about the devas giving protection, but I can't remember the details now. > > I hope you and your loved ones are well, Rob. > > Metta, > > Phil > #113703 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Feb 24, 2011 3:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arhatship is possible in this very life! nilovg Dear Alex, Op 23-feb-2011, om 21:38 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > Some say that path to awakening takes an incredibly long time. > However, what does it say in Sutta Pitaka? > > SN38.16 Says that if you Practice in accordance with the Dhamma > (which is difficult to do) then in no long time you will become > Awakened. > > Comy: SA quotes MN II 96,19-20: "Instructed in the morning, by the > evening he will attain distinction (enlightenment); instructed in > the evening, by the morning he will attain distinction." > > This is also said in MN85, that one can achieve Awakening within > one day if possessing certain qualities. Compared to this, 7 days > to 7 years till Arahatship teaching of satipatthana sutta seems > more than reasonable provided you do the hard work. ------- N: More than the hard work. It depends on the degree of understanding that has been accumulated during aeons. And according to the commentaries at this time in this world there are no more arahats. We are further away from the Buddha's time. I quote from a post I wrote off line just recently: QUOTE (1) A Ugghatita~n~nu : an individual who encounters a Buddha in person, and who is capable of attaining the Holy Paths and the Holy Fruits through the mere hearing of a short concise discourse. (2) A Vipancitta~n~nu: an individual who encounters a Buddha in person, but who is capable of attaining the Paths and the Fruits only when the short discourse is expounded to him at some length. At the present day, only the following Neyya and Padaparama classes of individuals remain. (3) A Neyya : an individual who needs to study the sermon and the exposition, and then to practise the provisions contained therein for 7 days to 60 years, to attain the Paths and the Fruits during this lifetime if he tries hard with guidance from the right teacher. (4) A Padaparama : is an individual who cannot attain the Paths and the Fruits within this lifetime can attain release from worldly ills in his next existence if he dies while practising samatha or vipassana and attains rebirth either as a human being or a deva within the present Buddha Sasana. ------- N: This shows that today enlightenment cannot be attained quickly. We are either 'those who have to be guided' or those who understand the words of the teachings but cannot attain enlightenment in this life. Who could hasten this process that depends entirely on the right conditions?> Acharn Sujin's Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, ch 34: -------- But why do you want to know how long it takes? That is yearning for the future that has not come yet. There is only the present moment to be studied with awareness. The Buddha exhorted to this: We read in the Bhaddekaratta Sutta of Lomasakangiya that the deva Candana approached the venerable Lomasakangiya and asked him whether he remembered the exposition and analysis of the Baddhekaratta Sutta. It appeared that both of them could not remember this, but Candana remembered the verses. He related that the Buddha had taught these when he dwelled in the Heaven of the Thirtythree. They are the following verses: The past should not be followed after, the future not desired. What is past is got rid of and the future has not come. But whoever has vision now here, now there of a present dhamma, The unmovable, unshakable, let him cultivate it. Swelter at the task this very day. Who knows whether he will die tomorrow? There is no bargaining with the great hosts of Death. Thus abiding ardently, unwearied day and night, He indeed is Auspicious called, described as a sage at peace. --------- Nina. #113704 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Sarah >S: Pre-satipatthana, there has to be the understanding of concepts about present > >realities - this is pariyatti. However, if it is satipatthana being referred to, > >this is patipatti, the mundane path that leads to the noble path, removing the >bricks of samsara. >As for the texts and the commentaries, we need to read carefully. If you read >the comy and tika to the Satipatthana Sutta, for example, you'll see that the >dhammas referred to as objects of satipatthana are: 1) the rupas of the body >("there can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived >materiality, in a body"), 2) feelings, i.e. vedana, 3) consciousness, i.e. >cittas, beginning with citta rooted in lobha, 4) all dhammas in different >classifications, beginning with akusala dhammas, then the khandhas, the ayatanas > >and so on. > KO: Nope the commentaries are very clear that before one reach feelings etc, they are all concepts. We cannot said this is pre-satipatthana because Buddha never said that or his great disciple ever said, not even the comy or Visud said that. It is clear from the comy and Visud, satipatthana starts from concepts, once it is hits vipassana level then it is nama and rupa. If you think the sutta or comy are wrong, that breathing is not a concept, then show me the comy that is against, in the process where the breathing is before feelings. ..... > >K:> Now since panna can arise with concepts, so is there any wrong about >practising meditations and if you think it is wrong so in what way why is it >wrong. > >.... >S: When panna arises (with concept or reality as object), the citta is always >sobhana (beautiful), so no question of there being anything wrong. KO: As I said to Jon, there is no such thing in the comy, rather comy used concepts too for the understanding and development of satipatthana. Panna can arise with kusala cittas and kusala cittas can take on any objects. can cittas by nature take object said hey, citta dont want a concept because panna is arising. Where did it said in the of Abhidhamma that panna can only arise with nama and rupa as an object (except for vipassana level). > >The question is when "practising meditation", what are the cittas involved? Only > >If there is an attempt to have a different citta experiencing a different object > >to the one conditioned at this moment, is that kusala or akusala? >>panna can know. KO: Definitely only citta is involved, just like whe you practise reading :-). So why is reading is good while meditation is not good, isnt reading an attempt also, what make your reading and mediation so different. Isnt that all are attempts by dhamma? Ken O #113705 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses ashkenn2k Dear Rob E >> ------- >> N: I think you expressed very well that there is a mixture in our >> experience as worldling. Of course we think of a person when looking >> at a corpse of someone we used to know. That is how it happens. And >> we can learn gradually to be aware of just a moment of dhamma. We >> have to learn, and this depends on our listening to Dhamma.To be >> sincere, it does not come yet naturally to me. But I see the value of >> Dhamma and I wish (chanda) to learn. > >Rob: It is very difficult isn't it? Someone recently said that without chanda >one > >cannot become an arahant. I think it was Ken O. I think that's something many of > >us have in common here. > KO: without chanda, one cannot be a Buddha. It is one of the 8 requisties to be a Buddha :-). Ken O #113706 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 24, 2011 5:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E > >I understand the basic idea of anatta, which literally translates I believe as >"not-self," "non-self" or "no self." I don't think there is any other way to >translate that into English or the equivalent form in any other language. So if >you say it is a positive characteristic of a dhamma - and the above *is* what it > >means - you are then faced with the issue: "What does it mean to say that 'no >self' is a positive characteristic. How would one experience 'no self' as a >positive presence. When 'no self' is present, what is present? If you cannot >answer these questions with a sensible answer then you are not talking about >something that exists at all, but just a false and general idea based on another > >>idea - that all the characteristics of dhammas have to be *something,* they >cannot be a description of a condition that is based on something else. In other > >>words, for anatta to have its natural meaning: 'no self,' or 'not self' which is >> >>not the word *I* gave to describe it, but the word the Buddha gave to describe >this condition or characteristic, you have to start with the natural belief that > >>all humans have that a self *does* exist. Without the illusion of self, 'no >self' is nonsense. There is no way to turn it into some other characteristic, >because it doesn't have another meaning. It simply means "There is no self, and >the existence of a self is an illusion that causes clinging, delusion and >suffering." That is the meaning of anatta and that is it. Dhammas are discovered > >to not have any core entity and to not be part of any form of self. That is the >discovery that frees one from attachment to dhammas, and that is why Buddha >talked about it, period.> KO: Honestly, IMHO the usage of positive and absence of the characteristics do not matter. What is important is that dhamma is empty of a self. Whether one said it is a positive or absence, it would not have much effect on understanding dhamma as long as it is about not self, which is our goal. >Mahasi Sayadaw talks about the four false concepts of self that the Buddha's >teaching on anatta dispels, and which Buddha addressed in the great discourse on > >>anatta, the Anattatakkhaṇa Sutta: > >>feels sensations, pleasant or unpleasant. This form of clinging is concerned >with the vedanak-khandha, the aggregate of feelings, which we will take up fully > > >in the next chapter. > >That the aggregate of materiality is not self or a living entity has been >adequately expounded, but it still remains to explain how meditators practicing >vipassanā meditation come to perceive the nonself and uncontrollable nature > >of the body." > >- - - - - - - - - KO: honestly, my pali is not good so cannot read the comy whether these are said in the comy. I dont know where he got the four false concepts of self. It would be good someone good in pali to help whether it is in the comy. I got one rule that I always stick to it whenever I learn Buddhim, I dont allude my own interpretaion, I always base on my interpretation of the comy from difference sources. I suit my understanding to the comy and not the comy to my understanding. If my views and the comy differs, then the comy is right. 2nd rule, I dont extract part of comy or sutta to support my views, the sutta and the comy must look as a whole for any intepreation of the dhamma. Just my personal views. No offence meant. >In my view, it is because of clinging to belief in these deeply rooted aspects >of self that the Buddha taught the doctrine of anatta to dispel these delusions >and free those on the path from clinging to a false view of self. It is true >that all dhammas have the characteristic of anatta - which is the characteristic > >of lacking any self or connection to self. KO: there are clinging to personality views which are classified in four types of personality views. I think you know about this as well, sakkayaditthi. >If we were to turn the lack of a self into a positive characteristic we would >truly be taking this lack of self and turning it into a different kind of self, >a "non-self" which we would say actually exists. That defeats the entire purpose > >of insight into anatta which is to fully and thoroughly understand that *there >is no lasting or personal or eternal or any other kind of self,* period. KO: hmmm, the comment above remain the same Ken O #113707 From: Ken O Date: Thu Feb 24, 2011 6:07 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Everything that happens in life is OK? ashkenn2k Dear Lukas >Dear All, > >What's the goal of life? Isnt it to have more understanding? Does the goal is, >to have less wrong view? > >I am so forgetful, that I even could not honestly say to myself I am practicing >Dhamma. I would be glad to hear more on kamma and vipaka. How you lead your >daily life, so u could say I am practicing Dhamma? KO: Each of us are different. Phil believes in virtue, Howard and Alex - meditation and Sarah, Jon and Ken through the natural path of panna. That is their own niche of development. You have to find your own niche, what is suitable for you or those akusala behaviour you wish to eradicate. Ill will with metta, craving for lovely objects with comtemplation of the unlovely. Also we are all human, bounds to have failures, even when Buddha was still a Bodhisattas, he did commit aksuala acts. So Buddha always say made amends of our trangression and not remorse over our trangression. Also there are five facutlies, remember to balance them :-). Too much energy, faith will not resolve. So be aware To reduce wrong view, then investigate dhamma thoroughly and not just aware of them, keep think of them why it is not self. Dont worry about thinking because citta thinks. It is whether the thinking is beneficial or not. Ken O #113708 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Arhatship is possible in this very life! truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >A: Some say that path to awakening takes an incredibly long time. > > However, what does it say in Sutta Pitaka? > > > > SN38.16 Says that if you Practice in accordance with the Dhamma > > (which is difficult to do) then in no long time you will become > > Awakened. > > > > Comy: SA quotes MN II 96,19-20: "Instructed in the morning, by >the evening he will attain distinction (enlightenment); instructed >in > > the evening, by the morning he will attain distinction." > > > > This is also said in MN85, that one can achieve Awakening within > > one day if possessing certain qualities. Compared to this, 7 >days > > to 7 years till Arahatship teaching of satipatthana sutta seems > > more than reasonable provided you do the hard work. > ------- > N: More than the hard work. It depends on the degree of >understanding that has been accumulated during aeons. But Practice in accordance with the Dhamma, which you've called "hard work" does include understanding (one needs to know what one is doing for that to be proper practice of Dhamma in accordance with the Dhamma). And even the Comy to that statement does say that Awakening can occur very quickly *if* one really goes at Dhamma practice. With metta, Alex #113709 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:19 am Subject: Re: Questions on Samatha. kenhowardau Hi Ken O (Sarah and Alex), Sorry for the delay in responding, I have found it rather difficult. In the meantime you have raised many of the same points with Sarah, so I will leave them for her to answer. I will concentrate on the easy ones. :-) ------------- > KO: To dimiss or to say there is no formal mediation, one must show concrete evidence from the text. -------------- KH: Yes, and there is plenty of that. ---------------------- > KO: Honestly, I have yet come across the text saying there is no formal mediation. ---------------------- KH: You have come across texts saying there are only the presently arisen dhammas - there is no self or 'other reality' of any kind. On that basis surely you must conclude there is only one kind of meditation. And that is the kind that arises, functions and ceases in the space of a single citta. So there is no formal meditation. ------------------------------------ > KO: Yes to Jon and you, may say in the Visud on concentration is a described behaviour due to their accumulation and not a prescribed behaviour. --------------------------- KH: I will skip that paragraph. As I was saying, I found it difficult to reply to. The Dhamma can be regarded as a description of paramattha dhammas, but I don't know where your term "described behaviours" fits in. We might not be talking about the same thing. ------------------------------------------------------ > KO: However, many text do not support it is a described behaviour, why because of it is a precise way of doing the meditation, because the person take up a subject from his teacher. There is a clear and concise method to do it. That is why I told Rob E, this is due to the way we interpret the commentaries. Though I do not have text said these are prescribed behaviour but the mounting text showing a methodology of meditation which I cannot ignore and pointing to a formal meditaiton like meditation of foulness. -------------------------------------------------------- KH: No matter how prescriptive the texts might sometimes sound, the fact remains there are (according to those same texts) only the presently arisen paramattha dhammas. Everything the texts say is to be understood in that light. ------------------------------ > KO: The second departure from the understanding of commentaries between DSGers and me is the understanding of the term satipatthana. DSGers believe satipatthana only takes on nama and rupa as objects which I felt this is not the correct intepretation of the satipatthana suttas. Satipatthana starts from concepts - be it breathing or corpse or the 32 parts of the body, there are all concepts. ----------------------------- KH: I think you are saying that concepts have lakkhana, and can be rightly understood as momentary, painful, and devoid of a lasting entity etc. As Alex might say: stand in front of a speeding car and see if it's devoid of a lasting entity! It is clearly a *lasting* entity; it will still be there at the point of impact. ------------------------------------------------------------- > KO: The nama and rupa part starts at feelings onward and this part always mistaken by the meditators that it is for everyone. This feeling part onwards are for those who have reach jhanas on the breathing subject as said in the commentaries. The only time I read breathing is treated as nama and rupa, I forget which text already, is only applicable after one has reach vipassana stage and not beforehand. ------------------------------------------------------------- KH: The Satipatthana Sutta is about conditioned dhammas only. (As Sarah will explain!) :-) -------------------------- > KO: Also to say formal medition is an intentional behavoiur -------------------------- KH: It is conventional behaviour. Just as kicking a football - or writing an email is a conventional behaviour. ---------------------------------------- > KO: and intentional means self. ---------------------------------------- We can play football or write emails etc., without having any views (right or wrong) about self. But can we deliberately try to practise satipatthana without self view? Can you think of any reason for meditating that does not involve wanting, or expecting, results for oneself? No, of course not! On the other hand, true meditation (bhavana) is conditioned by having heard and understood the Dhamma. There is no "doing" involved. Even now, at this moment, it has happened or not happened already, by conditions. ---------------------------------------------------- > KO: then why do people travel all the way to foundation to listen to dhamma, isn't that intentional also. Why do we read books and go email to discuss dhamma, aren't these actions are intentional behaviour. If one said these are all accumulated behaviour, why cant their formal meditaion are also their accumulated behaviour. ------------------------------------------------------- KH: If I don't skip ahead to something easier this reply will never get posted. :-) ----------------------------------------------- <. . .> > KO: regarding why I say that that you dont believe concepts cannot have insight is because of this old email on 16 september > >For example, it helps to explain why the Buddha agreed to teach. The texts tell >us his decision was motivated by compassion, and it's interesting, isn't it, >that they should say compassion rather than insight? I think it fits in with >your perspective. The decision to teach was made when a concept (sentient >beings) was the object of the Buddha's consciousness. Therefore, insight could >not arise at that moment. But compassion could. > > > KO: New theory on Buddha. :-) ----------------------------------------------- Just idle hypothesising, and not to be taken seriously. But it doesn't contradict anything I have been saying about satipatthana and concepts. The only contradiction I can see is with regard to the terms "right understanding" and "satipatthana." I have been using them interchangeably, but I notice Sarah uses satipatthana for *direct* right understanding of dhammas only . I, on the other hand, have been talking about *indirect* right understanding (right understanding of concepts of dhammas) as if it was a stage of satipatthana. I was right in a way, but strictly speaking it isn't. Sorry for the confusion. Ken H #113710 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:31 am Subject: Re: Questions on Samatha. truth_aerator Hello KenH, all, >KH:We can play football or write emails etc., without having any views >(right or wrong) about self. But can we deliberately try to >practise >satipatthana without self view? Yes we can. In my humble experience, there is more self-view when doing worldly stuff and no (or almost none) when satipatthana arises. I don't think that it is wise to twist Buddha's words so much so to make them say what they don't say. I believe that the Buddha, being the best teacher, knew HOW to teach Dhamma, meant what He meant. I don't think that puthujjanas can interpet His Dhamma better than He did. I also think that the Buddha would NOT mislead us with his suttas. IMHO. With metta, Alex #113711 From: "philip" Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 3:17 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Sarah Jane Nice to meet you. Yes, it's good to know we are protected by devas. And it is interesting that compared to angels in Christianity, for example, devas protect us in a very Buddhist way, by offering us the opportunity to develop understanding. They come in the form of the sick, the old and they dying and offer us the opportunity to wake up to the realities of life! Most people don't see them, do we? Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Sarah" wrote: > > Hi Philip, > You will find the reference to Deva protection in the Metta Sutta > AN XI,16. ".....one is dear to human beings; one is dear to non-human beings; one will be protected by devas;....." Translation is by Nyanaponika Thera & Bhikkhu Bohhi. I hope this helps. > May you be well and happy and always smiling, > Sarah Jane > #113712 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 12:19 am Subject: Serene is Equanimity! bhikkhu5 Friends: How is Release by Equanimity Achieved? The Blessed Buddha once said: And how, Bhikkhus, is release of mind by serene equanimity (Upekkh ) 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 neutral & imperturbable equanimity? Here, a Bhikkhu dwells pervading first the entire frontal quadrant, with a mind imbued with infinite equanimity, so the second quadrant, the 3rd quadrant, and the 4th quadrant. As above, so below, across, and everywhere, & as to all beings also to himself, he dwells pervading the entire universe with a mind saturated with unlimited equanimity, immense, exalted, measureless, without hostility, without any enmity, without any ill will! Thus prepared and expanded, he then develops: 1: The Awareness Link to Awakening joined with limitless equanimity. 2: The Investigation Link to Awakening fused with such equanimity. 3: The Energy Link to Awakening together with infinite equanimity. 4: The Joy Link to Awakening accompanied with absolute equanimity. 5: The Tranquillity Link to Awakening linked with serene equanimity. 6: The Concentration Link to Awakening associated with equanimity. 7: The Equanimity Link to Awakening joined with endless equanimity. Based upon seclusion, disillusion, ceasing, and culminating in release. If he then wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in any unrepulsive & tempting, then he can dwell experiencing repulsiveness therein. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in any disgusting & repulsive, then he dwells experiencing pleasing beauty in whatever disgusting! If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the repulsive in what is both unrepulsive & repulsive, he dwells experiencing repulsive disgust in it. If he wishes: May I dwell experiencing the unrepulsive in what is both unrepulsive & repulsive, he experiences only unrepulsive beauty by it! If he wishes: Avoiding both the repulsive and the unrepulsive, may I dwell in equanimity , just aware and clearly comprehending, then he dwells in equanimity, just aware and clearly comprehending! Or else, completely transcending the realm of infinitude of consciousness, only aware that there is nothing, he enters & dwells in the sphere of the void, empty & vacuous nothingness.. I tell you Bhikkhus for a wise Bhikkhu here, who has not yet penetrated to an even more superior mental release, the mental release by imperturbable equanimity has the subtle sphere of the nothingness as its final culmination! <...> Source of reference (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nikya. Book [V: 115-21] 46: The Links. 54: Joined by Friendliness... Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113713 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 2:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions for Nina 1: body intimation as "not suitable for comprehension" nilovg Dear Philip, I appreciate your interest and questions and these are always welcome. Op 24-feb-2011, om 5:32 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > The first question is something from the book on Rupa, on p.69, > that the two kinds of intimation are considered "unproduced" > because they are not rupas with their own nature, they are just > shapers of other "produced" rupas. I was surprised, because it > seems that consciousness of the facial expression, body language of > a person can be an interesting and useful way to consider the > mutability of citta that produces that intimation. I can't be > directly conscious of another person's citta, so the intimation of > their facial expression, speech etc seems the only way... -------- Re-reading my question I see I left out the point, which is because they are "unproduced" they are considered "not suitable for comprehension." ----------- N: Not all ruupas are what we call 'concrete matter'. Some of the 28 on the list are characteristics of ruupa (such as arising etc.), qualities of ruupa or changeability ( alteration) of ruupa. The intimations are 'a certain, unique change' in the eight inseparable ruupas produced by citta. As you understood, they are unproduced. They are not ruupas with their own characteristic. ------- Ph: Now I guess I can see that if it is a rupa that doesn't have its own nature, it is not suitable for comprehension, there could only be thinking about concepts related to what we perceive as this or that behaviour? Now I'm confused...in any case, I'm sure I will continue to find value in being aware of body language, facial expression, and speculating on the cittas behind them... ------ N: The two intimations are the physical conditions for communicating, conveying an intention by gestures or by speech. When we notice what mood someone is in then there is not necessarily intimation. Kusala citta or akusala citta conditions ruupas and we may know that he is kind or angry. There may not be an intention of that person to convey a meaning. We think very often of the cittas of another person we meet. Usually we are forgetful of realities. In the satipatthaanasutta where it is said to be aware of cittas of others, this is meant as a reminder, as a way of being non-forgetful. We think of the other person's cittas and the thinking is not us, it is citta that thinks. I heard this on a recording this morning. ------ Nina. #113714 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Ken H > >------------- >> KO: To dimiss or to say there is no formal mediation, one must show concrete >>evidence from the text. >-------------- > >KH: Yes, and there is plenty of that. > >---------------------- >> KO: Honestly, I have yet come across the text saying there is no formal >>mediation. >---------------------- > >KH: You have come across texts saying there are only the presently arisen >dhammas - there is no self or 'other reality' of any kind. > > >On that basis surely you must conclude there is only one kind of meditation. And > >that is the kind that arises, functions and ceases in the space of a single >citta. So there is no formal meditation. KO: Nope, Visud is full of formal mediation under the concentration portion. Do you want me to quote you a few examples. There are definitely only presently arisen of dhammas, you mean u can do meditation without dhammas. Or could read dhamma books without dhamma. Also where did you get the idea that formal meditation is a self. I dont see that in visud. You got no text to prove but I got many text prove meditation. Also what is the difference betwen reading a book and meditation. So why do you read a book or listen to dhamma then since it is not in one single citta And you are talking about one single citta, so are you able to be mindful of one single citta. If you can, then there is no need for us to listen to dhamma. If you can listen to dhamma in one single citta, then I will not say anything more. What you said about one single citta is in Vipassana stage, are you there yet. >> KO: However, many text do not support it is a described >behaviour, why because of it is a precise way of doing the meditation, because >the person take up a subject from his teacher.  