#114000 From: "azita" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 8:39 am Subject: notes from KK gazita2002 Hallo folks, here are some of my short notes from our discussion in wonderful Kang Krajaan. :whatever the Buddha taught was about realities. : it can be a burden to have attachments. : how come conventional death without momentary death. : we live in the rapidity of signs : to eliminate the idea of self, it must be the arising of understanding of present moment. : What abbout one separate world, thro anyone of the 6 doorways. These senses dont know ea other. Thinking puts it all together and makes a whole, if not yet enlightened. : no one can stop thinking. : the concept hides the reality. : the important thing is to have understanding rathe than focus on awareness. : no one can condition understanding. : ignoring that which appears... clinging to that which has gone...... never being aware of now! : what appears now is that which can be known patience, courage and good cheer, azita #114001 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 7:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 3/12/2011 9:20:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: HK: Anatta means there are no concepts, only dhammas. ====================================== I'm more on your side than in opposition to you with regard to the nature of concepts, but C'MON, Ken!! That is not what 'anatta' means at all! You will not find that given as the meaning of that Pali word ANYWHERE! With metta, Howard P. S. Leaving for the airport in an hour or so. So, if you or anyone should write me during this week, don't expect anything more than a one-liner in reply. (Sorry.) Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #114002 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 1:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics philofillet Hi Azita it was nice to meet you too, you are as lovely as your voice! Yes, 12 foot tall lobster-clawed Phil is a concept and nice friendly Phil is a concept and bad-mannered, cranky Phil too...only the six worlds are real and only our understanding of them will be liberating. But unlike the lobster Phil the friendly/cranky Phil has gained a certain reality by virtue of the deply accumulated ignorance so I think(or tend to think due to accumulations) that I have to gain liberation with a kind of important conceptual understanding growing *through* it rather than simply aspiring to see through it and drop it via moments of understanding reality...but yes, that is just another story I like to tell and confidence about understanding reality is much stronger now after my trip. What A Sujin said about courage as virya was very en...couraging, wasn't it? metta, phil #114003 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 1:50 pm Subject: Re: Problems again philofillet Hi Lukas We know that the best thing is to understand painful mental feeling as just a conditioned reality but we are limited in our capacity to understand so when courage to observe the present reality is not there why not enjoy some pleasant meditation or other kind of therapy such as yoga? Let's be kind to ourselves and treat ourselves with gentle affection when rhings are really hard but let's keep in mind that only understanding reality will get us out of hell for good? Hang in there! But please no alcohol to deal with the pain. that can't help at all. Metta, Phil #114004 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:09 pm Subject: A cheerful smile philofillet Hi all Needless to say, being an internet junky and living in Japan I hae been consuming very dreary images for the last two days, and now that litterally a million people are cluttering in the dark without heat or food in Northern Japan, things are getting even worse. But suddenly I came across this smile and I felt better. Talking about the human spirit rising to deal with hardship is just a concept and a cliche, but there are good and healing cittas that are being fostered everywhere in this world, along with the lousy ones. Let's all hope we can continue to develop wholesome cittas to deal with all the horrible hardship that is inevitably coming our way. http://sankei.jp.msn.com/affairs/photos/110313/dst11031319000085-p1.htm Metta, Phil #114005 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 2:54 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics philofillet Hello Han > [Han]: Please do not misunderstand me. I am all for chanting Dhamma verses to the dying man. I have even selected two tapes for my family to play for me at my deathbed. One is on the Eleven Parittas. The other one is on Dhammapada verses 153 and 154. Ph: What a good verse! I would also like to have the one about our good deeds welcoming us in the next world like relatives and friends welcoming a traveller home. It is difficult to understand that sort of teaching in the light of a detailed analysis and understanding of paramattha dhammas, but sometimes it is good to have encouraging conceptual teachings, isn't it? And of course it is true that the rebirth citta may find a good destination, that is not a concept, it is a reality. > But I had written, "So all the chanting and reminding may not produce the desired results" in my last post, not because I do not appreciate the value of Dhamma chanting, but because I am not sure of my mental state at the dying moments. At the dying moments