There is a clear and concise >method to do it.  That is why I told Rob E, this is due to the way we >interpret the commentaries. Though I do not have text said these are prescribed > >behaviour but the mounting text showing a methodology of meditation which I >cannot >ignore and pointing to a formal meditaiton like meditation of foulness. >-------------------------------------------------------- > >KH: No matter how prescriptive the texts might sometimes sound, the fact remains > >there are (according to those same texts) only the presently arisen paramattha >dhammas. Everything the texts say is to be understood in that light. > KO: definitely the text is about paramatha, but are you at that level. If not look at satipatthana sutta, it started with concepts. >------------------------------ >> KO: The second departure from the understanding of commentaries between DSGers > >>and me is the understanding of the term satipatthana.  DSGers believe >>satipatthana only takes on nama and rupa as objects which I felt this is not >>the correct intepretation of the satipatthana suttas. Satipatthana starts from >> >>concepts - be it breathing or corpse or the 32 parts of the body, there are all >> >>concepts. >> >----------------------------- > >KH: I think you are saying that concepts have lakkhana, and can be rightly >understood as momentary, painful, and devoid of a lasting entity etc. As Alex >might say: stand in front of a speeding car and see if it's devoid of a lasting >entity! > > >It is clearly a *lasting* entity; it will still be there at the point of impact. > > KO: If you dont understand satipatthana, please check the commentaries. We could also discuss. You could also ask all your DSGers to dicuss with me. I am more than happy. > >---------------------------------------------------------- >> KO: The nama and rupa part starts at feelings onward and this part always >>mistaken by the meditators that it is for everyone. This feeling part >>onwards are for those who have reach jhanas on the breathing subject as said >> >>in the commentaries.  The only time I read breathing is treated as nama and >>rupa, I forget which text already, is only applicable after one has reach >>vipassana stage and not beforehand. >---------------------------------------------------------- > >KH: The Satipatthana Sutta is about conditioned dhammas only. (As Sarah will >explain!) :-) > KO: hmm you should read my reply to Sarah on this. >-------------------------- >> KO: Also to say formal medition is an intentional behavoiur >-------------------------- > >KH: It is conventional behaviour. Just as kicking a football - or writing an >email – is a conventional behaviour. > KO: including listening to dhamma and going to the foundation. If all listening are wrong since it is conventional behaviour, then I dont know how you learn dhamma. If you could listen to dhamma in one citta, then I said you are right all conventional behaviour is wrong. >---------------------------------------- >> KO: and intentional means self. >---------------------------------------- > >We can play football or write emails etc., without having any views (right or >wrong) about self. But can we deliberately try to practise satipatthana without >self view? > >Can you think of any reason for meditating that does not involve wanting, or >expecting, results for oneself? No, of course not! > >On the other hand, true meditation (bhavana) is conditioned by having heard and >understood the Dhamma. There is no "doing" involved. Even now, at this moment, >it has happened or not happened already, by conditions. KO: Sure, reading books is not doing anything and listening is not doing anything and going to founation is not doing anything. These are not self, the rest actions are. > >---------------------------------------------------- >> KO: then why do people travel all the way to foundation to listen to dhamma, >>isn't that intentional also. Why do we read books and go email to discuss >>dhamma, aren't these actions are intentional behaviour. > >If one said these are all accumulated behaviour, why cant their formal meditaion > >are also their accumulated behaviour. > >------------------------------------------------------- > >KH: If I don't skip ahead to something easier this reply will never get posted. >:-) KO: You cannot give a good reply and I am confident of it. >----------------------------------------------- ><. . .> >> KO: regarding why I say that that you dont believe concepts cannot have insight >> >>is because of this old email on 16 september >> >>For example, it helps to explain why the Buddha agreed to teach. The texts tell > > >>us his decision was motivated by compassion, and it's interesting, isn't it, >>that they should say compassion rather than insight? I think it fits in with >>your perspective. The decision to teach was made when a concept (sentient >>beings) was the object of the Buddha's consciousness. Therefore, insight could >>not arise at that moment. But compassion could. >> >> >> KO: New theory on Buddha. :-) >----------------------------------------------- > >Just idle hypothesising, and not to be taken seriously. But it doesn't >contradict anything I have been saying about satipatthana and concepts. > > >The only contradiction I can see is with regard to the terms "right >understanding" and "satipatthana." I have been using them interchangeably, but I > >notice Sarah uses satipatthana for *direct* right understanding of dhammas only >. > > >I, on the other hand, have been talking about *indirect* right understanding >(right understanding of concepts of dhammas) as if it was a stage of >satipatthana. I was right in a way, but strictly speaking it isn't. Sorry for >the confusion. KO; Direct understanding happens only in nama and rupa, Vipassana level, it dont happen in before this level. Sure, as I said earlier, if you could read or listen to dhamma in one citta, I will not say anything more. Ken O #113715 From: Ken O Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 5:54 pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. ashkenn2k Dear Phil if you believe in practising metta, please go ahead and do it. You have to do it regularly and not just do it one day and forget that a few days. If you could you should do it whenever you remember about it. Use human beings as objects of metta as you could see them everyday and there are good objects for triggering mindfullness of metta. Mindfulness of metta is a very powerful thing especially in the jhanas level where it could repell arrows shooting at one self or from danger arising from non-human beings. Even if you do not reach that level, IMHO practising metta will help to reduce anger or irritation or become impatient. If anyone here tell you metta is not practising with beings as objects, dont listen to them. It is written clearly in Visud. It must be beings especially human beings as objects of metta. If anyone here tell you there is no such thing as formal mediation of metta, dont listen to them too much and dont get discourage because it is written in Visud there is such thing. Until the commentaries say likewise, we stick to the commentaries version and not others intepretation of what the commentaries meant, the commentaries are clear that there is a formal meditation of metta. Ken O #113716 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:06 pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. dhammasanna Dear Phil & Ken O., I totally agree with Ken as to practicing metta. I have been doingnthis practice for a number of years and Ken's words match my experience in this matter. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane #113717 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 12:46 am Subject: Pure Merit=> Elevated Future! bhikkhu5 Friends: To whom should one give, to gain most Merit? The gods became gods as a result of their giving! The young brahman Magha once asked the Blessed Buddha: When giving food, where would this offering be most purified for the donor? The Blessed One answered: If any open-handed householder, a lordly giver, Magha, seeking merit, looking for merit, sacrifices, giving food and drink to others, such one would achieve most merit, if the recipient is pure and Noble . Such, who indeed wander unattached in the world, having & wanting nothing, fully accomplished, in complete self-control, upon them, at the right time one should bestow an offering. Those who have cut all mental bonds and fetters, who are tamed, completely released, without affliction, without desire, upon them, at the right time, should one bestow an offering. Upon these purified & Noble Ones should any brahman, who is looking for merit, place his sacrifice! Sutta-Nipāta verses 488-491 Edited excerpt. Pure giving cut short: Give 2 those who don't want anything! <...> Giving is getting, since it causes a kammic wealth, which will be reflected back. :-) Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #113718 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:30 am Subject: emails to Ken H kenhowardau Hi all, I think there might be a DSG member who has been trying to contact me off list. I have received messages from Yahoo telling that two emails have been "returned: user unknown." Their headings refer to current DSG threads, and I think they contained attachments. So, my apologies for not responding, please try again without the attachments. Ken H #113719 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 9:00 am Subject: Re: emails to Ken H ptaus1 Hi KenH, all, Is anyone else having a similar problem? RobE has been getting something alike - in his case it looks like the posts that failed to get delivered were addressed to a user with an email xingyiman@..., but there's no such email in the member list... What's the email that was responsible for undelivered messages in your case KenH? Anyway, I'm not sure what's going on here, but if anyone else is having similar problems, describe them to me, and I'll try reporting the problem to yahoo. Maybe email me off-list so as not to swamp the list with technical matters. Best wishes pt --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi all, > > I think there might be a DSG member who has been trying to contact me off list. I have received messages from Yahoo telling that two emails have been "returned: user unknown." Their headings refer to current DSG threads, and I think they contained attachments. > > So, my apologies for not responding, please try again without the attachments. > > Ken H > #113720 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 24-feb-2011, om 7:08 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > N: To be > > sincere, it does not come yet naturally to me. But I see the > value of > > Dhamma and I wish (chanda) to learn. > > It is very difficult isn't it? Someone recently said that without > chanda one cannot become an arahant. I think it was Ken O. I think > that's something many of us have in common here. ------- N: Chanda is an important condition for seeing the value of insight and beginning to develop it. It is difficult to realize that a person is not real in the ultimate sense. I mean, we can repeat this and understand in theory, but we have not eradicated the belief in person or self. I heard on a recording: (end quote) It is good to know the difference, and this is the beginning of understanding of what is real in the ultimate sense. ------ Nina. #113721 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:30 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Robert E (113391) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. :-) > ... > > J: To begin with, there would have to be a clear understanding of the difference between kusala and akusala on an ongoing basis. > > That is fine with me, but it seems that in your [by which I mean the commentarial] philosophy, one is not equipped to tell kusala from akusala until it can be discerned in the momentary arising that is reserved for sotapanna and above. > =============== J: No, that's not the commentarial position at all. Knowing kusala from akusala, and knowing the arising of (momentary) dhammas, are 2 different things. As I see it, knowing kusala from akusala means not taking one for the other; it does not, for example, necessarily involve being able to identify successive moments of consciousness as and when they arise. > =============== So once again the ability to do *anything* of worth on the path, other than very very gradually developing right understanding, is postponed for hundreds or thousands of lifetimes. > =============== J: But the path *is* the very, very gradual development of right understanding. Having the idea that it should be something more than that tends to lead to different ideas as to the meaning of what we read in the texts. > =============== > My own opinion is that the gradual path does not have to be only about right understanding of dhammas, but can be a more conventional way of discerning kusala from akusala and related understandings. One may not be able to catch a moment of kusala as it happens and discern it from a momentary arising of akusala, but one can certainly develop mindfulness to the point of observing when there is *obvious* akusala, and perhaps even some obvious kusala at time in our lives. At a moment of happiness, fellowship and good will, there may be some clinging or other akusala, but we can observe some clear kusala, even if we are not aware of the exact moments during which it is arising. And if we do notice clinging, worry or other akusala things, we can acknowledge it. So perhaps we can begin to become more aware of the preponderence of what is arising in a given situation before we can even approach the individual moments. To me, that is a very valuable way to develop the path, during this lifetime, > =============== J: What you describe above is in the realm of samatha rather than vipassana, I'd say. Noticing this or that is not the direct awareness of arising dhammas, and hence not directly to do with the path. > =============== rather than waiting for an interminable period to see anything of note. > =============== J: Better for there to be the (too?) gradual development of awareness than the taking of one kind of kusala for another. > =============== > And in that vein, maybe we can use a little common sense to get a beginning sense of what our natural tendencies are. If someone enjoys sitting peacefully and calmly, perhaps reading a book or sitting under a tree and enjoying nature, and if during such a time one's breathing relaxes and slows and one has a feeling of ease without a lot of worry and attachment, maybe one has a natural tendency towards the development of samatha, of calm. [That would not be me!] If one has a tendency to notice little things about the moment, to notice qualities of experience, etc., maybe that person has a tendency towards awareness and insight. > =============== J: But there's no such connection as this suggested in the texts. Are you sure this is a safe line of thinking to follow? > =============== So again, I think we can get a sense of these things without demanding that we wait until as sotapannas - because it's hard to imagine how we would ever reach that level if there are no building blocks along the way - we are able to discern individual moments with great clarity. I feel like the gradual path of semi-conventional awareness that will gradually shift to greater and greater discernment is a path we can begin to follow now, rather than waiting for many unknown lifetimes to pass. > =============== J: I don't think an understanding of the world of dhammas can emerge from the kind of reflection you described in the previous segment. There can be no 'shift' from a conventional awareness of what one's thoughts or tendencies are to an awareness of dhammas as mere impersonal elements; these are just not on the same continuum. Conventional awareness when developed leads only to more of the same, and whatever kusala is involved in that will be dana, sila or samatha but not awareness of the kind uniquely taught by the Buddha. Jon #113722 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body jonoabb Hi KenO (113490) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > ... > KO: It is not about different view, it is about understanding how dhamma works > in the paramatha level. Panna cannot take citta as its object, only citta can > experience an object, panna knows the object that citta experiences. panna > arise with whatever citta experiences and citta can experience concepts :-). > that is how one understand dhamma by listening and investigating. > =============== J: There is no argument from me about the role of concepts in all aspects of our life, including in the development of the path. And yes, the citta that expereinces a concept can be accompanied by panna. As you say, this is how the dhamma is heard and reflected on and understood. But when it comes to the development of awareness/insight, that is to say, following upon the hearing of the Dhamma and after it has been reflected on and understood at an intellectual level, it is dhammas that are to be the object, not concepts. I'd like to go back to an earlier point which I don't think you've expressed a specific view on yet. I said that in the suttas references to anicca, dukkha and anattaa invariably (or almost) appear in the context of dhammas and not of conventional activities or other concepts. Any comment on this? To my understanding, if the characteristics of anicca, dukkha, anattaa are to be known, it must be through an awareness of dhammas, not concepts (conventional objects). Jon #113723 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified jonoabb Hi KenO (113491) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Jon > ... > KO: If it is not intentional, then I dont know how you are condition to go. > Intentional or directed is also arise with cetana or chanda. Without chanda, > one cannot be a Buddha :-) > =============== J: Right, but everyone has cetana and chanda, they are not factors that need to be developed per se. What needs to be developed are the kusala factors without which cetana and chanda cannot themselves be kusala. > =============== > KO: As I said, look at the fundamental dhamma, there are cetasikas for > intentional and it is not necessary all akusala. The revulsion on intentional > is due to a belief that intentional must arise with aksuala. I dont know where > you get this idea from, because in the text in Abhidhamma and sutta, there is > nothing wrong about intentional unless is arise with aksuala. > =============== J: Again, it's not the intention that makes the difference but the kusala or akusala factors that the intention arises together with. Jon #113724 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Nina (113537) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jon, Rob E, ... > N: Following with attention your discussion. I am involved, having > just seen the corpse of my sister's partner and tomorrow is the > cremation. Just thinking about my own immortality is not enough. It > is the teaching on understanding the true characteristic of arising > dhammas, and this is what the Buddha taught for fortyfive years. I am > thinking of Kh Sujin's:' just as this moment'. > =============== J: Right. I understood the comment "just the same as now" to mean that the world of dhammas when at a funeral is the same as the world of dhammas when, say, watching TV. This is not to trivialise the occasion of a funeral, nor to suggest that there will not be feelings, emotions and thoughts at a funeral that in conventional terms are normally experienced at other times. But in the ultimate sense those feelings, emotions and thoughts, and other dhammas, are indeed the same namas and rupas as are experienced at other times, except they are arising in different combinations. So (for example) the sombre reflection when reminded of the fragility of life, and the thinking associated with watching something on TV, are both instances of the nama that thinks and accordingly share that characteristic. Just difficult to realise as such (mere impersonal elements) ;-)) Jon #113725 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: should one try one's best? jonoabb Hi Nina (113538) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Jon and Rob E, ... > > J: Yes, I'd be happy to. I'll dig something up for discussion and > > post it. I'm sure Nina will have written something on this [DO] on the > > list. There's also UP. Then there's an entry in Nyanatiloka's > > Buddhist Dictionary. > ------ > N: See my studies on Visuddhimagga Ch XVII and Tiika. pt. just helped > with the files where these are to be found. > =============== J: Many thanks. I've located these. My thanks to Connie and pt for making this material so readily accessible, as well of course to you for writing it in the first place. > =============== > But it is not a matter of knowing the names of the links, it is not > theory! > =============== J: Good to be reminded. Thanks. Jon #113726 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:55 am Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses jonoabb Hi Alex (113541) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, ... > > It compares the duration of existence, and other aspects as well. > > "So when even in the external earth property so vast inconstancy will be discerned, destructibility will be discerned, a tendency to decay will be discerned, changeability will be discerned, then what in this short-lasting body, sustained by clinging, is 'I' or 'mine' or 'what I am'? It has here only a 'no.'"..." > =============== J: The term 'property' in the passage is a translation of the Pali 'dhatu' ('element'). Ven. Sariputta is here referring to the dhammas that comprise the 5 khandhas. So when it speaks of discerning the earth property it's referring to awareness of/insight into the characteristic of hardness, rather than the conventional objects of hair, nails, teeth, body etc which are given as illustrations of that characteristic. > =============== > Even external earth is impermanent, nothing to say about this body. This can create a lot of nibbida. > =============== J: Well the sutta doesn't quite say that. It says that the person whose discernment of the khandhas is sufficiently well developed is unmoved by contact with rupas however unpleasant the experience may be. > =============== > Please note that the Buddha is not talking about momentariness (radical impermanence or khanikavada). > =============== J: If not about momentariness per se, then about dhammas that are momentary in nature (as I see it). Jon #113727 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Arhatship is possible in this very life! nilovg Dear Alex, Op 25-feb-2011, om 2:00 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > > This is also said in MN85, that one can achieve Awakening within > > > one day if possessing certain qualities. Compared to this, 7 >days > > > to 7 years till Arahatship teaching of satipatthana sutta seems > > > more than reasonable provided you do the hard work. > > ------- > > N: More than the hard work. It depends on the degree of > >understanding that has been accumulated during aeons. > > A: But Practice in accordance with the Dhamma, which you've called > "hard work" does include understanding (one needs to know what one > is doing for that to be proper practice of Dhamma in accordance > with the Dhamma). And even the Comy to that statement does say that > Awakening can occur very quickly *if* one really goes at Dhamma > practice. -------- N: Yes, the *if* is important. What is this practice? Being aware and developing understanding right now of seeing, visible object, thinking, whatever appears at this very moment, and no delay. Otherwise enlightenment can never be attained. Anyway, it distracts to think of enlightenment or arahatship in the future, thinking about when. That is the future, not the present moment. ---- Nina. #113728 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:36 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina nilovg Dear Vince, Op 24-feb-2011, om 6:21 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > well, now I'm reading the movement is defined as a rupa belonging > to the > mind-door. That's quite difficult to manage... It would be nice > reading some > example in a practical way. ------- N: Motion is one of the four great Elements and it can be experienced through the bodydoor as motion or pressure. But when speaking of moving a finger, we are thinking of a story about a finger and think of moving in conventional sense. The ruupa that is motion is not the same as what we mean by motion in conventional sense. The ruupa that is motion always arises together with the other three great elements and at least four more ruupas in one unit. The four great Elements arise with each group of ruupas and are a support for the other ruupas in that group. When you press something that has resilience, such as a cushion, motion or pressure may appear. But it is so momentary, it falls away immediately. when you think of it it has gone already. --------- > > V: If we say citta is so fast that cannot be traced, and also we > say our experience > is "this, then that"... What is "then"?. > In a first view it seems to be conceptual.., Why movement is > defined as rupa?. > How can we fit this in the daily understanding of the experience? ------- N: Citta has then this object, then that object, it arises and falls away so fast, but each citta experiences an object. Then this, then that: then at this moment, then at a next moment... ----- Nina. #113729 From: "philip" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:43 pm Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Ken O, Sarah Jane, and all An interesting anecdote related to the topic of metta. This evening after work I went to the neighbourhood gym I joined several months ago, I really love it, such friendly people, I