my mental faculty may become very weak so that I may not hear, or I may not comprehend even if I do hear, the Dhamma verses that are chanted for me. That was the only reason. Otherwise, I am all for the Dhamma chanting for the dying man. Ph: I think you have a good tape selection and you are fortunate to have loving family members to play it for you, in my case, no children, so unless I am lucky enough (I guess it's lucky...) to have a wife by my side, I will have to count on the kindness of strangers or friends. But as you say, we know enough about death to know that we are unlikely to be perfectly conscious of what is going on in terms of words, so accumulated good kamma is our best companion of all. The other good thing about playing the parittas etc is that it can provide comfort to your loved ones. Metta, Phil > #114006 From: Ken O Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 3:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. ashkenn2k Dear Ken H >KH: Maybe you should. But then again, maybe you shouldn't. It seems to me you >have invented an original theory and become a little bit obsessed with it. > >Maybe you should drop it, go back to the beginning and start your Dhamma study >again. > >If I have understood her correctly, that is something A Sujin says we should all > >do, all the time. > KO: You only have puff and more puff. I never said any new original theory because I already show you what is written in the text, till now you have yet show me any resemblance from the text. A Sujin no doubt is a very good in explaining and teaching nama and rupa. But A Sujin is not correct in her interpretation of samadhi, samantha, satipatthana and some other topics like space, attanuditthi, accumulation. When a teacher starts having their own interpretation of the text where the text say otherwise, then you have to ask yourself this question. Is your teacher right? Its difficult, after so many years one believe one is right and there is no one able to question and prove it with text until now. I am not here to be a crusadar or a challenger, my only wish and always my wish, dhamma is discuss correctly to the text, true to the text. If it ones intepretation, one should acknowledge it is and not saying the text should be interpret in this way or only show certain part of the texts that support one intepretation but not in full. When we are truthful to dhamma, especially to the commentary, then more people will appreciate Buddhism especially the commentary and learn the way to the deathless. Let me repeat again from the Abhidhamma text, Debates commentary <<[35] There is another way of putting it. The teaching of the Exalted One is of two kinds, the hightest-meaning teaching consisting of the aggregates and so forth, and the popular teaching consisting of "butter jar" and so forth. The Exalted One does not indeed, overall run consistency. Hence on the mere expression "there is the person who," must not command adherence. The highest meaning has been declared by the Teacher, without transgressing the concept. So, another wise man also should not, in explaining the highest meaning, overrun a concept>> on the word dhamma Commentary to MN1 Root of Existence <> Summary of Topics of Abhidhamma and Commentary ; pg 5, 6 <> This is the third time i am saying this dhamma learning is not limited to comprehending of nama and rupa. learning nama and rupa is not about nama and rupa vs concept, and in Abhidhamma texts, there are also describing of concepts as meditaiton object. If you dont agree, I just leave the discussion as it is. Ken O #114007 From: Ken O Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? ashkenn2k Dear Alex it is not about freedom of will, it should be there is no self in will but there is a will (volition), will itself does not get anyone anywhere, there must be panna, chanda, viriya and sati. Oh, one more sila. Understand more of this, then these will answer your questions below. On the repetition of practise - Just like there is no doer in the doing, but then there is a doing even though there is no doer. doing can be repeated again and again because doing is just another dhamma, there is no one that is repeating all this, it is just the doing doing again and again Commentary to Satipatthana Sutta <> this is not just the only reference, there is also a few references of repeatedly practise in terms of wisdom and concentration, and even compassion Ken O > >Hello all, > >I agree that there is no freedom of will, and everything is anatta. [cut] >Alex > #114008 From: Ken O Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems again ashkenn2k Dear Lukas You stop doing it when you feel well, IMHO is the cause of your problem. You should have something that give you a constant reminder to understand dhamma daily be it reading a short passage of a dhamma, or listening to dhamma or verse pin on your wall or closet. Panna development is through repeated understanding of dhamma. You know there are many ways to understand dhamma, by nama and rupa, by D.O or by reflection of impermanence, it is up to you, choose one that suits your temperaments. No one can tell you what, but you will know which suits you, you have to trial and error. Ken O > #114009 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 4:02 am Subject: Impermanence is a Fact! bhikkhu5 Friends: Impermanence cannot be Stopped! Let us face the dry facts! Everything is