have a sense of community that I have been lacking in Japan. I was sitting in the sauna thinking about your post, or at least the topic raised by your post, and was thinking again, as I have come to understand recently, that the reason I have not been doing metta meditation recently is that there is more understanding that my nature is not of the sort that the Buddha says metta meditation is for, or perhaps it is in the commentaries, the thing about caritas (temperamants) and which meditation subjects are suitable for each type. It's clear to me that I am not a "hating" type, I don't hold on to grudges, I tend to be friendly and forgiving, it's just my nature. On the other hand I am absolutely thick as the thickest pudding with all kinds of forms of lust, greed, hunger, clinging to pleasures and so on, that is my nature, a friendly and sensually oriented pleasant object seeing/sniffing/gobbling/touching/thinking dog. And not prone to insight. Now, that is maybe too much speculation, but there is a lot of confidence about understanding where the preponderance of my defilements lie. So it seems wise that I have kind of drifted away from doing metta meditation. As I walk to the station, I often think "be well" to the people I pass, there is understanding that all people who were born in the human realm are worthy and are going through a hard time under the realities of ageing, illness and death, and there is a friendly and forgiving attitude to people, as an accumulated tendency. My meditation has to go in a different direction, and is going in that direction, towards asubha and other forms of samattha which i think are probably not proper but involve pleasant sensation through breathing and perception of light, I need to find forms of pleasure for all that greed and lust to feed on safely. And gradually, gradually, keep developing the understanding that will really liberate. So I was thinking about this sort of thing, understanding that the lashing out in anger, the road rage incidents and so on, that led me to be interested in metta meditation before were really, are really, about lobha. My desire to have things certain ways, my attachment to it, that's what leads to brief but quickly passing outbursts of anger when frustrated. That is not hatred of the hating personality though, that is frustration of the lusting personality. So I left the sauna having thought about this, found someone's towel had fallen on the floor and was thoroughly soacked, so I put it back up and had a shower. When I got out of the shower I found that the fallen towel fellow had left the soaking wet one and stolen my towel instead, clearly mine because my locker key was on the same hook. So I stalked out into the locker room and stood there dripping wet, glaring here and there looking for the culprit. There was only one man in sight, an equally naked man, standing there holding a towel. The culprit. I stood there, glaring at him, you towel stealing bastard! But then he walked by me into the shower, he was completely dry just going to the showers after his workout. So it wasn't him. Now there's a man who thinks that foreigner guy was cruising him! Well, a silly story, but to prove the point, the anger I felt wasn't because of a hating nature, it was because my attachment to the wonderful gym and the perfect manners of people was jolted, and that led to anger. I don't think metta meditation is for that kind of sudden jolting of our attachment, I think it's more for people who have a problem with ongoing hatred, a hating nature, but I might be wrong.... Anyways people if anyone steals your towel at the gym, please don't assume it's the first naked person you see holding a towel, it could lead to misunderstanding.... A rambling anecdote for old times sake. The point is that not everyone needs metta meditation, different meditation topics suit different temeraments...I think, but I might go back to metta meditation someday, we'll see. And don't worry, Ken, no one will put me off meditation in the way folks here try to do it, by talking about self involved. Of course self is involved, how could it not be for us at the beginning. On the other hand, I'm not comfortable with the mentality that one's progress as a Buddhist correlates to the length and frequency of one's retreats, that is wrong view. (Not that you have written in that way, or anyone here as far as I know, I'm thinking of a different forum where that comes up a bit too often.) Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Phil > > if you believe in practising metta, please go ahead and do it. You have to do it > regularly and not just do it one day and forget that a few days. If you could > you should do it whenever you remember about it. Use human beings as objects > of metta as you could see them everyday and there are good objects for > triggering mindfullness of metta. > > > > #113730 From: "philip" Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 2:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions for Nina 1: body intimation as "not suitable for comprehension" philofillet Hi NIna Thank you for your reply. I will be back in a few days to ask a follow up question. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip, > I appreciate your interest and questions and these are always welcome. > Op 24-feb-2011, om 5:32 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > > The first question is something from the book on Rupa, on p.69, > > #113731 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Part 2 on Intentional development, simplified ashkenn2k Dear Jon >J: Right, but everyone has cetana and chanda, they are not factors that need to >be developed per se. What needs to be developed are the kusala factors without >which cetana and chanda cannot themselves be kusala. > KO: You need them to read books and listen to dhamma. without them, panna is just undersanding characteristiscs. I forget to say also, you need viriya as well because they are the energy or effort. Without, a purpose, a will and effort, i wonder how one listen. What need to be developed also depends on the dhamma that supports it. Once cannot go read books without chanda likewsie without chanda one cannot do akusala as well And I wonder maybe Buddha is wrong, there should only be seven requisite and not eight to be a Buddha. >> =============== > >J: Again, it's not the intention that makes the difference but the kusala or >akusala factors that the intention arises together with. KO: that is what I said, you just paraphase me, So does what is the intentional behaviour of meditaiton and reading books. why formal meditation is aksual while reading is not akusala? this you have yet answered Ken O #113732 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 4:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] awareness of 4 elements within one's body ashkenn2k Dear Jon >J: There is no argument from me about the role of concepts in all aspects of our > >life, including in the development of the path. > > >And yes, the citta that expereinces a concept can be accompanied by panna. As >you say, this is how the dhamma is heard and reflected on and understood. > >But when it comes to the development of awareness/insight, that is to say, >following upon the hearing of the Dhamma and after it has been reflected on and >understood at an intellectual level, it is dhammas that are to be the object, >not concepts. > >I'd like to go back to an earlier point which I don't think you've expressed a >specific view on yet. I said that in the suttas references to anicca, dukkha and > >anattaa invariably (or almost) appear in the context of dhammas and not of >conventional activities or other concepts. Any comment on this? KO; ohh pse read the comy to distraction of thoughts where comy use temperorance of bowls to understand impermanence or ownerless, You could always search it in the access to sight. > >To my understanding, if the characteristics of anicca, dukkha, anattaa are to be > >known, it must be through an awareness of dhammas, not concepts (conventional >objects). > KO: you have yet tell me where did you get this from, I dont see this in the comy. Since here we talk about comy, so why dont you give me something to think about and not made such claims that panna could only take dhamma as object. I never saw in the comy that panna cannot take concepts and I only heard this here and not in the Abhidhamma texts or comy Ken O #113733 From: Ken O Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 6:04 pm Subject: Re: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. ashkenn2k Dear Phil I fint it interesting talking to you and Rob E and som other people here because you are able to self reflect and constantly reflect on your practise whether it is right or wrong. First let me address this question >And don't worry, Ken, no one will put me off meditation in the way folks here >try to do it, by talking about self involved. Of course self is involved, how >could it not be for us at the beginning. On the other hand, I'm not comfortable >with the mentality that one's progress as a Buddhist correlates to the length >and frequency of one's retreats, that is wrong view. (Not that you have written >in that way, or anyone here as far as I know, I'm thinking of a different forum >where that comes up a bit too often.) KO: Let me address this first, many people think going to retreat is practising meditation or Buddhism. They always forget Buddhism is a daily business. They also did not emphasis that without virture and mindfulness and panna, one's cultivation of meditiation will always not fruitful, In fact many a times, people get fustrated how come they are not producing results. Meditation which are done wrongly are clinging to rites and rituals. Also there is another type of meditation getting popularity, Vipassana meditation. IMHO, many do not know what is it and believeing that practising those written in the satipatthana, one practise vipassana meditation. Vipassana in my personal views that I understand from the text, is after one attain jhanas, one use jhanas as basis of insight. Vipassana mediation starts at feelings onwards. the second point I like to discuss and wish you are open minded on this "self is involved". What the DSGer said are very true about nama and rupa, we are just namas and rupas and there is no self that is involved. To think there is self that is involved, that is because of our three cetasikas, ditthi, lobha and mana. A meditation action is a long series of cittas, just like reading a book or writing an email or going up a bus. There is no self that meditates, it is ditthi that thinks that is a self that meditates, > >An interesting anecdote related to the topic of metta. This evening after work I > >went to the neighbourhood gym I joined several months ago, I really love it, >such friendly people, I have a sense of community that I have been lacking in >Japan. I was sitting in the sauna thinking about your post, or at least the >topic raised by your post, and was thinking again, as I have come to understand >recently, that the reason I have not been doing metta meditation recently is >that there is more understanding that my nature is not of the sort that the >Buddha says metta meditation is for, or perhaps it is in the commentaries, the >thing about caritas (temperamants) and which meditation subjects are suitable >for each type. It's clear to me that I am not a "hating" type, I don't hold on >to grudges, I tend to be friendly and forgiving, it's just my nature. On the >other hand I am absolutely thick as the thickest pudding with all kinds of forms > >of lust, greed, hunger, clinging to pleasures and so on, that is my nature, a >friendly and sensually oriented pleasant object >seeing/sniffing/gobbling/touching/thinking dog. And not prone to insight. Now, >that is maybe too much speculation, but there is a lot of confidence about >understanding where the preponderance of my defilements lie. So it seems wise >that I have kind of drifted away from doing metta meditation. As I walk to the >station, I often think "be well" to the people I pass, there is understanding >that all people who were born in the human realm are worthy and are going >through a hard time under the realities of ageing, illness and death, and there >is a friendly and forgiving attitude to people, as an accumulated tendency. My >meditation has to go in a different direction, and is going in that direction, >towards asubha and other forms of samattha which i think are probably not proper > >but involve pleasant sensation through breathing and perception of light, I need > >to find forms of pleasure for all that greed and lust to feed on safely. And >gradually, gradually, keep developing the understanding that will really >liberate. KO: You are right to say one should practise that suits one temperament. Then there could be different temperaments like some could have hating and greed temperaments together so it is not just one temperament. Visud did said that the teachers of old did not said much on this. You could find this in Visud. if you want to eradicate greed, the you should comtemplate constantly and not just sitting down doing meditation, on the subject of foulness for beings and impermanence or ownerless for non living things. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wheel021.html Breathing meditation is to quell restlesness or distraction. Perception of light is used against laziness. So you must use the correct practise and not use whatever that is convenience. Wisdom is developed through repetitions and repetitions. Or you could think of the drawback of craving and lust, lust condition becoming (kamma of the next world), which lead to birth, ageing, illneess, death, etc... these drawbacks could be visible in our daily life. If you dispeller of delusion, one could see the drawback writtening clearly in the text on birth, etc. >So I was thinking about this sort of thing, understanding that the lashing out >in anger, the road rage incidents and so on, that led me to be interested in >metta meditation before were really, are really, about lobha. My desire to have >things certain ways, my attachment to it, that's what leads to brief but quickly > >passing outbursts of anger when frustrated. That is not hatred of the hating >personality though, that is frustration of the lusting personality. So I left >the sauna having thought about this, found someone's towel had fallen on the >floor and was thoroughly soacked, so I put it back up and had a shower. When I >got out of the shower I found that the fallen towel fellow had left the soaking >wet one and stolen my towel instead, clearly mine because my locker key was on >the same hook. So I stalked out into the locker room and stood there dripping >wet, glaring here and there looking for the culprit. There was only one man in >sight, an equally naked man, standing there holding a towel. The culprit. I >stood there, glaring at him, you towel stealing bastard! But then he walked by >me into the shower, he was completely dry just going to the showers after his >workout. So it wasn't him. Now there's a man who thinks that foreigner guy was >cruising him! Well, a silly story, but to prove the point, the anger I felt >wasn't because of a hating nature, it was because my attachment to the wonderful > >gym and the perfect manners of people was jolted, and that led to anger. I don't > >think metta meditation is for that kind of sudden jolting of our attachment, I >think it's more for people who have a problem with ongoing hatred, a hating >nature, but I might be wrong.... > >Anyways people if anyone steals your towel at the gym, please don't assume it's >the first naked person you see holding a towel, it could lead to >misunderstanding.... > >A rambling anecdote for old times sake. The point is that not everyone needs >metta meditation, different meditation topics suit different temeraments...I >think, but I might go back to metta meditation someday, we'll see. KO: Lobha and dosa are two different distinct dhammas. lobha can condition lobha that is explain in one sutta talking about D.O.. At that moment you are angry, that is already dosa arisen, at the moment you think of the attachment to the wondeful gym, that is lobha and that lobha can condition anager which is another dhamma altogether. So metta is use for eradicating of ill will and asubha is for eradication attachment to lovely objects. We have to use the appropriate method to rectify our defilements. Ken O #113734 From: A T Date: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:15 pm Subject: Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >J: The term 'property' in the passage is a translation of the Pali >'dhatu' >('element'). Ven. Sariputta is here referring to the dhammas that comprise >the 5 khandhas. > > So when it speaks of discerning the earth property it's referring to >awareness of/insight into the characteristic of hardness, rather than >the >conventional objects of hair, nails, teeth, body etc which are >given as >illustrations of that characteristic. But the sutta clearly includes: "head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, contents of the stomach, feces, or whatever else internal, within oneself, is hard, solid, & sustained: This is called the internal earth property(ajjhattikā paṭhavīdhātu)." While I agree that "head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth," etc, have certain degree of hardness/softness, etc - they are also valid objects of contemplation. Furthermore, if we limit definition of paṭhavīdhātu only to "hardness/softness, heaviness/lightness, etc" then it will run into difficulty with: How can there be internal vs external(ajjhattikā siyā bāhirā) paṭhavīdhātu? Hardness, etc, is felt only internally! Moreover, internal earth element is also defined as: "head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, contents of the stomach, feces, or whatever else internal, within oneself, is hard, solid, & sustained: ". Why did Ven. Sariputta include those conventional objects? Because they are useful for the goal, elimination of ALL craving and underlying ignorance. With metta, Alex #113735 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:33 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" > KH: When a satipatthana-citta experiences a dhamma it knows there is no self contained in that dhamma, nor anything pertaining to a self. BTW, that is the definition of anatta that you've recited there, and it is thoroughly "negate-ive." As you say, satipatthana knows that there is NO SELF contained in that dhamma, NOR ANYTHING pertaining to a self. And that is anatta plain and simple. There is no additional characteristic that is to be known as "anatta" other than what you yourself have said above. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113736 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 5:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Phil), --- On Tue, 22/2/11, Robert E wrote: >I appreciate this clarification, and just note in reviewing it again, that sati + sampajanna ---> vipassana. Would that be correct, that when mindfulness and right understanding arise together it leads to direct insight? ... S: Yes, exactly. Strictly speaking, vipassana refers to moments of insight, as in the stages of insight, although we can speak broadly about the development of satipatthana as vipassana, in the sense of leading to vipassana. In the context of the Satipatthana Sutta, sati and sampajanna refer to the awareness and understanding of realities (dhammas), i.e. satipatthana. Sati and sampajanna are also developed in samatha bhavana, but in this case, they have different objects - concepts. So, for example, there can be wise reflection on the Dhamma with sati and sampajanna and this is samatha bhavana. In order to be the sati and sampajanna of satipatthana, the object has to be a nama or a rupa - one of the 4 foundations of mindfulness - rupas, cittas or cetasikas. ... >> S: So gradually, panna (right understanding) can know the difference between awareness of what is experienced vs attachment which would like it another way or which clings to it. R:>Thanks for this point as well. That must be a relief if and when it happens, to stop craving for a moment and see what is actually present. ... S: Yes.... that is a moment of true detachment and calm without any "trying". Btw, another opportunity to raise any qus for KS for when we're in Thailand next week. We always appreciate your points then. Phil will also be with us which is very exciting. If I misrepresent your points, he may be able to help correct me:-)) Metta Sarah ======= #113737 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the commentaries. sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Tue, 22/2/11, Robert E wrote: > IB Horner (past president of the Pali text Society) writes ""The > prime object of every Commentary is to make the meanings of the > words and phrases in the canonical passages it is elucidating > abundantly clear, definite, definitive even....<...> R:>Thank you, that is an impressive statement. How were the commentaries originally created, collected and codified? Was it during the early councils or sometime later? I am interested in how they were certified and attached to the canon. .... S: In "Useful Posts", see lots more under "Commentaries", "Councils", "Buddhavacana", "Vinaya commentary" and "Abhidhamma - origins". Lots and lots of material. It's likely to also include the above text which Rob copied from an old post of mine:-)) Metta Sarah ====== #113738 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- On Tue, 22/2/11, Vince wrote: > S: let's see if this quotes from B.Bodhis's Guide to CMA, Ch IX, #38 helps: > "A stream-enterer is one who has entered the stream that leads irreversibly > to Nibbaana, that is, the Noble Eightfold Path. A stream-enterer has cut off > the coarsest three fetters [...] His conduct is market by scrupulous > observance of the Five Precepts: abstinence from taking life, stealing, > sexual misconduct, false speech, and use of intoxicants." V:>but these are commentaries of commentators, not sources. ... S: Hmmm...You might not even accept the commentaries or Abhidhamma :-) Surely we find that as understanding grows, so does our confidence in the value of all kinds of kusala and that we're less and less likely to harm others knowingly in these ways. Let me try again, sticking to suttas: SN 55:1 Sotaapattisa.myutta, (Bodhi transl) "... 'Although, bhikkhus, a noble disciple maintains himself by lumps of almsfood and wears rag-robes, still, as he possesses four things, he is freed from hell, the animal realm, and the domain of ghosts, freed from the plane of misery, the bad destinations, the nether world. 'What are the four? Here, bhikkhus, the noble disciple possesses confirmed confidence in the Buddha......confirmed confidence int he Dhamma....confirmed confidence in the Sa'ngha..... 'He possesses the virtues dear to the noble ones - unbroken, untorn, unblemished, unmottled, freeing, praised by the wise, ungrasped, leading to concentration. [BB's note: "The terms describing the noble one's virtue are explicated at Vism 221-22(Ppn 7:101-6). Spk{S:the commentary to the sutta} says that noble ones do not violate (na kopenti) the Five Precepts even when they pass on to a new existence; hence these virtues are dear to them.]...' " ... V:>They build a direct relation between the eradication of these three fetters and a full observance of precepts. It doesn't sound logical while there is presence of the rest of non-eradicated fetters and also attachment. Neither these commentators give sources justifying this relation. ... S: I think it's very logical that the more the defilements are worn away and when the grossest defilements are eradicated, that one's sila becomes more and more purified. To think otherwise suggests doubt in the value of the Teachings. .... V:>On the contrary, one can read: "At the moment of attaining sight, one abandons three things: identity-views, uncertainty, & any attachment to precepts & practices. One is completely released from the four states of deprivation, and incapable of committing the six great wrongs." This is from Sutta Nipata. Snp 2.1. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.2.01.than.html >"Incapable of committing six great wrongs" is not "incapable of breaking precepts". >Maybe there are other sources, I don't know. It would be really useful. .... S: The Sangiiti Sutta, DN 33, (Walsh transl) may satisfy you, similar to the SN one I quoted above: "(14) 'Four characteristics of a Stream-Winner: Here the Ariyan disciple is possessed of unwavering confidence in the Buddha.....Dhamma....Sangha....And (d) he is possessed of morality dear to the Noble Ones, unbroken, without defect, unspotted, without inconsistency, liberating, praised by the wise, uncorrupted, and conducive to concentration...." ... <...> V:>In example, Why a real need to lie in such environment? >But think in a lay sotapanna who is in London or Bagdad; he/she would >observe how precepts are observed but sometimes they should be broken in >order to avoid greater errors and dukkha to third people and herself. ... S: Simply, a sotapanna would not think like that. They would not even consider or be tempted to lie, kill, steal, be involved in sexual misconduct or take intoxicants for pleasure. We don't know what will happen in a conventional sense, but a sotapanna has complete confidence in the value of right understanding and the path. What is experienced through the senses for those in London, Baghdad or anywhere else will depend on kamma, including when it is time to die. ... V:>Beyond that, Don't you see the clear contradiction between Snp 2.1. and those commentaries? ... S: Sometimes in the suttas, some examples only are given. They don't spell out all the details. For this we need to read the commentaries or other texts, such as the Abhidhamma. Hope this helps. Metta Sarah ===== #113739 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Thu, 24/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >A:""Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: discontent >with regard to skillful qualities[1] and unrelenting exertion. >Relentlessly I exerted myself, ..." > .... >S: So, if at this moment, we feel a lot of discontent with our >skillful qualities and try hard now to have more skillful qualities, >is that kusala, is that skillful? Who would such striving be for? >Would there be any metta, any dana or any bhavana involved? .. A:>Sarah, are you saying that Buddha taught us to do unskillful things? ... S: I'm saying the opposite - that the Buddha only taught what is skillful. If, now, we feel "discontent with our skillful qualities...", is that the teaching of right understanding and all that is kusala (wholesome)? Is there any discontent with the present reality now? If so, it indicates a lack of detachment and equanimity, surely? ... >Striving is impersonal and fully consistent with anatta principle. ... S: Yes, any dhammas are "impersonal and fully consistent with anatta principle:, even wrong view or wrong effort. ... > =================================================================== >A:"As â€" with his teeth clenched and his tongue pressed against the >roof of his mouth â€" he is beating down, constraining, and crushing >his mind with his awareness, those evil, unskillful thoughts are >abandoned and subside. With their abandoning, he steadies his mind >right within, settles it, unifies it, and concentrates it." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.020.than.html > ==================================================================== > ... > S: Again, now if you clench your teeth and press your tongue >against the roof of your mouth, trying to "crush" your mind with >awareness, is that kusala, is that skillfull? Really? Again, is >there any understanding, any metta, any dana involved? Or is there >attachment? > .... A:>Again, did Buddha told us to do unskillful things? ... S: Just my point! If we follow what we read as being prescriptions to count breaths or clench our teeth, we are not following the Buddha's teachings at all. We are merely engaged in silabbattaparamasa in the hopeless desire for some elusive result or attainment. The result will just be disturbance and agitation when that elusive result isn't achieved. Metta Sarah ======== #113740 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Fri, 25/2/11, Ken O wrote: >>S:As for the texts and the commentaries, we need to read carefully. If you read the comy and tika to the Satipatthana Sutta, for example, you'll see that the dhammas referred to as objects of satipatthana are: 1) the rupas of the body ("there can be nothing apart from the qualities of primary and derived materiality, in a body"), 2) feelings, i.e. vedana, 3) consciousness, i.e. cittas, beginning with citta rooted in lobha, 4) all dhammas in different classifications, beginning with akusala dhammas, then the khandhas, the ayatanas and so on. > >KO: Nope the commentaries are very clear that before one reach feelings etc, they are all concepts. We cannot said this is pre-satipatthana because Buddha never said that or his great disciple ever said, not even the comy or Visud said that. It is clear from the comy and Visud, satipatthana starts from concepts, .... S: It is clear to you, it is not clear to others of us. Ken, let's just accept that we read the texts and commentaries with a different understanding these days. I can quote and quote, but there's no point in it as you read those quotes according to your interpretation, the one you believe is correct. Later you go on to ask where it says in the Abhidhamma "that panna can only arise with nama and rupa as an object". Again and again we all make clear to you that no one has said this. I asked you to find a single quote from over 113K messages to suggest this and you didn't find a single one:-))The same applies to some other comments mis-paraphrasing what Jon, Ken H or I have said. I really wonder if you read our comments carefully or just react:-)) You also ask "what make your reading and meditation so different. Isn't that all are attempts by dhamma?" Simply, there are only ever dhammas arising and falling away now. It's useless to think in terms of conventional activities with regard to the path. If there is right understanding of dhammas now, that is the path. If there is wrong understanding or an attempt to change what has been conditioned already, that is the wrong path. It doesn't matter when such right or wrong understanding occur - it's the citta now that counts, not the conventional activity. Metta Sarah ====== #113741 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses sarahprocter... Dear Ken O & Rob E, --- On Fri, 25/2/11, Ken O wrote: > KO: without chanda, one cannot be a Buddha. It is one of the 8 requisties to be a Buddha :-). ... S: Without a lot of kusala chanda accompanying right understanding of the path. Most of the chanda arising in the day (including most of the chanda we take for being kusala chanda) is in fact akusala chanda. What about now? Kusala or akusala chanda (interest)? Only right understanding can know. Metta Sarah ===== #113742 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Sun, 20/2/11, Ken O wrote: >there are jhanas that are mundane right concentration and supradmundane. So it depends, the stock formulae are at times mundane right concentration. >so we cannot asssume it is supradmundane jhanas until we look at the commentary. At times the commentary is refering to mundane right concentration and at times supradmundane. So not all jhanas in the sutta are supradmundane ... S: Agreed! Phew!! Metta Sarah ======= #113743 From: sarah abbott Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:24 am Subject: Re: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Sun, 27/2/11, Ken O wrote: >Vipassana in my personal views that I understand from the text, is after one attain jhanas, one use jhanas as basis of insight. Vipassana mediation starts at feelings onwards. ... S: Which text is this? Metta Sarah ====== #113744 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:48 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. robmoult Hi Phil, Thanks for asking about me and my family. My two sons are safely installed at University (Medicine, 3rd year @ Manchester and Architecture, 1st year @ Sydney). My wife is spending a lot of time on vipassana meditation retreats. I am traveling constantly but still make it back to Malaysia to teach Abhidhamma on Sundays. To all my DSG friends... If there is a specific post / thread to which you feel that I could contribute, please drop me a quick note off-line ( rob.moult@... ) to give me a heads up. Previously, I had enough time to monitor DSG activity, but these days I need to be a bit more selective. Metta, Rob M :-) #113745 From: "sarah" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Techno-dhamma discussion - meditation sarahprocter... Hi Alex, last one for now....! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > A:>Suppressing the 5 hindrances to allow wisdom to cut off >defilements while they are weak. > > .... > > S: What are the cittas at moments of "suppressing the 5 hindrances" >- kusala or akusala? > > Kusala ... S: Yes, exactly. In other words, when kusala arises, there are no hindrances arising. At moments of trying to suppress the hindrances, this is not the kusala moment. ... > S:>For example, now it there is a moment of wise reflection on Dhamma, >are the hindrances suppressed at such a moment? > A:> While technically speaking the precise moment of wise reflection is skillful and hindrances are suppressed, the question remains as to "for how long and how strongly the hindrances are suppressed". ... S: why are we so concerned about "for how long"? Is that concern now kusala or akusala? Can any kind of citta last for more than a split-instant? Didn't the Buddha teach us that all kinds of conditioned dhamma are dukkha because they are impermanent and not worth clinging to? ... > A:> As it often happens to the untrained mind is that while there may be wholesome moments, they are few and are drowned by kilesas that occur much more. ... S: Yes and the trainee, the sekkha, is the sotapanna, surely? ... > A:> Continuity of wholesome states is important. 1 second of kusala is different from hours of such moments uninterrupted by akusala cittas. ... S: Impossible! Being so concerned about having such kusala is not going to lead to more kusala of any kind - just desire to have more kusala, surely? ... > > >S:What about at moments of *attempting* to suppress the hindrances, >attempting to reflect on Dhamma, attempting to have wisdom arise? >Are those moments also kusala? > A:> Attempting to do good is better than complancency and allowing the bad qualities to overwhelm the mind. ... S: But certainly not better than present understanding with detachment towards 'what is' at this very moment. ... > > > S: It's still an idea of doing something by a Self, isn't it? > A:> Then lie on the bed and don't even move a finger. ... S: Did the Buddha and ariyans ever do this when atta-ditthi had been eradicated? Such a suggestion indicates a lack of understanding of what is being discussed. ... > A:> Actions are going to occur, so if they will occur, they better be kusala. Intention will still occur, so it is much better to take the Buddha's word and strive to develop more kusala. ... S: Actions are stories about dhammas at best. They are not dhammas, so they cannot be kusala. ... > >A:>ANything, or almost anything can be done with an idea of a self. >Even eating food or drinking water can be done with a wrong idea of >a Self. > > ... > > S: Can be, but usually isn't. For example, for the person who has >never heard of the Dhamma, there are just thoughts about the food, >drink and other topics, but no thoughts about there being a Self >eating or drinking. > A:> Some people don't think about theory of self, but that doesn't make them wise. Right view does. ... S: No, it doesn't make them wise and it doesn't make them have wrong ideas of atta arising. ... > A:> The more attachment there is when trying to meditate, the harder it will be, and less successful. One needs to stop doing while being aware of presently arisen realities. In sitting meditation it is much easier than when doing worldly chores (such as washing dishes). ... S: All an idea of doing something special in order for kusala to arise. ... > > S: Only right view eradicates wrong view. > A:> Right. And right view sees the danger of akusala and necessity of striving for getting rid of akusala and of all kilesas that cause only dukkha. ... S: Right view understands that right striving, right effort arises with it at such moments without any Self having to do anything special. ... > > S: It all depends on the citta at any given moment. When you say >"actions do occur", what do you mean? > A:> That they are fully conditioned cause-effect conditionality. ... S: What are these actions that are fully conditioned? ... > >S:Does bhavana (mental development or meditation if you prefer) >refer >to cittas and cetasikas or does it refer to activities such >as sitting on a cushion, counting breaths, being in a forest and so >on? > A:> Cittas and cetasikas. But position of the body can also be an expression of state of citta/cetasikas. ... S: Yes, cittas and cetasikas. There is no "postion of the body" - this is a concept. The only dhammas that are conditioned are cittas, cetasikas and rupas. I'll leave the traffic lights as we've been over that one so many times:-)) .... Metta Sarah p.s you might like to break this one up when you reply as it's getting rather long... ======== #113746 From: "philip" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:16 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Rob M Wow, great to hear from you and glad to hear things are going well for everyone! Please let me know if we can meet in Tokyo again sometime. I think conditions are a bit better for me to learn about Abhidhamma than the last time we met.... :) Metta, Phil p.s The other day I remembered the wonderful letters you wrote to your friend who lost her husband, it was some of the wisest advice to help the grieving that we could hope to see, I think. I hope she is on the road to recovery... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi Phil, > > Thanks for asking about me and my family. My two sons are safely installed at University (Medicine, 3rd year @ Manchester and Architecture, 1st year @ Sydney). #113747 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 10:28 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. robmoult Hi Phil, I will be in Tokyo from Mar 7-10, but I heard that you will be in Bkk at that time. I will keep you informed off-line of my next trip. I have not chatted with my friend's widow for some time, but last time we talked, it sounded as though she was on the road to recovery. Metta, Rob M:-) #113748 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 10:41 am Subject: Inner Peace robmoult Hi All, I recently wrote the following and sent it to three Western friends (each about 50 years old) who had not been exposed to Buddhism: ===== Inner peace does not come from transient things such as wealth or fame. Inner peace comes from a purified mind. There are three kinds of mental states: 1. Mental states that are unwholesome, unbeneficial and unskillful; these kinds of thoughts create bad habits that lead one away from having a purified mind. 2. Mental states that are wholesome, beneficial and skillful; these kinds of thoughts create good habits that lead one to having a purified mind. 3. Mental states that are neutral; these kinds of mental states are functional. For example, mental states that are part of the process of seeing or hearing are neutral; it is what the mind does with the sight or sound that leads one closer to or further from a purified mind. There are three categories of unwholesome mental states: 1. Mental states with a root or foundation in greed, attachment, craving and clinging 2. Mental states with a root or foundation in hatred, aversion, fear and guilt 3. Mental states with a root or foundation in delusion, ignorance and mental blindness The mental states that are wholesome have the opposite roots; roots of generosity, loving-kindness and self-awareness. Mental states are constantly changing; they arise naturally triggered by two things: 1. Whatever the mind is thinking about at that moment (the object of thought) 2. Habits, tendencies or accumulations that constantly work in the background A mind with bad habits naturally inclines toward more mental states that are unwholesome. Similarly, a mind with good habits naturally inclines toward more mental states that are wholesome. In this way, habits are naturally self-perpetuating habits constantly reinforce themselves. How does one break this natural cycle to nurture more good habits and diminish bad habits? Here are three strategies to train the mind: 1. Make a conscious effort to be generous. Giving money to charity is easy (but still a good thing to do). Volunteering your time for a worthy cause is more impactful in terms of developing new good habits. Do it on a regular basis for constant reinforcement. 2. Reserve ten minutes, once a day, to send thoughts of loving-kindness to people you know (start with yourself, move to individuals and then think about groups of people). Doing this regularly, ideally at the same time each day, is the key. 3. Regularly practice self-awareness or mindfulness. Observe the mind carefully to see how one thought triggers another. If whatever you are thinking about triggers unwholesome mental states, then focus on something neutral such as being mindful of your breathing. Watching how your breath flows in and out gives the mind a new object to think about, thereby stopping the mind from spinning out of control with unwholesome mental states. ===== The reactions of the three people was most interesting. One person said what I had written was very valuable, that they were placing it on their desktop so they could refer to it often. One person said that they were not looking for inner peace but rather how to maximize how they spend their lives. One person said that they strongly disagreed because, "It's as though someone who is looking for inner peace is lacking it due to something that they have done wrong." Metta, Rob M :-) #113749 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace nilovg Dear Rob M, great to hear from you. Do you still have a dhamma room where you had Dhamma discussions and where also monks attended? Once you sent a photo and it looked very nice. Op 27-feb-2011, om 11:41 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > The reactions of the three people was most interesting. One person > said what I had written was very valuable, that they were placing > it on their desktop so they could refer to it often. One person > said that they were not looking for inner peace but rather how to > maximize how they spend their lives. One person said that they > strongly disagreed because, "It's as though someone who is looking > for inner peace is lacking it due to something that they have done > wrong." -------- N: So interesting, it shows the different accumulations of different people. How varied (vicitta) citta is. Nina. #113750 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses nilovg Dear Alex, Op 26-feb-2011, om 23:15 heeft A T het volgende geschreven: > While I agree that "head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth," etc, > have certain degree of hardness/softness, etc - they are also valid > objects of contemplation. ------- I see them as a reminder to be mindful, not forgetful of all the objects we meet in daily life. They are headhairs, but all these body parts are only, only ruupas. They do not belong to us. -------- > > A: Furthermore, if we limit definition of paṭhavīdhātu only to > "hardness/softness, heaviness/lightness, etc" then it will run into > difficulty with: > > How can there be internal vs external(ajjhattikā siyā bāhirā) > paṭhavīdhātu? Hardness, etc, is felt only internally! ------ N: External: not belonging to the body. The hardness of a rock is not different from hardness of the body: just the element of hardness, a ruupa. We find the body so important and this teaches us a lesson. -------- > > A: Moreover, internal earth element is also defined as: "head > hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone > marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, pleura, spleen, lungs, large > intestines, small intestines, contents of the stomach, feces, or > whatever else internal, within oneself, is hard, solid, & > sustained: ". > > Why did Ven. Sariputta include those conventional objects? Because > they are useful for the goal, elimination of ALL craving and > underlying ignorance. ------- N: Internal: belonging to the body. Conditioned by: kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. External: conditioned only by temperature. Mentioning the body parts is useful since we perceive them all day long in our life, but we tend to forget that they are only elements, devoid of self. ------ Nina. #113751 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 2:53 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, > >A:""Monks, I have known two qualities through experience: >discontent >with regard to skillful qualities[1] and unrelenting >exertion. >Relentlessly I exerted myself, ..." > > .... > >S: So, if at this moment, we feel a lot of discontent with our >skillful qualities and try hard now to have more skillful qualities, >is that kusala, is that skillful? Who would such striving be for? >Would there be any metta, any dana or any bhavana involved? > .. > A:>Sarah, are you saying that Buddha taught us to do unskillful >things? > ... > S: I'm saying the opposite - that the Buddha only taught what is >skillful. If, now, we feel "discontent with our skillful >qualities...", is that the teaching of right understanding and all >that is kusala (wholesome)? Yes that teaching is about right understanding that the mind of untrained worldling has lots of akusala qualities, which leads to more dukkha. So with right effort and wisdom, should be used to eliminate, reduce or replace akusala and set the cause for more kusala to appear. > A:>Again, did Buddha told us to do unskillful things? > ... > S: Just my point! If we follow what we read as being prescriptions >to count breaths or clench our teeth, we are not following the >Buddha's teachings at all. We are merely engaged in >silabbattaparamasa in the hopeless desire for some elusive result or >attainment. The result will just be disturbance and agitation when >that elusive result isn't achieved. The Buddha was clear in MN118 and many others suttas. >S: At moments of trying to suppress the hindrances, this is not the >kusala moment. It is kusala because to removes or suppresses akusala. Whatever removes, replaces, or, at least, suppresses akusala - is kusala. >S: why are we so concerned about "for how long"? Is that concern now >kusala or akusala? Kusala. >S: Can any kind of citta last for more than a split-instant? Probably not. But there can be a series of similar (kusala or akusala) cittas. And that series of similar cittas is more powerful than one kusala citta among many akusala cittas. >S: Didn't the Buddha teach us that all kinds of conditioned dhamma >are dukkha because they are impermanent and not worth clinging to? Right. But check the timescales: The body is impermanent, but it is said to last as much as "a hundred years or more. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html Loka of "neither perception nor non-perception" is impermanent, but it lasts 84,000 MK! There is very big difference between anicca, and khanika. Buddha taught Anicca. With metta, Alex #113752 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 3:10 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... nilovg Dear Alex, just butting in, I found the subjects you raised worth while and interesting. Op 27-feb-2011, om 15:53 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > The body is impermanent, but it is said to last as much as > "a hundred years or more. " ---------- I know that text. In conventional sense this is said, and this is no problem. But what we take for our body are only ruupas that do not last even a moment. ------- > Loka of "neither perception nor non-perception" is impermanent, but > it lasts 84,000 MK! ------- N: Again, no problem. The cittas that have this meditation subject while abiding in that plane are momentary. They arise and fall away each moment. ------- > > A:There is very big difference between anicca, and khanika. > Buddha taught Anicca. ------ N: He taught the impermanence of each moment of citta, cetasika and ruupa. Momentary impermanence. Thre arising and falling away of citta, cetasika and ruupa. But this can only be realised and truly understood when pa~n~naa knows what naama is and what ruupa is, when it knows their characteristics when they appear one at a time. Not before that. ------ Nina. #113753 From: "robmoult" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 8:11 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace robmoult Hi Nina, Five years ago, each month, my wife would organize a dhamma talk (usually by a visiting monk, sometimes by a lay dhamma speaker) in our house. Fifteen to thirty friends would attend; we provided the meditation cushions so that people could sit comfortably on the floor and people brought snacks for all to share after the dhamma talk was over. We did this for a couple of years... it was wonderful fellowship. My travel schedule intensified and I was more frequently unable to make it home for the weekday evening when we held the event. As our sons got older, my wife felt more comfortable leaving them for longer periods and she started going to more retreats. We still do this, but now it is two or three times per year rather than according to a fixed monthly schedule. Nina, thank you so much for reminding me of those happy get-togethers. When my wife returns from her three-week retreat on Saturday, I will talk to her saying, "Let's organize one of those dhamma talks in our house soon..." Metta, Rob M :-) PS: FYI - this Sunday, I will be handing out 40 copies of your "Abhidhamma in Daily Life" in my Abdhidhamma class. Sabba Danam Dhamma Danam Jinati. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob M, > great to hear from you. Do you still have a dhamma room where you had > Dhamma discussions and where also monks attended? Once you sent a > photo and it looked very nice. > Op 27-feb-2011, om 11:41 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > > > The reactions of the three people was most interesting. One person > > said what I had written was very valuable, that they were placing > > it on their desktop so they could refer to it often. One person > > said that they were not looking for inner peace but rather how to > > maximize how they spend their lives. One person said that they > > strongly disagreed because, "It's as though someone who is looking > > for inner peace is lacking it due to something that they have done > > wrong." > -------- > N: So interesting, it shows the different accumulations of different > people. How varied (vicitta) citta is. > Nina. > > > > > #113754 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 9:34 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... truth_aerator Dear Nina, Sarah, all, > ------- >А: Loka of "neither perception nor non-perception" is impermanent, >but it lasts 84,000 MK! > ------- >N: Again, no problem. The cittas that have this meditation subject >while abiding in that plane are momentary. They arise and fall >away each moment. But there is long succession of similar momentary cittas that last for 84,000 MK. There is series of aruppa cittas. Similar is with meditation and its strength. One kusala citta among 1000000 akusala cittas is one thing. A long series of them kusala cittas, lasting lets say 1-2 hours of similar kusala cittas is much more powerful and has a more lasting effect. It is experientially seen that after a good long meditation (of a long series of kusala cittas), the mind is more receptive and inclined to understanding & relinquishment than after 1 moment of kusala citta. > > A:There is very big difference between anicca, and khanika. > > Buddha taught Anicca. > ------ > N: He taught the impermanence of each moment of citta, cetasika >and > ruupa. Momentary impermanence. Thre arising and falling away of > citta, cetasika and ruupa. But this can only be realised and truly > understood when pa~n~naa knows what naama is and what ruupa is, >when > it knows their characteristics when they appear one at a time. Not > before that. > ------ > Nina. You see to describe khanika rather than anicca. With metta, Alex #113755 From: Vince Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:19 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: Hmmm...You might not even accept the commentaries or Abhidhamma :-) Surely > we find that as understanding grows, so does our confidence in the value of > all kinds of kusala and that we're less and less likely to harm others > knowingly in these ways. of course, although confidence and attachment are different matters. Falling in wrong actions or thoughts it doesn't have to do directly with the confidence in the teaching. > SN 55:1 Sotaapattisa.myutta, (Bodhi transl) > "... > 'He possesses the virtues dear to the noble ones - unbroken, untorn, > unblemished, unmottled, freeing, praised by the wise, ungrasped, leading to > concentration. [BB's note: "The terms describing the noble one's virtue are > explicated at Vism 221-22(Ppn 7:101-6). Spk{S:the commentary to the sutta} > says that noble ones do not violate (na kopenti) the Five Precepts even when > they pass on to a new existence; hence these virtues are dear to them.]...' " maybe you should check again if what you cites belongs directly to sotapannas. I fear this is not a comment on stream-winners. Why don't look directly in the direct references to sotapannas? In example this conversation between Mahanama the Sakyan and the Buddha. Mahanama was a sotapanna and he was asking about an abiding to depend on: "Then the Sakya Mahanama approached the Blessed One, worshipped, sat on a side, and said: "I remember the Blessed One teaching some time ago that greed is a minor defilement of the mind, anger is a minor defilement of the mind, and delusion is a minor defilement of the mind. Venerable sir, I know this teaching well that greed, anger, and delusion are minor defilements of the mind, yet on some days greed takes hold of my mind and persists, anger takes hold of my mind and persists and delusion takes hold of my mind and persists. Then it occurs to me: `Why are these things not dispelled from me internally, that on a day greed takes hold of me and persists, anger too takes hold of me and persists, and delusion too takes hold of me and persist?'" ** Majjhima Nikaya I, 2. 4. Caladukkhakkhandhasutta. episode of this sotapanna is commented by Buddhaghosa. See "Path of Purification" (Nanamoli tr, p.242,-see also note 111). This is not the only place in where Buddhaghosa speaks on stream-winners and the difference between attaining the fruition and to be established in fruition. Different things! > S: The Sangiiti Sutta, DN 33, (Walsh transl) may satisfy you, similar to the > SN one I quoted above: > "(14) 'Four characteristics of a Stream-Winner: Here the Ariyan disciple is > possessed of unwavering confidence in the Buddha.....Dhamma....Sangha....And > (d) he is possessed of morality dear to the Noble Ones, unbroken, without > defect, unspotted, without inconsistency, liberating, praised by the wise, > uncorrupted, and conducive to concentration...." so I fear maybe you have read quickly the text, and with these cuts perhaps you have misread what is attributed to Buddha instead to the stream-winner. This is what appears without cuts inside Welsh book: "(14) Four characteristics of a Stream-Winner: Here the Ariyan disciple is possessed of unwavering confidence in the Buddha, thus: "THIS BLESSED LORD IS an Arahant, a fully-enlightened Buyddha, endowed with wisdom and conduct, the Well-Farer, Knower of the worlds, incomparable Trainer of men to be tamed, Teachers of gods and humans, enlightened and blessed". (b) He is possesed of unwavering confidence in the Dhamma, thus: "Well-proclaimed by the Lord is the Dhamma, visible here and now, timeless, inviting inspection, leading onward, to be comprehended by the wise each one for himself" (c) He is possessed of unwavering confidence in the Sangha, thus: "Well-directed is the Sangha of the Lord's disciples, of upright conduct, on the right path, on the perfect path; that is to say the four pairs of persons, the eight kinds of men. The Sangha of the Lord's disciples is worthy of offerings, worthy of hospitality, worthy of gifts, worthy of veneration, and unsurpassed field of merit in the world". And (d)He is possessed of morality dear to the Noble Ones, unbroken, without defect, unspotted, without inconsistency, liberating, praised by the wise, uncorrupted, and conducive to concentration" the a,b,c,d are attributes for the Buddha, not for the stream-winner. thanks for the interchange :) best, Vince. #113756 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:30 pm Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Ken H. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" > > > KH: When a satipatthana-citta experiences a dhamma it knows there is no self contained in that dhamma, nor anything pertaining to a self. > > BTW, that is the definition of anatta that you've recited there, and it is thoroughly "negate-ive." As you say, satipatthana knows that there is NO SELF contained in that dhamma, NOR ANYTHING pertaining to a self. And that is anatta plain and simple. There is no additional characteristic that is to be known as "anatta" other than what you yourself have said above. > ------------ Hi Robert, Could you give an example (a simile) from conventional science please? You might, for example, take magnetism. A metal is said to be magnetic if it is attracted to a magnet, isn't it? So, is movement towards a magnet all there is to the "magnetic" characteristic? Or does that metal actually possess an inherent characteristic called "magnetic" that is always there? (By 'always there' I mean regardless of the presence of magnets, and regardless of observers carrying out experiments etc.) If you prefer, you could take the example of "non-magnetic". :-) Ken H #113757 From: Vince Date: Sun Feb 27, 2011 11:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah: > (d)He is possessed of morality dear to the Noble Ones, unbroken, without defect, > unspotted, without inconsistency, liberating, praised by the wise, uncorrupted, > and conducive to concentration" > the a,b,c,d are attributes for the Buddha, not for the stream-winner. sorry, you right! The later belongs to the stream-winner. Then it contain what is eradicated by the sotapanna (and what is not), and this situation is dear to the Noble Ones. I think! best, #113758 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:13 am Subject: Re: Inner Peace kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > Hi All, > > I recently wrote the following and sent it to three Western friends (each about 50 years old) who had not been exposed to Buddhism: > > Hi Rob M, Ken H here, you might remember me as someone who was always on at you about "mere dhammas" existing and "no self". :-) I think that's what you left out in the message to your friends. Without it, your message sounded like just another religion, or just another self-help course. I don't blame your friends if they politely said "Thanks, but no thanks." :-) Please write back to them and explain that the Dhamma is something they have *never* heard before. The Dhamma is about the existence of mere mental and physical phenomena all of which contain a characteristic known as anatta, "no self". Explain how in this way, "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found." They still won't be interested (not many people are) but at least they will have been told. The Dhamma is unique and new - unheard before by men or gods. Ken H #113759 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 12:24 am Subject: Rejoicing Joy :-) bhikkhu5 Friends: Unselfish Joy! How to Rejoice in Other's Success: By seeing that: If only happy at one's own success, such egoistic Joy is rare and limited! If happy at other's success also, the Joy is more frequent & even infinite! By observing that: It starts with basic sympathy, develops into acceptance, genuine approval, & appreciation. It culminates in rejoicing altruistic sympathy by directing mind to initiation, much cultivation & boundless expansion of Mutual Joy! By knowing that: Mutual Joy is the proximate cause of fully satisfied contentment! Lack of mutual joy is therefore the proximate cause of discontentment! Mutual Joy instantly eliminates acidic jealousy, grudge and green envy! Mutual Joy is an infinite, truly divine, elevating and sublime mental state! The Blessed Buddha pointed out: If it were impossible to cultivate this Good, I would not tell you to do so! Buddhaghosa : See how this worthy being is very Happy! How fine! How excellent! How sweet! Let there be Happiness. Let there be open Freedom. Let there be Peace. Let there be Bliss from cultivating this. Let there be Understanding of this mental state of Mutual Joy ! <...> Mudita: The Buddha's Teaching on Unselfish Joy: BPS Wheel Publication No. 170 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/various/wheel170.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113760 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 6:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace nilovg Dear Rob M, Op 27-feb-2011, om 21:11 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > his Sunday, I will be handing out 40 copies of your "Abhidhamma in > Daily Life" in my Abdhidhamma class. ------ N: Wonderful you still do this Abh class. I wrote an intro to the Abh which is shorter and I think more simple for beginners. I am still checking it through and will send it to you on line. I shall ask pt to help me to get the Unicode format. Could you perhaps post again the letter you wrote to the friend who lost her husband? It is rather long ago and meanwhile, people are always dying and there is loss again and again of dear ones. This will be good for DSG. Thank you so much, Nina. #113761 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > In the context of the Satipatthana Sutta, sati and sampajanna refer to the awareness and understanding of realities (dhammas), i.e. satipatthana. Sati and sampajanna are also developed in samatha bhavana, but in this case, they have different objects - concepts. > > So, for example, there can be wise reflection on the Dhamma with sati and sampajanna and this is samatha bhavana. In order to be the sati and sampajanna of satipatthana, the object has to be a nama or a rupa - one of the 4 foundations of mindfulness - rupas, cittas or cetasikas. I am guessing that rupas = 1st foundation and that citta and cetasika are...3 and 4? If that is the case then 2 would be vedana. Is vedana classified as a mental formation, or where does "feeling" fit in? I'm also interested in how you would further define the fourth foundation? It seems like it is a complex level of satipatthana, involving aspects of Dhamma. It's always been a confusing level for me. > >> S: So gradually, panna (right understanding) can know the difference between awareness of what is experienced vs attachment which would like it another way or which clings to it. > > R:>Thanks for this point as well. That must be a relief if and when it happens, to stop craving for a moment and see what is actually present. > ... > S: Yes.... that is a moment of true detachment and calm without any "trying". > > Btw, another opportunity to raise any qus for KS for when we're in Thailand next week. We always appreciate your points then. Phil will also be with us which is very exciting. If I misrepresent your points, he may be able to help correct me:-)) That is great that Phil will be coming to see K. Sujin. I'm sure he will have plenty of interesting questions of his own, and I look forward to hearing about it. I'll see if I can think of any questions that would be good for me to ask, and report back. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #113762 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:14 am Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... nilovg Dear Alex, Op 27-feb-2011, om 22:34 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > You see to describe khanika rather than anicca. ------ N: Same, same! Anicca is just momentary, not a longer stretch of time. ------- Similar is with meditation and its strength. One kusala citta among 1000000 akusala cittas is one thing. A long series of them kusala cittas, lasting lets say 1-2 hours of similar kusala cittas is much more powerful and has a more lasting effect. It is experientially seen that after a good long meditation (of a long series of kusala cittas), the mind is more receptive and inclined to understanding & relinquishment than after 1 moment of kusala citta. ----- N: This happens only in the case of those who are very skilfull in jhaana. When there is not jhaana attainment kusala cittas are interrupted by seeing hearing, etc. and just after seeing already attachment is likely to arise, even when you do not notice it. Very subtle attachment to seeing, visible object, thinking. Thus, the question is: who can have long periods of jhaana, genuine jhaana and not what someone may take for jhaana. Is there jhaana now? If not, what to do? Is there not this present moment to be understood, even if it is clinging? If clinging is not understood as it is it can never be eradicated. Nina. #113763 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:22 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Ken H. > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" > > > > > KH: When a satipatthana-citta experiences a dhamma it knows there is no self contained in that dhamma, nor anything pertaining to a self. > > > > BTW, that is the definition of anatta that you've recited there, and it is thoroughly "negate-ive." As you say, satipatthana knows that there is NO SELF contained in that dhamma, NOR ANYTHING pertaining to a self. And that is anatta plain and simple. There is no additional characteristic that is to be known as "anatta" other than what you yourself have said above. > > > ------------ > > Hi Robert, > > Could you give an example (a simile) from conventional science please? You might, for example, take magnetism. > > A metal is said to be magnetic if it is attracted to a magnet, isn't it? So, is movement towards a magnet all there is to the "magnetic" characteristic? Or does that metal actually possess an inherent characteristic called "magnetic" that is always there? > > (By 'always there' I mean regardless of the presence of magnets, and regardless of observers carrying out experiments etc.) > > If you prefer, you could take the example of "non-magnetic". :-) I think it would be interesting to try out some examples and see if we can find a concrete analogy for the characteristic of anatta. However, I think you should be able to answer me just on the face of what I said as well. I pointed out that your description of anatta was merely a statement of the absence of self. I accept that this is a characteristic in a sense, that it is "always true," and that it is "part of the nature of a dhamma" that it has no self. I just don't think that beyond that there is an "anatta characteristic." I think that *is* the character of a dhamma with regard to anatta. That is not a problem for me, and I don't know why it is unacceptable to you, since you too define it that way in unguarded moments, exactly as I do. I also stick to my proposition that if something exists it must be definable or describable. You can't say that something exists and not be able to say what it is in any way shape or form. If anatta is indeed the "lack of having a self or being part of a self" then that is fine. You have no trouble defining it that way, I would contend, because that is clearly what anatta means and is, and is what the Buddha had in mind when he talked about anatta. So if it is something beyond that, what is it? I'd still like an answer to that question. In the meantime, yes, the correct analogy is "non-magnetic." "Non-magnetic" is not a positive characteristic because it is defined by the lack of a magnetic charge. It is something that the object in question does not have, not something that it does have. There is no "non-magnetic" characteristic, except as a negative characteristic. If you were to observe the object without having "magnetism" in mind, there would be nothing to observe in it with regard to magnetism. It's something you notice only with regard to magnetism and then notice that it is lacking. Likewise the realization of anatta is an understanding that the normal human assumption of a self is actually not there; it's the awakening to the nature of an illusion, not to the reality of something positive that *is* there. If I see a dhamma with panna and have insight into its nature as anatta, I am seeing that where I associated a dhamma with self-nature and the character of a self, I now see that it has nothing of the kind. It is free of self or anything pertaining to a self. I see its true character as anatta, but there is no way in which the dhamma behaves or displays itself that shows an "anatta" because "anatta" is not a "something," just as non-magnetic is not a "something," but just a lack of the characteristic of being magnetic. Good analogy. To put it another way, if all beings were already enlightened, the idea of anatta would never arise, because the false idea of self would have never occurred in the first place. Anatta is medicine for the illusion of "atta/atman," not something in its own right. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113764 From: "ptaus1" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:08 am Subject: Re: emails to Ken H ptaus1 Hi KenH, RobE, and everyone else who's having a problem with "Returned mail: User unknown" issue, We've reported the matter to Yahoo and they said they'll get back to us about it, so hopefully it'll be resolved soon. In the meantime, one possible partial solution could be to move the "Returned mail: User unknown" email to Spam folder, and then hopefully all such emails will automatically go to Spam folder. Just make sure that once that happens, the actual dsg posts don't end up going to Spam folder as well - in what case move the the dsg posts back to inbox, and then hopefully they'll sort themselves out automatically. Hopefully... Best wishes #113765 From: "robmoult" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace robmoult Hi Nina and All, I shared a couple of letters that I wrote to my friend's widow and I am not sure which one Phil remembers after four years. Here is the exchange that I had with her (please understand that English is not her first language). Letter from widow to me: ===== I know you are a Buddhist and you may be able to give me an answer. I've heard from many people that 49 days after someone passed away is very important. Could you please explain it to me why? Do you know what is going to happen after someone passed away? Do you believe in life after life? I feel so empty and lost. I have no desire to live long and no reason to get up in the morning. I have lost my Hubby and my best friend at the same time... I feel so devastated. To be honest, I don't know why I have to keep on living. What is the purpose of my life? I wish I don't have to live long. I wish I could go and meet XXX. I feel completely lost. I really miss XXX very much. I don't know what I am supposed to do. If you don't mind, could you please give me an answer as a Buddhist? ===== My reply to the widow: ===== I am pleased to share some things that I have learned about Buddhism and I hope that this makes you feel better. Yes, I do believe in life after life. Every person is born with a unique set of talents, habits, likes and dislikes. I see these as carry-overs from the previous existence. I believe that XXX and you had been very close in one or more previous existences (perhaps even husband and wife) and this is why there was a natural interest or affinity when you first met. It is possible, perhaps likely, that you and XXX will meet in future lives and when this happens, the natural interest or affinity will happen again. There are different schools of Buddhism with slightly different beliefs about what happens immediately after death. One school (the one that I belong to), believes that rebirth happens instantly. The Tibetan school (the one headed by the Dali Lama) believes that rebirth happens after seven days. The Chinese school (the one most popular in Hong Kong) believes that rebirth happens after forty-nine days. Hindus believe that rebirth happens after thirteen days. Different traditions have various rituals which are performed, but performing rituals without understanding is of limited value. So what can you do now to help XXX? There is a concept in Buddhism called "transferring of merit". It means that when you have done something good, you think to yourself, "May the merit that I have accumulated from this good act be transferred to XXX." The exact words are not important; you can even reflect in Korean if that is comfortable to you - it is the thought that counts. Merit is like love; grows when it is shared. One of the main ideas of Buddhism is that everything is impermanent. A flower is beautiful today, but one month from now it will be wilted. Youth is impermanent, health is impermanent, life is impermanent and situations are impermanent. Impermanence is natural; we see it all around us. Another of the main ideas of Buddhism is that clinging or craving causes suffering. Your words reflect the suffering in your mind. This suffering is happening because you are attached to a previous time when XXX was beside you when you woke up in the morning. It is said that there is nothing more traumatic than the loss of a spouse. The suffering that you are feeling now is natural. The suffering that you are feeling now is not "wrong", but it is unhealthy. If, when suffering happens, you allow yourself to get caught up in it, then the suffering will multiply until it consumes your entire mind. On the other hand, when suffering happens, you can take away its power by reflecting, "Suffering is happening because I am chasing after something that is impossible to catch." A woman approached the Buddha saying, "My son has died. I am overcome with grief. Can you help me?" The Buddha told her to go into the city and bring back a mustard seed from any house that had not known death. Every house that she visited turned her away because they had known death. After failing to get the mustard seed from so many houses, the woman realized that it was a natural law that life was impermanent. She returned to the Buddha saying that this realization had helped her see things as they truly are and had taken away her grief. You need some time to heal now, but when you are stronger, my advice is that you look for things that you can do to help others and then transfer the merit of any good actions to XXX. You can start small by picking up some litter in the park or sweeping the walk in front of a community centre. You could even volunteer to help feed people at an old-folks home or massage children at a spastic centre. There are many ways that you can help others. If done with a very strong feeling, even a small donation of money is a very meritorious deed. There is so much more that I could write, but one does not take the entire bottle of medicine at once. You take medicine at regular intervals in measured doses and you sometimes vary the dosage or the medicine based on how you are feeling. Please consider this email as "your first dose of medicine for your heart". Please tell me which parts of my email make sense to you and which parts of my email do not make sense to you. Let me know what other questions you may have. When I get your feedback, I will send you a "second dose of medicine." Healing will take time. ===== The widow's reply to me: ===== Thank you so much for your kind reply. I am very impressed by your Buddhism. It is good to know that there is life after life. If every person is born again after death, are they going to be born again as a human being or animal or nature (like wind or rain)? If this is what is going to happen to everybody, how can I meet XXX again up there someday? It seems to me that it would be almost impossible to see him again unless I die soon. "Suffering is happening because I am chasing after something that is impossible to catch." I keep thinking about this sentence. It really makes sense. I am suffering because I keep thinking about XXX and I keep wishing XXX would be here with me. I keep thinking about lots of memory we shared together. I really miss him a lot. I wish I could see him again even if it is just a dream. If I can see him and If I can be with him again, I would do anything. I wish I could die soon so I could be with him. When XXX was with me, I thought 'This is a wonderful world.' Now it seems like it doesn't mean anything to me. If I could be sick without too much pain, it would be great. I am not afraid of dying any more. I am afraid that I may have to live long until I can see him again. What if he doesn't remember me? Memories are all I've got. They are so precious and important to me at the moment. It really hurts me so much. The pain what I am going through is beyond words. I can't even describe it. However, memories will never be gone until I die. Memories may bother me for the rest of my life. They may give me strength to carry on until my time comes. Maybe that's why I am still alive. I can never forget about them. The problem is how long am I going to suffer? I have a certain numbness inside. I don't think my brain functions properly. I have no appetite so I have to force myself to eat. I don't feel like sleeping so I just wait until I can fall asleep. There must be a reason I am still here without XXX. Why am I alone here? Have I done something really bad? Is this my punishment? ===== My reply to the widow: ===== I am so glad that you find that Buddhism makes some sense to you. I hope that it can help you cope with the difficult situation that you are facing. I sense from your words that losing XXX has left a big, painful hole in you. Reflecting on the truth of the statement, "Suffering is happening because you are chasing after something that is impossible to catch." can help the hole from getting any bigger and that is our first priority. When you are strong enough, helping others will begin to fill in the hole so that you can be whole again. What is it that continues from life to life? Obviously, it is not the body. It is the mind with its habits, accumulations and inclinations. Buddhists believe that we can be reborn as animals or humans, but we can also be reborn in a heavenly realm or a hell realm. We cannot be born as nature (wind or rain) because these things do not have a mind. Each of the rebirths are temporary, whatever is born will also die. Buddhists believe that we have experienced countless previous rebirths and we are destined for countless more rebirths. This cycle of rebirths only stops when we become enlightened. Dying soon will not allow you to meet XXX any sooner. I believe that you and XXX had been close companions in many previous existences. This is why when conditions supported your meeting in this existence, there was a natural attraction. At some time in the future, I believe that there is a very good chance that you will meet again, though you will have different names at that time. And when you do meet in the future, you will know in your heart that you were destined to be together and support each other again for a time in that existence. At the funeral, I briefly mentioned that according to Buddhism, the state of mind at the time of death could have an impact on where the person was reborn. I praised your devotion to XXX, especially in his final months and I told you that XXX had shared with me how happy you had made him. I genuinely believe that your actions helped XXX to a positive rebirth. I really want you to have a positive rebirth too. I believe that the best thing that you can do to improve the chances of meeting XXX again is to make yourself whole again so that your next rebirth is positive. Making yourself whole again will take some time. The hole inside you seems to be always with you. Be gentle with yourself, be kind and compassionate towards yourself. Loving-kindness, first towards yourself and later towards others, will make the hole shrink and speed your recovery. Some days will be better than others. Please relax and please try not to chase after something that is impossible to catch. ===== Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob M, > Op 27-feb-2011, om 21:11 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > > > his Sunday, I will be handing out 40 copies of your "Abhidhamma in > > Daily Life" in my Abdhidhamma class. > ------ > N: Wonderful you still do this Abh class. I wrote an intro to the Abh > which is shorter and I think more simple for beginners. I am still > checking it through and will send it to you on line. I shall ask pt > to help me to get the Unicode format. > Could you perhaps post again the letter you wrote to the friend who > lost her husband? It is rather long ago and meanwhile, people are > always dying and there is loss again and again of dear ones. This > will be good for DSG. Thank you so much, > Nina. > > > > > #113766 From: "robmoult" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace robmoult Hi Nina, I would love to see your "Intro to Abhidhamma" and I would be pleased to help with fonts if I can. Metta, Rob M :-) #113767 From: "robmoult" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:52 am Subject: Re: Inner Peace robmoult Hi Ken H, Of course I remember you, with great fondness. You would never hesitate to challenge and that "keeps me honest". You are correct that I did not mention anatta in my letter to my friends... in my own defence, there were quite a few suttas where the Buddha did not mention anatta either :-) Allow me to share a bit about the background to help put my message into context. Each of my three friends had shared with me that they were experiencing a stressful period in their lives. Unlike the widow four years ago (see my long post to Nina), they did not approach me asking about Buddhism. In fact, one of them is a staunch Christian and if I had mentioned Buddhism (or even hinted that I was talking about Buddhism), she would have immediately "turned off" to the message. It was an attempt to calm the minds of non-Buddhists using basic principles of Buddhism, but not naming it as such. I also wanted tto make the message practical. It was similar in context to the Kalama Sutta, except that the Buddha's talk touched all of the Kalamas, whereas I had a 33% success rate with my message :-) Metta, Rob M :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "robmoult" wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > I recently wrote the following and sent it to three Western friends (each about 50 years old) who had not been exposed to Buddhism: > > > > > > Hi Rob M, > > Ken H here, you might remember me as someone who was always on at you about "mere dhammas" existing and "no self". :-) > > I think that's what you left out in the message to your friends. > > Without it, your message sounded like just another religion, or just another self-help course. I don't blame your friends if they politely said "Thanks, but no thanks." :-) > > Please write back to them and explain that the Dhamma is something they have *never* heard before. The Dhamma is about the existence of mere mental and physical phenomena all of which contain a characteristic known as anatta, "no self". Explain how in this way, "Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found." > > They still won't be interested (not many people are) but at least they will have been told. The Dhamma is unique and new - unheard before by men or gods. > > Ken H > #113768 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 1:57 pm Subject: practice -> improvement of the skill truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, >A: Similar is with meditation and its strength. One kusala citta >among 1000000 akusala cittas is one thing. A long series of them >kusala cittas, lasting lets say 1-2 hours of similar kusala cittas >is much more powerful and has a more lasting effect. > > It is experientially seen that after a good long meditation (of a > long series of kusala cittas), the mind is more receptive and > inclined to understanding & relinquishment than after 1 moment of > kusala citta. > ----- > N: This happens only in the case of those who are very skilfull in > jhaana. When there is not jhaana attainment kusala cittas are > interrupted by seeing hearing, etc. and just after seeing already > attachment is likely to arise, even when you do not notice it. Very > subtle attachment to seeing, visible object, thinking. > Thus, the question is: who can have long periods of jhaana, genuine > jhaana and not what someone may take for jhaana. Is there jhaana now? > If not, what to do? Is there not this present moment to be > understood, even if it is clinging? If clinging is not understood as > it is it can never be eradicated. > Nina. IMHO the only way to become better at something is to set up causes for improvement, ie: practice, practice, practice. It is like any skill. To get better at it, one must practice. ex: To be good piano player, one must practice playing the piano as much as possible. Same is here. Of course practice initially involves many falls and mistakes. But eventually they can be overcomed. With metta, Alex #113769 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:25 pm Subject: Impermanence according to moment, Vis. Ch XIV revisited.part 1. nilovg Dear Alex, I found more details on khana, moment, in Vis. Ch XIV, 186 and following. Visuddhimagga, XIV, 187. Intro: as the Vis. states, there are four aspects according to which ruupa can be seen as past, future and present, namely: according to (a) extent (addhaa), (b) continuity (santati), (c) period (samaya) and (d) moment (kha.na). In this section the Vis. deals with the meaning of extent. -------- Text Vis. 187. Herein, (a) firstly, 'according to extent': in the case of a single becoming of one [living being], previous to rebirth-linking is 'past', subsequent to death is 'future', between these two is 'present'.[71] ------ N: Extent is the translation of the Pali addhaa which has the meanings of: length of space or time, period, lifetime. --------- Note 71 taken from the Tiika: 'Here when the time is delimited by death and rebirth-linking the term "extent" (addhaa) is applicable. It is made known through the Suttas in the way beginning "Was I in the past?" (M.i,8). ------- Text Tiika: But when it is delimited in the ultimate sense as in the Addhaaniruttipatha Sutta thus, "Bhikkhus, there are three extents, the past extent, the future extent, and the present extent" (Iti.53), then it is appropriate as delimited by moment. Herein, the existingness of the present is stated thus, "Bhikkhus, of matter that is born ... manifested, it is said that 'It exists'" (S.iii,72), and pastness and futureness are respectively called before and after that' (Pm.496). ------- N: This sutta (S. III, 62, Mode of reckoning) states the same for the other khandhas. The Tiika to Vis. 187 adds that extent, addhaa can also be used in the ultimate sense (paramatthato) with the meaning of moment (kha.na). The Diigha Nikaaya, Sangiiti Sutta, the threes, XXIV, states: The word addhaa is used here. The Co. to this passage explains that there is the Suttanta method and the Abhidhamma method of explanation. In the Suttanta method past, future and present periods are used in conventional sense, as lifespan. In the Abhidhamma method, addhaa is used in the sense of moment. -------- Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 188. Intro: After the Vis. has dealt with presence as period (addhaa), it deals now with presence according to continuity (santati) or serial presence. N: Temperature that arises and appears as heat or cold impinges on the bodysense. In fact there is a continuity of several units of temperature, but the Tiika explains that they are taken together (eak- ggaha.na.m) as a serial presence, occurring as a continuity in one mode (ekaakaara.m). N: The serial presence is reckoned as the present object for insight. The characteristic of ruupa such as heat or hardness appears and can be object of insight so that it is realized as a conditioned dhamma, not a person or self, not mine. --------- Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 189. 189. (c) 'According to period': any period among those such as one minute, morning, evening, day-and-night, etc., that occurs as a continuity, is called 'present'. Previous to that is 'past'. Subsequent is 'future'. The Tiika explains that the classifications of present, past and future as extent (or life span, addhaa), as continuity (serial presence, santati) and as period, samaya, are figurative expressions (sapariyaaya), not literal (nippariyaaya). It explains that there are other dhammas (ae dhammaa) at present, that there were other dhammas in the past and that there will be other dhammas in the future. This refers to the classification of extent, addhaa, etc. Not to the classification as to moment, kha.na). As we shall see, only the classification according to moment, kha.na, is to be taken literally. Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 190. Intro: In this section the Visuddhimagga deals with moment, kha.na. Kha.na is different from the word moment as it is used in conventional language where it has a wider meaning. Whereas kha.na has a very precise meaning. It refers to the infinitesimally short moments of naama and ruupa. Citta has its arising moment, the moment of its presence and the moment of its dissolution. Ruupa lasts seventeen times longer than citta, or, if we take into account the three moments of citta, fiftyone times longer than citta. Ruupa has its arising moment, the moments of presence and the moment of its dissolution. When a sense object impinges on a sensebase, a complete sense-door process of cittas can experience that object which has not fallen away. The cittas of a complete sense-door process and the preceding bhavanga-cittas are seventeen in number. Since ruupa lasts seventeen moments of citta it can be experienced by the cittas of a sense-door process. After it has just fallen away it is experienced through the mind-door. ******** Nina. #113770 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 2:25 pm Subject: Impermanence according to moment, Vis. Ch XIV revisited. part 2. nilovg Dear Alex, The Expositor deals with many meanings of the term arisen, uppanna. We read: Thus, kha.na does not refer to life period, nor to serial presence. It refers to moment in the ultimate sense, namely arising, presence, and dissolution. Text Vis. 190: (d) 'According to moment': what is included in the trio of moments, [that is to say, arising, presence, and dissolution] beginning with arising is called 'present'. At a time previous to that it is 'future'. At a time subsequent to that it is 'past'. ------------------------------ We read in the Dispeller of Delusion (p. 8): Conclusion: When we consider the meaning of kha.na, moment, we are reminded that the processes of cittas succeed one another extremely rapidly. In one process seeing arises, and it seems that we immediately think of a concept of what is seen, of a person or thing. However, several processes have elapsed before a concept is experienced in a mind-door process. There is no person who can exert control over the cittas that arise, perform each their own function and then fall away immediately. -------- It seems that cittas last, but the meaning of kha.na, moment, reminds us of the impermanence of dhammas. As soon as a dhamma has arisen, it is going towards its cessation, it is gone immediately. When paaa arises it does so for an extremely short moment and then it falls away. However, a moment of paaa is never lost, it is accumulated so that there are conditions for its arising again. This exhorts us not to waste the moments of which our life consists. There can be accumulation of paaa at this moment. ------- Thus, kha.na does not refer to life period, nor to serial presence. It refers to moment in the ultimate sense, namely arising, presence, and dissolution. ----------- Text Vis. 190: (d) 'According to moment': what is included in the trio of moments, [that is to say, arising, presence, and dissolution] beginning with arising is called 'present'. At a time previous to that it is 'future'. At a time subsequent to that it is 'past'. ------------------------------ N: the first three are sapariyaaya (figurative) and the last one is nippariyaaya (literal).The last one is in the ultimate sense only. There were examples: extent, addhaa: a lifespan. Present lifespan, this is different from the present moment of citta, kha.na. We can think of death in conventional sense, the end of this lifespan. But actually there is all the time momentary death, kha.nika marana, when the present citta falls away. Looking at death as kha.nika is very realistic! Continuity or serial present (santati): utu keeps on producing heat and this impinges on the body. it is a serial presence, but still, the characteristic of heat can be object of insight. --------- The Tiika states that as regards feeling, the classifications according to extent and period has not been spoken of. Feelings are classified as past, future and present only according to continuity and to moment. -------- Text Vis. 197. In the classification (i)-(iii) into 'past', etc., the past, future, and present state of feeling should be understood according to continuity and according to moment and so on. --------- N: Feeling is naama, and as the Tiika states, naama is quick to change (lahuparivattino aruupadhammaa). ****** Nina. #113771 From: "Martin" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 12:03 am Subject: Samsara cmkwk Dear Dhamma friends, I found that samsara is not included in the teachings of the four noble truths and conditioned arising. So it is not part of the Buddha Dhammas. What do you think? Regards, Martin #113772 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:57 pm Subject: Giving is Anti-Clinging! bhikkhu5 Friends: Generosity is the first Mental Perfection: Generosity means willingness to give and share whatever. Generosity means magnanimous and open-handed liberality. Generosity means freedom from small and stingy pettiness. Generosity means practicing charity for the poor and unfortunate. Generosity means kind big-heartedness towards those worthy of it. Generosity means warm-hearted and altruistic unselfishness. Generosity provides the kammic cause for later wealth.. Giving causes Getting... No Giving causes Poverty! The Blessed Buddha explained the treasure of generosity like this: When a disciple of the Noble Ones whose mind and mentality is all cleared of disgracing miserliness, living at home, is freely generous and open-handed, delighting in being magnanimous, responsive to every request and, is enjoying the giving of any alms. Such is this treasure called generosity. AN VII 6 Just as a filled pot, which is overturned, pours out all of its water, leaving nothing back, even and exactly so should one give to those in need. Whether low, middle or high, like the overturned pot, holding nothing back! Jataka Nidana [128-129] The Generosity of Giving, The Kindness in Speech, The Benefit of Service, The Impartiality of treating all Alike, These 4 threads of Selfless Sympathy, Upholds this world, like the axle do the cart! AN II 32 Giving food, one gives and later gets strength. Giving clothes, one gives and later gets beauty. Giving light, one gives & later gets vision & intelligence. Giving transportation, one gives and later gets ease. Giving protecting shelter, one gives and later gets all... Yet the one who instructs in the True Dhamma, - The supreme Teaching of all the Buddhas - Such one gives a quite divine ambrosia! SN I 32 These are these five rewards of generosity: One is liked and charming to people at large, One is admired and respected by wise people, One's good reputation is spread wide about, One does not neglect a householder's true duty, and with the break-up of the body - at the moment of death - one reappears in a happy destination, in the plane of the divine worlds! AN V.35 There are these two kinds of gifts: Material gifts and gifts of Dhamma. The supreme gift is that of Dhamma. There are these two kinds of sharing: Material sharing and sharing of Dhamma. The supreme sharing is that of Dhamma. There are these two kinds of help: Material help and help with the Dhamma. This is the supreme of the two: Help with this subtle Dhamma It 98 Sabbadnam dhammadnam jinti. The gift of Dhamma exceeds all other gifts. Dhammapada 354 The Bodhisatta once as king Sivi gave both his eyes to a beggar who was Sakka the king deity in disguise, who desired to test him. He remembered "While I was wishing to give, while I was giving and after this giving there was neither contrariety, nor opposition in my mind, since it was for the purpose of perfect awakening itself! Neither were these eyes, nor the rest of my body, disagreeable to me. Omniscience was dear to me! Therefore I gave both my eyes." The Basket of Conduct Cariyapitaka I-8 Full story: Sivi Jataka no. 499 The Bodhisatta once as the Wise Hare gave his roasted body as alms to a beggar by jumping into a fire: He remembered: "There came a beggar and asked for food. Myself I gave so that he might eat. In alms-giving there was none equal to me. In alms, I had thereby reached the absolute ultimate perfection." From then and the rest of this world-cycle the moon will display a characteristic 'hare-in-the-moon' sign! Sasa-Jataka no. 316 Giving of things, treasures, external possessions, job, position, wife, and child is the first perfection of giving. Giving the offer of one's organs, limbs, and senses is the second higher perfection of giving. Giving the sacrifice of one's life is the third ultimate perfection of giving only performed by future Buddhas! The clarifier of sweet meaning 89 (Commentary on Buddhavamsa) Madhuratthavilasini [59] Venerable Buddhadatta: 5th century. Generosity is the first mental perfection (parami): Clinging and egoism creates internal panic and social tension. Giving and sharing creates internal elation and social harmony... What is gladly given, returns more than thousandfold! Giving requires Relinquishing! Giving is Anti-Clinging! Giving is the opposite mental state of Greed... <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113773 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 12:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Satipatthana Sutta - Reflection on corpses epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 24-feb-2011, om 7:08 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > N: To be > > > sincere, it does not come yet naturally to me. But I see the > > value of > > > Dhamma and I wish (chanda) to learn. > > > > It is very difficult isn't it? Someone recently said that without > > chanda one cannot become an arahant. I think it was Ken O. I think > > that's something many of us have in common here. > ------- > N: Chanda is an important condition for seeing the value of insight > and beginning to develop it. > It is difficult to realize that a person is not real in the ultimate > sense. I mean, we can repeat this and understand in theory, but we > have not eradicated the belief in person or self. > > I heard on a recording: thinking. When there is forgetfulness of realities we are inclined to > think of this or that person. When we read stories there are moments > of forgetfulness and of sati, and both can be known. When we watch > T.V. do we think of the cittas of others? Is there a person in T.V.? > We should know when a paramattha dhamma is the object and when a > story (conventional truth). We can think with kusala citta or with > akusala citta of conventional truth.>(end quote) > It is good to know the difference, and this is the beginning of > understanding of what is real in the ultimate sense. Those are good reminders, and it's important to remember as you have pointed out that how you think about reality puts you in the right direction. I notice that when I think about anatta there is a kind of loneliness in contemplating a universe without any beings, just mechanical actions arising and falling away. I think that my attachment to the concept of beings is obvious and it keeps delusory thoughts being generated about self and others. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #113774 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 1:26 am Subject: Satipatthana Sutta - Cemetary Contemplation (was, Re: A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113391) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. :-) > > ... > > > J: To begin with, there would have to be a clear understanding of the difference between kusala and akusala on an ongoing basis. > > > > That is fine with me, but it seems that in your [by which I mean the commentarial] philosophy, one is not equipped to tell kusala from akusala until it can be discerned in the momentary arising that is reserved for sotapanna and above. > > =============== > > J: No, that's not the commentarial position at all. Knowing kusala from akusala, and knowing the arising of (momentary) dhammas, are 2 different things. As I see it, knowing kusala from akusala means not taking one for the other; it does not, for example, necessarily involve being able to identify successive moments of consciousness as and when they arise. Well, if kusala and akusala are arising on a momentary basis, and are not more "general" in a given situation, as you strongly assert in this entire post, then how can one know kusala from akusala and not mistake one from the other without knowing the dhamma of the moment clearly? This seems to be a contradiction, but I would be happy to hear how it is possible. > > =============== > So once again the ability to do *anything* of worth on the path, other than very very gradually developing right understanding, is postponed for hundreds or thousands of lifetimes. > > =============== > > J: But the path *is* the very, very gradual development of right understanding. I think that's an important part of the path, but we have this controversy between this way of thinking and the description of the path as a whole - that the other branches of the 8fold path are also equally important, and in my view, are equally important. While there is one sutta at least that clearly says that Right Understanding is the leading factor, it is never said that one can wait until Right Understanding is fully developed before actualizing the other aspects of the path, including something as mundane as Right Livelihood to something as specific to the mind as Right Concentration. Waiting for gradual understanding to unfold only through hearing and considering the spoken Dhamma is not the entire path; it is only one part of it. It's a question that should be considered whether one can follow the entire path through depending on only one factor out of eight. If that were the case, Buddha would not have called it an 8fold path, but the Path of Right Understanding. As I understand it, that is not the philosophy he advocated, all by itself, though it is a most important factor, and a leading and necessary factor. > Having the idea that it should be something more than that tends to lead to different ideas as to the meaning of what we read in the texts. Well I think it merely leads to the idea that the path is something more than *only* the texts, and I think that the idea that only the word of the Buddha was significant and not what the word instructs us to do in other areas is not right understanding. It appears to be incomplete understanding by sidelining other aspects of the teaching. > > =============== > > My own opinion is that the gradual path does not have to be only about right understanding of dhammas, but can be a more conventional way of discerning kusala from akusala and related understandings. One may not be able to catch a moment of kusala as it happens and discern it from a momentary arising of akusala, but one can certainly develop mindfulness to the point of observing when there is *obvious* akusala, and perhaps even some obvious kusala at time in our lives. At a moment of happiness, fellowship and good will, there may be some clinging or other akusala, but we can observe some clear kusala, even if we are not aware of the exact moments during which it is arising. And if we do notice clinging, worry or other akusala things, we can acknowledge it. So perhaps we can begin to become more aware of the preponderence of what is arising in a given situation before we can even approach the individual moments. To me, that is a very valuable way to develop the path, during this lifetime, > > =============== > > J: What you describe above is in the realm of samatha rather than vipassana, I'd say. Noticing this or that is not the direct awareness of arising dhammas, and hence not directly to do with the path. I would disagree with that. I don't have an idealized, Platonic view of the Ideal Path. I believe that Buddha meant the path to be practical and to be something that is Worked and Developed. It is a workable, hands-on path. One can discern dhammas, one can sit and contemplate dhammas, one can develop samatha, one can read and discuss and understand what arises in daily life using the Dhamma as a guide, one can generate metta, one can choose kusala actions and avoid akusala actions, one can choose an amenable lifestyle and living space, one can choose wise and wholesome companionship, one can contemplate not only dhammas as a pure arising but the principles of kamma and codependent arising, cittas and cetasikas as is almost a sport around here, and enjoy and develop all these aspects of the path. Though there is no sufferer and no seeker, only the process, still it's a worthwhile and practical process, and it doesn't have to be carefully restricted to understanding of written and spoken word. There are many aspects of life that are included in the path, purposely included so that the path impacts all aspects of living. I don't think that's a path of samatha instead of insight; I think it's a balanced and holistic path of developing kusala, cultivating insight, having a balanced life that leads to clear seeing and thinking, doing good and accumulating merit, cultivating sympathetic joy and metta, and being part of the enlightened and enlightening community instead of part of the violent and reactive culture of akusala cittas. So I think what I am describing is a way of being authentic about real life and cultivate the path from a sense of current reality. It doesn't mean to put aside the activity of recognizing dhammas, but to let the path carry the whole person along. > > =============== > rather than waiting for an interminable period to see anything of note. > > =============== > > J: Better for there to be the (too?) gradual development of awareness than the taking of one kind of kusala for another. Well if my biggest problem is failing to discern my different diverse types of kusala, that is a problem I'm willing to take on. :-) > > =============== > > And in that vein, maybe we can use a little common sense to get a beginning sense of what our natural tendencies are. If someone enjoys sitting peacefully and calmly, perhaps reading a book or sitting under a tree and enjoying nature, and if during such a time one's breathing relaxes and slows and one has a feeling of ease without a lot of worry and attachment, maybe one has a natural tendency towards the development of samatha, of calm. [That would not be me!] If one has a tendency to notice little things about the moment, to notice qualities of experience, etc., maybe that person has a tendency towards awareness and insight. > > =============== > > J: But there's no such connection as this suggested in the texts. Are you sure this is a safe line of thinking to follow? I wasn't suggesting that the above is definitive or that it is a substitute for the elements of the path. I was suggesting that it might be suggestive as to what one's natural tendencies might be. What one would do with that is no different than you suggested some many posts ago, when you noted that someone might have a natural tendency to sit under a tree and follow the breath, and that such a person would naturally, because of accumulations, cultivate anapanasati, while someone else might have a different predilection. I thought that was a smart way of demonstrating how one follows natural tendencies rather than try to "think" your way into enlightenment by forcing certain assumptions on your practice. It was your idea Jon - you should be prepared to defend it! ;-) > > =============== > So again, I think we can get a sense of these things without demanding that we wait until as sotapannas - because it's hard to imagine how we would ever reach that level if there are no building blocks along the way - we are able to discern individual moments with great clarity. I feel like the gradual path of semi-conventional awareness that will gradually shift to greater and greater discernment is a path we can begin to follow now, rather than waiting for many unknown lifetimes to pass. > > =============== > > J: I don't think an understanding of the world of dhammas can emerge from the kind of reflection you described in the previous segment. There can be no 'shift' from a conventional awareness of what one's thoughts or tendencies are to an awareness of dhammas as mere impersonal elements; these are just not on the same continuum. > > Conventional awareness when developed leads only to more of the same, and whatever kusala is involved in that will be dana, sila or samatha but not awareness of the kind uniquely taught by the Buddha. Well I guess I disagree again. I think there is room for some sensible reflection on what, who and how one is and what the path contains at a given time. That doesn't mean to loosen up the Dhamma to the point of meaninglessness, but we don't have to be so rigid either that we never see, do or engage anything until the permanent future lifetimes to come. Direct seeing and true understanding will arise when it will amidst the normal conventional thinking. One should cultivate understanding of Dhamma, but one can also use Buddhist principles to look at the whole of life and make it more conducive to the path. Conventional thinking may never directly convert into panna, but panna may arise amidst conducive circumstances and I don't think we should keep the Dhamma in too tight of a box. Well that was helpful. Always good to engage conventional activities to allow the mind to relax. :-) Again, I am not advocating watering down the understanding of arising dhammas, but I am advocating applying the Dhamma now to whatever arises, even if it is conventional. In friendship and with metta, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #113775 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 1:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The clansman who is a beginner : one of the ancient wise ones? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > > Dear Rob E > > > > >I understand the basic idea of anatta, which literally translates I believe as > >"not-self," "non-self" or "no self." I don't think there is any other way to > >translate that into English or the equivalent form in any other language. So if > > >you say it is a positive characteristic of a dhamma - and the above *is* what it > > > >means - you are then faced with the issue: "What does it mean to say that 'no > >self' is a positive characteristic. How would one experience 'no self' as a > >positive presence. When 'no self' is present, what is present? If you cannot > >answer these questions with a sensible answer then you are not talking about > >something that exists at all, but just a false and general idea based on another > > > >>idea - that all the characteristics of dhammas have to be *something,* they > >cannot be a description of a condition that is based on something else. In other > > > >>words, for anatta to have its natural meaning: 'no self,' or 'not self' which is > >> > >>not the word *I* gave to describe it, but the word the Buddha gave to describe > > >this condition or characteristic, you have to start with the natural belief that > > > >>all humans have that a self *does* exist. Without the illusion of self, 'no > >self' is nonsense. There is no way to turn it into some other characteristic, > >because it doesn't have another meaning. It simply means "There is no self, and > > >the existence of a self is an illusion that causes clinging, delusion and > >suffering." That is the meaning of anatta and that is it. Dhammas are discovered > > > >to not have any core entity and to not be part of any form of self. That is the > > >discovery that frees one from attachment to dhammas, and that is why Buddha > >talked about it, period.> > > KO: Honestly, IMHO the usage of positive and absence of the characteristics do > not matter. What is important is that dhamma is empty of a self. Whether one > said it is a positive or absence, it would not have much effect on understanding > dhamma as long as it is about not self, which is our goal. > > > > >Mahasi Sayadaw talks about the four false concepts of self that the Buddha's > >teaching on anatta dispels, and which Buddha addressed in the great discourse on > > > >>anatta, the Anattatakkhaṇa Sutta: > > > >>feels sensations, pleasant or unpleasant. This form of clinging is concerned > >with the vedanak-khandha, the aggregate of feelings, which we will take up fully > > > > > >in the next chapter. > > > >That the aggregate of materiality is not self or a living entity has been > >adequately expounded, but it still remains to explain how meditators practicing > > > >vipassanā meditation come to perceive the nonself and uncontrollable nature > > > >of the body." > > > >- - - - - - - - - > KO: honestly, my pali is not good so cannot read the comy whether these are > said in the comy. I dont know where he got the four false concepts of self. It > would be good someone good in pali to help whether it is in the comy. I got one > rule that I always stick to it whenever I learn Buddhim, I dont allude my own > interpretaion, I always base on my interpretation of the comy from difference > sources. I suit my understanding to the comy and not the comy to my > understanding. If my views and the comy differs, then the comy is right. 2nd > rule, I dont extract part of comy or sutta to support my views, the sutta and > the comy must look as a whole for any intepreation of the dhamma. Just my > personal views. No offence meant. > > > >In my view, it is because of clinging to belief in these deeply rooted aspects > >of self that the Buddha taught the doctrine of anatta to dispel these delusions > > > >and free those on the path from clinging to a false view of self. It is true > >that all dhammas have the characteristic of anatta - which is the characteristic > > > >of lacking any self or connection to self. > > KO: there are clinging to personality views which are classified in four types > of personality views. I think you know about this as well, sakkayaditthi. > > > >If we were to turn the lack of a self into a positive characteristic we would > >truly be taking this lack of self and turning it into a different kind of self, > > >a "non-self" which we would say actually exists. That defeats the entire purpose > > > >of insight into anatta which is to fully and thoroughly understand that *there > >is no lasting or personal or eternal or any other kind of self,* period. > > KO: hmmm, the comment above remain the same Seriously, I am not trying to find comments or interpretations that support my own view. I looked for "anatta" and found those comments which I thought were very insightful into the nature of anatta. My view of anatta as a positive characteristic is very simple: If someone can tell me how anatta appears as a positive characteristic and define or describe it in some way, then I will be happy to engage with it. So far, no one seems to be able to describe this reality. I have asked many times. *Every* description of anatta I read by anyone including excerpts from the commentaries say that anatta is the lack of self or lack of connection to a self. It is a negation of self. And it makes perfect sense. So I am going by what is said in sutta and commentary, not my own view. I think that if someone says anatta is a "positive characteristic of all dhammas" it is necessary to say how that appears and how it is seen as a characteristic. I am waiting now for several years for anyone to describe this to me. If you have any kind of quote from commentary that explains this, I will be happy to read it; in fact I would be excited to see it. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113776 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 1:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 epsteinrob Hi Sarah. I'm working backwards, and very glad I found this post! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- On Sun, 13/2/11, Robert E wrote: > >very nice to hear, Sarah. Regards to your mom! > ... > S: Passed on. You have an admirer of your writing! That is very nice. Wish I could come by and say 'hi.' > >Yes, I still like "it's gone" very much. If I think of that sometimes now, it's refreshing to know that the slate is clear and we have a chance to start over again at each moment. > ... > S: Exactly! > ... > >Even though the usual 'stuff' arises again, there is a micro-moment here and there where the mental and emotional atmosphere seems nice and clear. And then 'it's gone' again. :-) > ... > S: Gone again and another opportunity for awareness and understanding to develop now:-) Yes, that's good. In a sense that is indeed a great opportunity for "bhavana" at any time; it takes meditation into the moment, and I certainly have nothing but positive regard for that. > "Letting go..." and "it's gone" can be helpful for everyone, I'm sure. A friend in Bangkok told us last time about how she'd once been in a boat with K.Sujin and had been telling the latter a long story about some problem. KS had just listened patiently and at the end of the story, she simply said: "When are you going to let go?". The friend said this was a really helpful wake up call for her. Ha ha, great story. I see that K. Sujin has a habit of rocking the boat. ;-) I like her approach, cutting through to the moment and to real release. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113777 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 3:10 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing kenhowardau Hi Robert E, I have promised myself several times, "No more discussions with Robert E on the nature of characteristics!" But, here I go again. :-) --------------- > RE: I think it would be interesting to try out some examples and see if we can find a concrete analogy for the characteristic of anatta. However, I think you should be able to answer me just on the face of what I said as well. I pointed out that your description of anatta was merely a statement of the absence of self. I accept that this is a characteristic in a sense, that it is "always true," and that it is "part of the nature of a dhamma" that it has no self. I just don't think that beyond that there is an "anatta characteristic." I think that *is* the character of a dhamma with regard to anatta. That is not a problem for me, and I don't know why it is unacceptable to you, since you too define it that way in unguarded moments, exactly as I do. --------------- KH: I like your "it is part of the nature of a dhamma that it has no self." That sounds like a good compromise! ------------------------ > RE: I also stick to my proposition that if something exists it must be definable or describable. You can't say that something exists and not be able to say what it is in any way shape or form. ------------------------ KH: Can we say anatta is part of the nature of something that exists? ------------------------------- > RE: If anatta is indeed the "lack of having a self or being part of a self" then that is fine. You have no trouble defining it that way, I would contend, because that is clearly what anatta means and is, and is what the Buddha had in mind when he talked about anatta. So if it is something beyond that, what is it? I'd still like an answer to that question. ------------------------------- KH: Both descriptions suit me fine: anatta is part of the nature of something that exists, *and* it is the lack of a self (etc). ---------------------------------------- > RE: In the meantime, yes, the correct analogy is "non-magnetic." "Non-magnetic" is not a positive characteristic because it is defined by the lack of a magnetic charge. --------------------------------------- KH: I'd prefer to say, "Non-magnetic" is part of the nature of certain metals, *and* it is the lack of being magnetic." Can we agree on that? ----------------------- > RE: It is something that the object in question does not have, not something that it does have. There is no "non-magnetic" characteristic, except as a negative characteristic. If you were to observe the object without having "magnetism" in mind, there would be nothing to observe in it with regard to magnetism. It's something you notice only with regard to magnetism and then notice that it is lacking. -------------------------- KH: It was good to be in agreement for a while, but now we part company again. I would say non-magnetic metals had the nature of being non-magnetic. However, I would not say purple (for example) had the nature of being non-magnetic. (Nor does it have the nature of being magnetic, of course.) --------------------- > RE: Likewise the realization of anatta is an understanding that the normal human assumption of a self is actually not there; it's the awakening to the nature of an illusion, not to the reality of something positive that *is* there. --------------------- KH: Anatta is part of the nature of a paramattha dhamma, but it is not part of the nature of a motor car. ------------------------------ > RE: If I see a dhamma with panna and have insight into its nature as anatta, I am seeing that where I associated a dhamma with self-nature and the character of a self, I now see that it has nothing of the kind. It is free of self or anything pertaining to a self. I see its true character as anatta, but there is no way in which the dhamma behaves or displays itself that shows an "anatta" because "anatta" is not a "something," just as non-magnetic is not a "something," but just a lack of the characteristic of being magnetic. Good analogy. ------------------------------ KH: It would be an even better analogy if we could agree on it. I see sodium as having the nature of being non-magnetic, but I don't see purple or "hello sailor" (etc) as having any such nature. Back to the drawing board! :-) ----------------------------------- > RE: To put it another way, if all beings were already enlightened, the idea of anatta would never arise, because the false idea of self would have never occurred in the first place. Anatta is medicine for the illusion of "atta/atman," not something in its own right. ----------------------------------- KH: Regardless of enlightenment or ignorance, all sankhara dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta, and all dhammas are anatta. Ken H PS: I would like to remind you of how this dispute originally came about. The followers of Nararjuna believe that conditioned dhammas do not really exist. They say namas and rupas are just as illusory as concepts (or even more illusory). The question then arises, "To what was the Buddha referring when he taught the doctrine of anatta?" The Nagarjunians would have to argue he was referring to both concepts and dhammas, wouldn't they? But he wasn't! KH #113778 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 10:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace nilovg Dear Rob M, Op 28-feb-2011, om 12:35 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > "Suffering is happening because I am chasing after something that > is impossible to catch." ------ N: Thank you for sharing these letters. It is good for those who know nothing about Buddhism. And the widow's feelings make me think very much of my sister in law who lost her husband, my brother, a year ago. Just at that time we went to Thailand and I was glad to be reminded by Kh Sujin of the present moment, but this is hard to understand for my sister in law. Also my sister lost her partner a few weeks ago. I asked Lodewijk's advice about sending on your letters to my sister in law, and we do not know when it is the right time. My own sister is most critical about any religion, I think that she would not appreciate it. We shall see. Anyway, thank you very much. As to my intro to the Abh, I have to go over it very slowly first and will send it later on to you. Nina. #113779 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 10:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samsara nilovg Dear Martin, Op 1-mrt-2011, om 1:03 heeft Martin het volgende geschreven: > I found that samsara is not included in the teachings of the four > noble truths and conditioned arising. So it is not part of the > Buddha Dhammas. What do you think? ------- N: Samsara is the cycle of birth and death, and being reborn again and again is sorrow, dukkha. Because when we are born, we are already on our way to dying. The eightfold Path is the way leading to the eradication of defilements and this means that there will not be any more conditions for rebirth, for being in the cycle. Then we shall be freed from dukkha inherent in the cycle. The development of right understanding of all phenomena of our life is a long way to go, but a beginning can be made at this moment. If there can be a moment of understanding that a self or person does not cause seeing that appears, but that it arises because of its own conditions and that it does not belong to us, just some of the mass of ignorance we have accumulated for aeons can be worn away. Ignorance is the cause for rebirth again and again. It is the first link of the Dependent Origination the Buddha taught. By eradication of ignorance there will be the end to samsara. Instead of thinking of the end to samsara, it is best to consider what can be done right now. Nina. #113780 From: A T Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 8:29 pm Subject: paññā vs ñāṇa is there a difference? truth_aerator Dear all, Does anyone know if there is a difference between paññā and ñāṇa? If so, what exactly is the difference? Or are they synonyms? For example In Ptsm there is chapter called: "Sotāvadhāne paññā sutamaye ñāṇaṃ." "Understanding of applying the ear is knowledge of what consists in the heard (learnt)" - Bhikkhu Nanamoli translation. Pali program that I have, has this translation: paññā=f. wisdom; knowledge; insight. ñāṇa= nt. wisdom; insight. Thanks, With metta, Alex #113781 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 9:46 pm Subject: Re: emails to Ken H kenhowardau Thanks very much pt. I haven't received any since that last one I told you about off list. They were already going into my spam folder. I'm just glad it wasn't the voice of a DSG member crying in the wilderness. :-) Ken H --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi KenH, RobE, and everyone else who's having a problem with "Returned mail: User unknown" issue, > > We've reported the matter to Yahoo and they said they'll get back to us about it, so hopefully it'll be resolved soon. > > In the meantime, one possible partial solution could be to move the "Returned mail: User unknown" email to Spam folder, and then hopefully all such emails will automatically go to Spam folder. Just make sure that once that happens, the actual dsg posts don't end up going to Spam folder as well - in what case move the the dsg posts back to inbox, and then hopefully they'll sort themselves out automatically. Hopefully... > > Best wishes > #113782 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 11:17 pm Subject: Re: should one try one's best? epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113387) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > J: If you're referring to kamma and vipaka, only the mental factor of intention is kamma. > > > > Well, if you take into account that kamma patha can not take place as the completion of kamma unless the action is completed, I'd say that the action component is extremely important in such a case. Would you disagree that kamma patha makes a big difference and is not just a mental factor? > > =============== > > J: In the context of kamma (as cause) and vipaka (as result), both are mental dhammas. Kamma is the mental factor of cetana, while vipaka is the consciousness that experiences an object through one of the sense-doors. Returning to this post to ask the question re. the above - if as you say both kamma and vipaka are mental dhammas, what in your view is kamma patha? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113783 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 12:08 am Subject: Re: wisdom and doing epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > > Hi Robert E, > > I have promised myself several times, "No more discussions with Robert E on the nature of characteristics!" > > But, here I go again. :-) > > --------------- > > RE: I think it would be interesting to try out some examples and see if we can find a concrete analogy for the characteristic of anatta. > > However, I think you should be able to answer me just on the face of what I said as well. I pointed out that your description of anatta was merely a statement of the absence of self. I accept that this is a characteristic in a sense, that it is "always true," and that it is "part of the nature of a dhamma" that it has no self. I just don't think that beyond that there is an "anatta characteristic." > > I think that *is* the character of a dhamma with regard to > anatta. That is not a problem for me, and I don't know why it is unacceptable to you, since you too define it that way in unguarded moments, exactly as I do. > --------------- > > KH: I like your "it is part of the nature of a dhamma that it has no self." That sounds like a good compromise! Well I certainly have no problem with that. I never said the lack of self wasn't inherent, just that it's not a "thing" that can be "experienced" in and of itself. > ------------------------ > > RE: I also stick to my proposition that if something exists it must be definable or describable. You can't say that something exists and not be able to say what it is in any way shape or form. > ------------------------ > > KH: Can we say anatta is part of the nature of something that exists? Well....it depends on what you mean by "part of the nature of..." :-))) If by "part" you mean there is something there, then no. If by "part of the nature of" you mean that every dhamma without exception is such that it has no self and is not any part of a self or entity, then absolutely. In other words, we agree on the fact of anatta, just not on what that fact consists of in concrete terms. > ------------------------------- > > RE: If anatta is indeed the "lack of having a self or being part of a self" then that is fine. You have no trouble defining it that way, I would contend, because that is clearly what anatta means and is, and is what the Buddha had in mind when he talked about anatta. So if it is something beyond that, what is it? I'd still like an answer to that question. > ------------------------------- > > KH: Both descriptions suit me fine: anatta is part of the nature of something that exists, *and* it is the lack of a self (etc). Tentatively, okay. :-) The second part is more comfortable for me, but it's certainly the nature of something that exists that it has no self, as long as you don't think that "nature" is referring to a "something" rather than the dhammas' condition. With magnetism, for instance, can you say that metal is "magnetic" at a time when there is no magnetic field drawing upon it? I think that would be a mistake. At such a time, "magnetic" is not actual, it is a concept regarding the metal's potential, but it is not actually and actively magnetic at a time when there is no magnetism. > ---------------------------------------- > > RE: In the meantime, yes, the correct analogy is "non-magnetic." "Non-magnetic" is not a positive characteristic because it is defined by the lack of a magnetic charge. > --------------------------------------- > > KH: I'd prefer to say, "Non-magnetic" is part of the nature of certain metals, *and* it is the lack of being magnetic." Can we agree on that? What do you mean by the first part in concrete terms, and why is it necessary to add that? If we say non-magnetic "is a lack of being magnetic," we have told the full story haven't we? Saying it is "part of the nature of" that metal sounds like you are establishing it as an entity, something that has own-being. Do you see why I would think that is a possibility in wanting the first part included? See, I agree with that first part as a fact: "certain metals are such that they will not respond to a magnetic field, ie, are non-magnetic." But I don't think it's part of its "nature" in the sense that there is something called "non-magnetic" that makes it non-magentic. It just is not magnetic. There's no positive "non-magnetic" except as a description of what the metal does or doesn't do. There's nothing in there that *makes* it non-magnetic. Now if you get more specific and say something like "There is a certain chemical structure that is the reason why tin is not magnetic; any metal that has this configuration will be non-magnetic," well then you have a positive characteristic that defines the metal as non-magnetic. That is different. You have taken your negation and found the positive characteristic that causes the negation. You can then say "because this metal is constructed this way, thus it is magnetic." So if you can say, "all dhammas *are* x, y or z and that is *why* they can never form an entity or self," then you would have a positive characteristic of anatta. For instance, when defining the lack of samatha in an akusala dhamma, the commentaries say that an akusala dhamma has the characteristics of agitation, restlessness I think, and a bunch of other nasty, jumpy, unhappy characteristics that are the opposite of being "calm and collected." So you can actually point to a bunch of *observable* and actual characteristics that are present when samatha is not present. If non-self or non-magnetic was a positive characteristic or consisted of positive characteristics you could list the actual observable characteristics that are present that create "non-self nature." But "non-self" or "not self," as opposed to samatha, is not a condition that a dhamma sometimes has and sometimes doesn't have. When samatha is present, certain characteristics appear - calm, equanimity, peacefulness, joy I think, etc. When samatha is absent, there are the other characteristics of agitation, irritability, etc., that are also present. But that is not the case with anatta. Anatta is *always* the case, it is the inherent condition of a dhamma, but in saying that it is only to say that there is *never a self* present in a dhamma and that a dhamma *never has a self* or self-nature. So what characteristics create anatta? Lack of self = lack of self. That's about it. If you can think of some other positive attributes of dhammas that are only such *because* of not having a self, then perhaps you can build a positive description of what anatta consists of, or at least the characteristics that attend anatta. That's my take on it anyway. Aren't you glad you decided to talk to me about this one more time...? ;-) > ----------------------- > > RE: It is something that the object in question does not have, not > something that it does have. There is no "non-magnetic" characteristic, except as a negative characteristic. If you were to observe the object without having "magnetism" in mind, there would be nothing to observe in it with regard to magnetism. It's something you notice only with regard to magnetism and then notice that it is lacking. > -------------------------- > > KH: It was good to be in agreement for a while, but now we part company again. > > I would say non-magnetic metals had the nature of being non-magnetic. However, I would not say purple (for example) had the nature of being non-magnetic. Well it all comes down to what you mean by "the nature of." To me, "the nature of" means that it is such that it would be impossible for it to be magnetic, and that may very well true. But in order to demonstrate that it is or isn't "it's nature," you have to be able to say what "it's nature is," that aspect of its nature that *causes* it to be non-magnetic. If you can describe it, then I agree it is "it's nature." With magnetism you may actually be able to describe that, and say "for magnetism to take place you have to have certain charges "X" in the molecules. Tin has definite "Y" molecules instead and thus it is in its nature as a "Y" carrier to ever and always be non-magnetic. All that causes a dhamma to not have a self, however, is that it does not have a self. "Self" has no function, like magnetic does, so there is no "something" there to have or not to have. Self is a fiction, a concept, and thus 'non-self' or anatta is simply being free of any such concept, not being "something else" which would then form another sort of self or entity-nature. In some: dhammas ain't got nothing. They have no "self" and they have no "non-self." You can't have an opposite of something that never existed in the first place. All you can have is a lack of it. > (Nor does it have the nature of being magnetic, of course.) > > --------------------- > > RE: Likewise the realization of anatta is an understanding that the normal human assumption of a self is actually not there; it's the awakening to the nature of an illusion, not to the reality of something positive that *is* there. > --------------------- > > KH: Anatta is part of the nature of a paramattha dhamma, but it is not part of the nature of a motor car. I see that the technicalities of your understanding of concepts will cause you to cling to anatta as a "something" in order to distinguish it from concepts. Too bad about that. It's still not anything. It is literally "No Self," not a "No Self" that you can observe. It is no self at all, nothing, nada. > ------------------------------ > > RE: If I see a dhamma with panna and have insight into its nature as anatta, I am seeing that where I associated a dhamma with self-nature and the character of a self, I now see that it has nothing of the kind. It is free of self or anything pertaining to a self. I see its true character as anatta, but there is no way in which the dhamma behaves or displays itself that shows an "anatta" because "anatta" is not a "something," just as non-magnetic is not a "something," but just a lack of the characteristic of being magnetic. > > Good analogy. Well that's hopeful! Maybe we are arguing over doctrinal terminology, rather than facticity. > ------------------------------ > > KH: It would be an even better analogy if we could agree on it. I see sodium as having the nature of being non-magnetic, but I don't see purple or "hello sailor" (etc) as having any such nature. > > Back to the drawing board! :-) The problem with those analogies is that they are nonsense. When you have a nonsense equation it is more correct to say that it doesn't apply, not that it does or doesn't have a given characteristic. If I say "a banana does not have the apple nature" that is just conceptual nonsense, it doesn't actually mean anything. Likewise, if I say "hello Kitty" doesn't have the "anatta" nature, I am now in the realm of pure nonsense. "hello Kitty" doesn't exist, therefore it neither has nor doesn't have *any* characteristics. Something that doesn't exist doesn't have any characteristics at all, but it also doesn't *not* have them. It simply doesn't apply because it's nonsense. If I say "You, Ken H., do not lack a non-beard," I am not saying anything about your characteristics. I am making up a characteristic of negation in order to negate it. That is just pure utter nonsense. It is equally nonsensical to say "a concept does not have not-self." It neither has nor doesn't have *anything.* It's made-up fabrication and so it's just an errant idea. > ----------------------------------- > > RE: To put it another way, if all beings were already enlightened, the idea of anatta would never arise, because the false idea of self would have never occurred in the first place. Anatta is medicine for the illusion of "atta/atman," not something in its own right. > ----------------------------------- > > KH: Regardless of enlightenment or ignorance, all sankhara dhammas are anicca, dukkha and anatta, and all dhammas are anatta. You're leaving the realm of what we can talk about and demonstrate and going back to doctrinal parroting. That's like someone falling off the tightrope of this discussion, Ken, it's just giving up. > PS: I would like to remind you of how this dispute originally came about. The followers of Nararjuna believe that conditioned dhammas do not really exist. They say namas and rupas are just as illusory as concepts (or even more illusory). The question then arises, "To what was the Buddha referring when he taught the doctrine of anatta?" > > The Nagarjunians would have to argue he was referring to both concepts and dhammas, wouldn't they? > > But he wasn't! Well, I'm not equipped to get into that right now. What I would say is that dhammas really do arise, they really are experienceable, and they really do not have a self. But as far as anatta being a positive characteristic, I think that's an error of language. When Buddha said "all dhammas are anatta" the syntax in English should probably translate to "all experienceable objects have no self," meaning they *don't* have a self, not meaning that they *have* a non-self. That is non-sense. :-) Anatta does apply to dhammas, I'm with you on that, but what it means, and what Buddha taught, was that "no objects have any identity as, nor any association with" a self or anything pertaining to a self." It is a statement of freedom from selfhood, not possession of 'non-self.' Anyone who thinks a dhamma can possess an absence should enjoy drinking their empty coffee cup every morning. Yummy! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #113784 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 12:14 am Subject: Re: emails to Ken H epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > Thanks very much pt. I haven't received any since that last one I told you about off list. They were already going into my spam folder. > > I'm just glad it wasn't the voice of a DSG member crying in the wilderness. :-) Most likely it's just some free-floating "anattas" searching for their "dhammas" so they can reattach. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #113785 From: Vince Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna cerovzt@... Dear Sarah just another text on the point According this Sutta, some monks should take care of sila while others not. Only those released by both ways or by discernment (arhants) they can keep a perfect sila in a natural way. Some of the rest, despite being released, they should a task to do because they can fall: "Monks, there are these seven individuals to be found in the world. Which seven? One [released] both ways, one released through discernment, a bodily witness, one attained to view, one released through conviction, a Dhamma-follower, and a conviction-follower. [...] "And what is the individual released through discernment? There is the case where a certain individual does not remain touching with his body those peaceful liberations that transcend form, that are formless, but — having seen with discernment — his fermentations are ended. This is called an individual who is released through discernment. Regarding this monk, I do not say that he has a task to do with heedfulness. Why is that? He has done his task with heedfulness. He is incapable of being heedless. [...] "And what is the individual released through conviction? There is the case where a certain individual does not remain touching with his body those peaceful liberations that transcend form, that are formless, but — having seen with discernment — some of his fermentations are ended, and his conviction in the Tathagata is settled, rooted, and established. This is called an individual who is released through conviction. Regarding this monk, I say that he has a task to do with heedfulness. Why is that? [I think:] 'Perhaps this venerable one, when making use of suitable resting places, associating with admirable friends, balancing his [mental] faculties, will reach & remain in the supreme goal of the holy life for which clansmen rightly go forth from home into homelessness, knowing & realizing it for himself in the here & now.' Envisioning this fruit of heedfulness for this monk, I say that he has a task to do with heedfulness." MN 70 Kitagiri Sutta http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.070.than.html What do you think? (it seems maybe Thanissaro translate "discernment" instead "insight" or "panna"... I'm right in this? best, Vince, #113786 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Mar 1, 2011 11:40 pm Subject: Evading the Present! bhikkhu5 Friends: Why Does Mind Avoid the Present Moment? Is mind truly capable of operating in this present and real moment of now? Memories: When mind is stuck in the forever gone and now unreal past: Memory is at best incomplete, one sided, and revisionist because mental consciousness is a process, which molds thoughts of past events into forms colored by preferences and biases conditioned by past education, experience, and reasoning. These are simply attachments serving the ego, the delusional self. Since memory requires mental processing any noticing of its conclusions is not truly in the present moment, since mind processes these thoughts, feelings, emotions, perspectives, attitudes, and viewpoints constructed in the past. The moment any mental state/idea is formulated by mind, time continues its flow leaving its conclusions behind in the past... Planning: When mind imagines the yet uncome and equally unreal future: Originating from the same mental processes, the motivation to make plans is indicative of a mind afflicted. It is a mind conditioned by dukkha, that is: Mental and/or physical pain, suffering, stressed and dissatisfied, tormented with feelings rising out of a desperate need to protect the delusional self, a mind struggling to prevent what it realizes in its ignorance is inevitable deterioration, death, and annihilation. Moment by moment. Life by life. Mindfulness of the present & Meditation Reveals How Our Minds Operate: Real-time personal observations of our own minds operating in what might be the best approximation of the present moment is during awareness meditation. It reminds of sitting in the middle of a busy train terminal watching travelers come into and disappear out of the view. There seems to be no mental limit as to direction, volume, or capacity in these passing mental phenomena, that all arise conditioned by mental contact with both external and internal events, past, present and future, all totally out of reach of personal control. This does not mean that we are left helpless, as we can chose to: A. Pay attention to these mental phenomena, thereby giving them importance and conditioned reinforcement resulting in clinging and attachment. B. Or, passively observe, smiling in equanimity, simply letting them pass away into the same empty mental oblivion from which they arose. C. Develop and train a mind which is totally devoid of the arising of thought, where all mental processing has ceased. This is a mind free of clinging, desire, and attachment. When all mental processing has ceased, such a mind is truly in the present moment, because no reflection is required, as no mental, or physical action is being processed or contemplated. It all boils down to a personal choice to participate, or not to participate in these flickering, yet captivating effects of mental processing. When faced with such decisions I have found it beneficial to follow Buddha's advice as given in the Ambalatthika-rahulovada Sutta regarding the crucial importance of observing, practicing and training our minds. source: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.061.than.html By our friend and kind editor Ronald J. Chiodi, Concord USA. <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #113787 From: Vince Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 1:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] A Question: What are the Direct Causes of Kamma?/Nina cerovzt@... Dear Nina you wrote: > N: Motion is one of the four great Elements and it can be experienced > through the bodydoor as motion or pressure. > But when speaking of moving a finger, we are thinking of a story > about a finger and think of moving in conventional sense. The ruupa > that is motion is not the same as what we mean by motion in > conventional sense. The ruupa that is motion always arises together > with the other three great elements and at least four more ruupas in > one unit. The four great Elements arise with each group of ruupas and > are a support for the other ruupas in that group. > When you press something that has resilience, such as a cushion, > motion or pressure may appear. But it is so momentary, it falls away > immediately. when you think of it it has gone already. I read in the Vism: "The ordinary term "motion" (gatisamanna) refers to successive arisings in adjacent locations (desantaruppatti) " And also in the same Vism. there is this definition on the four elements: "Air: (vayodistension and motion)". I wonder if the "motion" you explain can be closer to the later while our common use of the word "motion" sounds closer to that successive arising. Should we should understand both uses of "motion" inside the same concept?. It can be a translation problem of duplicity of one word to be applied over different things? > N: Citta has then this object, then that object, it arises and falls > away so fast, but each citta experiences an object. Then this, then > that: then at this moment, then at a next moment... I believe I would understand what you says in a practical way about motion, However, the same word "motion" cause some confusion to me: I'm not sure if your previous explanation of "motion" always needs an association with rupa. In example; in case of remembering a mental image in movement, What is that movement? It would be named "motion"?. Would we use the same pali word for "movement" in this case? best, Vince. #113788 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 2:11 am Subject: Fwd: [dsg] Re: : insight. links. philofillet Hi Ken O Thank you for your response to my long rambling post a few days ago, and your good ideas on practice. I think we basically agree, so I will leave it there. > So metta is use for eradicating of ill will and > asubha is for eradication attachment to lovely objects. We have to use > the appropriate method to rectify our defilements. I am very interested in words that people use, I guess that is called semantics. Well, we have to use words to get as close as we can to explaining and receiving explantions of Dhamma. So I am interested in "rectify", I think we can "rectify" before we can eradicate. And before "rectify" we basically have to stop the onrushing power of the defilements so that we don't get swept away into bad deeds again and again and again, lifetime after lifetime. We have to stand up to them, whether self is involved or not. So maybe "resist?" Resist, rectify and 'radicate. A new three Rs! Metta, Phil #113789 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 2:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace philofillet Hi Rob M and Nina Wow, what a wonderful kusala treat to read an Abhidhamma teacher/writer telling another Abhidhamma teacher/writer whose book he is using about his dana of 40 copies. What is the salutation that one is supposed to use in this case? Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu? In any case, great! :) Metta, Phil p.s Rob, sorry I'll be in Thailand when you're in Tokyo, can you leave a nimitta behind once your actual rupa nama formations have fallen away so we can discuss when I get back to Japan? Haha, please let me know next time you're coming. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob M, > Op 27-feb-2011, om 21:11 heeft robmoult het volgende geschreven: > > > his Sunday, I will be handing out 40 copies of your "Abhidhamma in > > Daily Life" in my Abdhidhamma class. > ------ > N: Wonderful you still do this Abh class. I wrote an intro to the Abh > which is shorter and I think more simple for beginners. #113790 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 2:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Questions for Nina 1: body intimation as "not suitable for comprehension" philofillet Hi Nina > N: The two intimations are the physical conditions for communicating, > conveying an intention by gestures or by speech. When we notice what > mood someone is in then there is not necessarily intimation. Kusala > citta or akusala citta conditions ruupas and we may know that he is > kind or angry. There may not be an intention of that person to convey > a meaning. Ph: I see, I misunderstood. I thought this intimation was anytime the cittas caused a change in facial expression, for example, whether inention to communicate was involved or not. So it is only when there is an intention to communicate? But what we understand as "intention" in conventional language is very different from "intention" in paramattha terms, isn't it? Isn't there always cetana, therefore always intention in any action, technically speak? To me, it wouldn't seem to matter if the person intended to express anger (in conventional terms, thinking "I will do this now!) or whether the dosa rooted cittas caused change in facial expression with no conscious intention of the person involved... > We think very often of the cittas of another person we meet. Usually > we are forgetful of realities. In the satipatthaanasutta where it is > said to be aware of cittas of others, this is meant as a reminder, as > a way of being non-forgetful. We think of the other person's cittas > and the thinking is not us, it is citta that thinks. > I heard this on a recording this morning. Ph: "It is meant as a reminder, as a way of being non-forgetful." That's all it can be, because we can't directly know others' cittas. But we can come close in a way. For example, when I am teaching I have had this experience many, many times. A student is listening to me with full attention and I guess when I try to explain something my brow furrows from frustration at getting it across, and I only notice this after I notice the students brow furrowing in response to mine, and this helps me to check my own arising aversion and my cittas soften, if you will. So the other person acts as a mirror in which I can see my own cittas, very interesting, I don't know if this is particular to Japanese people, maybe they have a special sesitivity or intuition to reading the moods of others, that's what is said, anyways, and this is how harmony is maintained in groups. (A racial stereotype maybe, but Japanese people themselves propogate it.) It is always good to be as sensitive as possible to whether our speech is harsh, or confusing, speech is a great human gift that we have to use with care and gratitude for having been born in this human realm. Metta, Phil p.s #113791 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 2:57 am Subject: Sukin's post on pariyatti philofillet Hi again Nina I remember some years ago you were very fond of a post by Sukin about pariyatti, and Lodewijk was also very impressed. I'm going to be meeting Sukin along with Robert K and hopefully Ivan and others for coffee on Monday, and would like to have that post on hand for discussion. I think that any problems I have with A.S's way of teaching or perhaps you have of writing about Dhamma in your books is about pariyatti, basically. I feel there is too much of a readiness to jump from pariyatti to something more direct. I know you always says "Abhidhamma is not in the book", but I tend to feel that if Abhidhamma doesn't stay in the book until conditions are ripe for the realities to be understood more directly, it is likely to be lobha that takes it out! Anyways, if you (or Sarah, or Sukin) remember the post I am referring to and have it on hand, I would appreciate it rereading it, thanks. Metta, Phil #113792 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 3:42 am Subject: Re: Inner Peace kenhowardau Hi Rob M, Thanks for your reply. I was going to give you the last word but there was something I just couldn't let you get away with: -------------- <. . .> > RM: You are correct that I did not mention anatta in my letter to my friends... in my own defence, there were quite a few suttas where the Buddha did not mention anatta either :-) -------------- KH: Even if anatta is not always expressly mentioned in every sutta, it is central to the meaning of every sutta. As Nyanatiloka says, "[Anatta] is the only really specific Buddhist doctrine, with which the entire structure of the Buddhist teaching stands or falls." (Buddhist Dictionary) Therefore, if you are reading a sutta in a way that does not depend entirely on right understanding of anatta then you are seriously misreading it. Nyanatiloka goes on to say, "All the remaining Buddhist doctrines may, more or less, be found in other philosophic systems and religions. . ." (end quote) I agree with that, but not in a way that would admit to any similarity between the Dhamma and other teachings. Those "remaining Buddhist doctrines" that Nyanatiloka refers to would be similar to other teachings *if* they were studied in isolation. However, when they are studied in conjunction with anatta they, too, become uniquely Buddhist. So, please, let's not hear any more talk of suttas in which the Buddha supposedly did not mention anatta! :-) Ken H #113793 From: "Martin" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 3:28 am Subject: Re: Samsara cmkwk Thank you, Nina. It is only in the meaning of dukkha for samsara (not the term)in the teaching of Dependent Origination. This makes the difference between Buddhism and Hinduism. Regards, Martin --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Martin, > Op 1-mrt-2011, om 1:03 heeft Martin het volgende geschreven: > > > I found that samsara is not included in the teachings of the four > > noble truths and conditioned arising. So it is not part of the > > Buddha Dhammas. What do you think? > ------- > N: Samsara is the cycle of birth and death, and being reborn again > and again is sorrow, dukkha. Because when we are born, we are already > on our way to dying. > The eightfold Path is the way leading to the eradication of > defilements and this means that there will not be any more conditions > for rebirth, for being in the cycle. <...> #113794 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Samsara sarahprocter... Dear Martin, Welcome to DSG! --- On Tue, 1/3/11, Martin wrote: >I found that samsara is not included in the teachings of the four noble truths and conditioned arising. So it is not part of the Buddha Dhammas. What do you think? ... S: Nina has already given you a good answer. Conditioned arising and the wheel of Dependent Origination is all about Dukkha, the cause of dukkha and the continuation of samsara. So it's very much part of Buddha Dhamma. If you go to "Useful Posts" in the Files section of DSG and scroll down to "Samsara", you will find past helpful messages on this topic. We learn that all kinds of dhammas other than the Path factors perpetuate the rounds of becoming - even at this very moment. If you feel inclined, please introduce yourself a little. Are you in Aus? I'm in Manly,Sydney right now, but leaving in a couple of days for Hong Kong and Bangkok. Metta Sarah ========= #113795 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 7:22 am Subject: Re: Sukin's post on pariyatti philofillet Hi again Nina >>I think that any problems I have with A.S's way of teaching or perhaps you have of writing about Dhamma in your books is about pariyatti, basically. Oops, I miswrote, meant to write "any problems I have with A.S's way of teaching or perhaps your way of writing about Dhamma in your books is about pariyatti, basically." Metta, Phil #113796 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 7:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Inner Peace sarahprocter... Dear Nina & Rob M, --- On Tue, 1/3/11, Nina van Gorkom wrote: >N: Thank you for sharing these letters. It is good for those who know nothing about Buddhism. .... S: Yes, I appreciate them too - especially Rob's kindness. Of course, we could quibble about some parts, such as the 'metta to oneself', but I appreciate the gist. ... >N:And the widow's feelings make me think very much of my sister in law who lost her husband, my brother, a year ago. Just at that time we went to Thailand and I was glad to be reminded by Kh Sujin of the present moment, but this is hard to understand for my sister in law. Also my sister lost her partner a few weeks ago. I asked Lodewijk's advice about sending on your letters to my sister in law, and we do not know when it is the right time. My own sister is most critical about any religion, I think that she would not appreciate it. We shall see. Anyway, thank you very much. .... S: I just gave the letters to my mother to read and also your note here, wondering whether they'd be appropriate for your sister and sister-in-law. I asked my mother her opinion on this. She thought "better not" - she thinks we all think too deeply instead of just accepting the natural way of things. I think her point was that people without an interest in the Dhamma prefer to grieve in their own way and will ask (like the widow who asked Rob M) if they wish to hear our comments or read our writings. She thought it might cause extra confusion and agitation for them, especially when they don't understand the content. I personally think we sense if people would like to hear us speak/write a little and you know your sister and sister in law best. Rob E could show the letters to his father and ask him his opinion on this too. Metta Sarah ======= #113797 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 7:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: A Sotapanna sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- On Mon, 28/2/11, Vince wrote: >V:of course, although confidence and attachment are different matters. Falling in wrong actions or thoughts it doesn't have to do directly with the confidence in the teaching. ... S: I think it very much does. The one with complete confidence in the Triple Gem (sotapanna) won't fall into serious wrong actions or thoughts. ... >> SN 55:1 Sotaapattisa.myutta, (Bodhi transl) > "... > 'He possesses the virtues dear to the noble ones - unbroken, untorn, > unblemished, unmottled, freeing, praised by the wise,<...> .... V:>maybe you should check again if what you cites belongs directly to sotapannas. I fear this is not a comment on stream-winners. ... S: That was why I indicated it was from "sotaapattisa.myutta". All these suttas describe the sotapanna who has experienced sotapatti magga and phala cittas, i.e the experience of nibbana. .... V:>Why don't look directly in the direct references to sotapannas? ... S: See above. .... >> S: The Sangiiti Sutta, DN 33, (Walsh transl) may satisfy you, similar to the > SN one I quoted above: > "(14) 'Four characteristics of a Stream-Winner: Here the Ariyan disciple is > possessed of unwavering confidence in the Buddha.....Dhamma....Sangha....And > (d) he is possessed of morality dear to the Noble Ones, unbroken, without > defect, unspotted, without inconsistency, liberating, praised by the wise, > uncorrupted, and conducive to concentration...." .... V:>so I fear maybe you have read quickly the text, and with these cuts perhaps you have misread what is attributed to Buddha instead to the stream-winner. ... S: As you realised later, it was you that read the text a tad quickly:). No problem. It is describing the sotapanna with "unwavering confidence" in the Triple Gem and "unbroken" morality. .... Metta Sarah ======= #113798 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 7:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Buddha taught Silabbata - AN 3.78 sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Tue, 1/3/11, Robert E wrote: > "Letting go..." and "it's gone" can be helpful for everyone, I'm sure. A friend in Bangkok told us last time about how she'd once been in a boat with K.Sujin and had been telling the latter a long story about some problem. KS had just listened patiently and at the end of the story, she simply said: "When are you going to let go?". The friend said this was a really helpful wake up call for her. R:>Ha ha, great story. I see that K. Sujin has a habit of rocking the boat. ;-) I like her approach, cutting through to the moment and to real release. .... S: Ah yes, she's never afraid to rock the boat for the sake of true understanding of the Dhamma:-) Yes, a quick slice through the proliferations that make up samsara most the time.... Enjoying your witty exchange with Ken H - laughed out loud when I got to the drinking of the empty coffee cup:-) Giving him a run for his own good humour and sign-off quips:-)) Metta Sarah =========== #113799 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Mar 2, 2011 7:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] You too should exert yourself... sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- On Sun, 27/2/11, truth_aerator wrote: >>S: Didn't the Buddha teach us that all kinds of conditioned dhamma >are dukkha because they are impermanent and not worth clinging to? A:>Right. But check the timescales: >The body is impermanent, but it is said to last as much as "a hundred years or more. " http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.than.html >Loka of "neither perception nor non-perception" is impermanent, but it lasts 84,000 MK! ... S: Nina has already responded to these comments. No conditioned dhamma lasts more than an instant. ... A:>There is very big difference between anicca, and khanika. Buddha taught Anicca. ... S: Please describe what you understand anicca and khanika to mean and what the difference is as you understand the terms. Metta Sarah =======