impermanent! We can all understand impermanence superficially. But deep down in our subconscious mind a sense of permanence is lurking. So we keep patching up our broken teeth, wrinkled dry skin, brittle nails, grey hair, hunched backs, weak eyes, impaired hearing, becoming sick, breaking bones & many other things caused by the inevitable impermanence of this fragile body. Similarly do our moods, our feelings, our thoughts, our perceptions, and our memories all go through many changes in every moment. We take medicines, see mental health specialists, & do many other things, including meditation, to correct our restless flickering minds! While we are doing this, impermanence is still going on crushing everything both inside our body and mind and also outside in all the world relentlessly... While all the organs, all the cells, nervous system, quality of blood, capacity of oxygen content in the lungs and the bone structure are going through this very rapid and unmistakable change, no matter how much we patch up on the surface and beneath the skin, impermanence is working its due course quite persistently underground & inside the body and mind. Nothing on this earth, no science, no technology, can ever delay or stop this proceeding of change! Impermanence keeps burning everything up unstoppable and systematically! Seeing impermanence (anicca) is the key that opens mind to see suffering, and non-self! The moment we understand this very clearly, our mind opens to the fact that things change without leaving a trace behind to follow the path that impermanence has taken. This is called voidness or signlessness... This awareness evaporates the desire for anything that is impermanent! It also evaporates all aversion growing from our disappointed expectations. Then naturally, this clean mind becomes fully aware of not having any agent, immovable mover, or controller, which sometimes is called "Self, I, Me, Ego" or even "Soul" by some people. This element of Dhamma, this basic intrinsic nature of all, this law of Dhamma is known in Buddhism as emptiness of self! The Blessed Buddha said: Sabbe Dhammā Anatta = All States are Selfless! Seeing impermanence with wisdom is the key to detachment, calming, stilling, ceasing, and releasing mental relinquishment. Joyous Freedom is the result! In the Mahā-suññata Sutta (MN 122 ) The Blessed Buddha points out that suffering arises from clinging and attaching to all impermanent things: "I do not see even a single kind of form from the change and alteration of which there would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, and despair in one who lusts for it and takes delight in it!" The same is true of all transient feeling, perception, mental construction=intention & sorts of consciousness! If we tenaciously cling to any of them, then we suffer, when they decay! This passage clearly states, that suffering arises from the attachment to form, not because the form is impermanent, but because we are attached to impermanent form. When we attain full enlightenment, we do not suffer! This happens not because we make any impermanent things now everlasting! This happens only because we release our clinging to all impermanent things. Impermanent phenomena continue to be impermanent, whether we ever gain enlightenment or not. As the blessed Buddha also has explained exactly: "Bhikkhus, whether Tathāgatas appear or do not appear, there is always this constantly established element of Dhamma, this fixed law of Dhamma: All that is conditioned and constructed is impermanent. To this aTathāgata fully awakens and fully understands. So awakened and thus understanding, he announces, points it out, declares, establishes, expounds, and explains it, classifies and clarifies it: All that is conditioned is actually impermanent... Bhikkhus, whetherTathāgatas appear or do not appear, there is always this precedent condition and absolute of Dhamma, this anchored law of Dhamma: All that is conditioned and constructed is unsatisfactory, & thus suffering! To this aTathāgata fully awakens and fully understands. So awakened and thus understanding, he announces, points out, declares, establishes, explains, and clarifies it: All that is conditioned and constructed is indeed Suffering! Bhikkhus, whether Tathāgatas appear or do not appear, there is always this situation present, a subtle truth of Dhamma, this safe doctrine of Dhamma: All states are without a self! To this fact anyTathāgata fully awakens and fully understands. So awakened and understanding, he announces, points out, declares, establishes, explains, and clarifies it: All states are without self!" Anguttara Nikāya I 285 By seeing the impermanence, suffering & selflessness thus in all conditioned things in this and any other world, one naturally becomes disenchanted with everything constructed. Disenchantment leads to disillusion and dispassion towards everything. Within a dispassionate mind craving for everything will gradually fade away (virāga ). With this insight one lets go of all attachment. Being dispassionate, one thereby liberates oneself from all this evil misery... Being liberated, one knows that one is liberated, has ended rebirth, has lived the Noble life, has done what should be done, and that there is nothing more to be done! This means that attaining full freedom from all suffering indeed begins with this very perfect and acute awareness of impermanence ...! Source: Bhante Henepola Gunaratana : From Impermanence to Liberation. Buddhist Publication Society http://www.bps.lk/ Newsletter #63: 2010-1. <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #114010 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 9:50 pm Subject: Suffering is Inevitable... bhikkhu5 Friends: Suffering in this World is Inevitable! The entire world is in flames, all the entire world is blazing up in smoke! The entire world is burning. The entire world is decaying and vanishing... But, that which does not vanish or burn, which is experienced by the Nobles, where Death has no entry, in that stilled silence mind finds sweet delight. Samyutta Nikya 1.168 Without sign, unknown, uncertain, is the life here of mortals, demanding, short, tied up with pain and misery, for there's no way by which those who are born will not die. All Beings will surely die even if they become very old! Like ripe fruits, whose downfall, and whose danger is always inevitable falling, so for mortals, once born, the constant danger is forever hereafter death! As a potter's clay vessels, large & small, fired & unfired, all end up broken, so too life heads to death. Young & old, wise & foolish, rich & poor: Everyone comes under the sway of death! All have death as their assured certain end. Note the hands are taken to the Head & Mind that suffers! For those overcome by death, gone to the other world, father cannot protect son, nor relatives any family. See: Even while relatives are looking & wailing heavily, mortals are one by one led away like dumb cows to the slaughter... In this way is the world afflicted with aging & death! Knowing this indeed inescapable and unavoidable nature of the world, the enlightened don't ever grieve! You don't know from where the dying came or where he is going... Seeing neither end, you lament uselessly in empty vain, helping nobody at all! If, by lamenting, confused, harming yourself, any good use could be gained the prudent would do it as well. But not by weeping & grief do you gain peace of mind. Pain just arises all the more. Your body is hurt. You grow thin, pale, harming yourself by yourself. Not in that way of folly, are the dead protected. Lamentations are all pointlessly in vain. Not abandoning grief, a person suffers all the more pain. Bewailing one whose time is done, you fall under the sway of grief yourself. Look at others, going along, people arriving in line with their past actions: Falling under the sway of death, beings simply shivers here, for a short unstable waste of a life... For however they imagine it to be, it always becomes quite other than that! That's a fate of their blinded estrangement. See this evil way of the world... Even if a person lives a century, or even more, he will be separated from his community, friends & relatives. He leaves his life alone & naked right there! So, having heard the Arahat, who have subdued all lamentation, seeing that the dead are ones whose time is done, understanding: "I can't fetch them back." Just as one would extinguish a burning shelter with water, even so does the Enlightened One, intelligent, clever and wise, blow away any arisen sorrow, like a strong wind, a bit of cotton fluff! Seeking your own happiness, you should pull out your own injuring arrow: All your own lamentation, longing, hoping, hungering producing only sorrow! With arrow pulled out, independent, attaining peace of awareness, all grief is transcended. Griefless you are unbound, free, safe, at ease in peace... Source: Salla Sutta: The Arrow. Snp 3.8, PTS: Sn 574-593 Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (Edited Extract) http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.3.08.than.html Kindly forwarded by our Friend Ivan Dhammavaro Wijaya: <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #114011 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 10:24 pm Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > <. . .> > Ph: What a good verse! I would also like to have the one about our good deeds welcoming us in the next world like relatives and friends welcoming a traveller home. It is difficult to understand that sort of teaching in the light of a detailed analysis and understanding of paramattha dhammas, but sometimes it is good to have encouraging conceptual teachings, isn't it? And of course it is true that the rebirth citta may find a good destination, that is not a concept, it is a reality. > -------------------------- Hi Phil, Han, Ken O and all, I have always had difficulty with complex sentences.( Even at school, where English was my strongest subject, I had trouble understanding poetry. ) So it is not surprising that I had trouble understanding this quote from Ken O: < Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:11 pm Subject: Re: Problems again kenhowardau Hi Lukas and Ken O, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Lukas > > You stop doing it when you feel well, IMHO is the cause of your problem. You > should have something that give you a constant reminder to understand dhamma > daily be it reading a short passage of a dhamma, or listening to dhamma or verse > pin on your wall or closet. Panna development is through repeated understanding > of dhamma. You know there are many ways to understand dhamma, by nama and > rupa, by D.O or by reflection of impermanence, it is up to you, choose one that > suits your temperaments. No one can tell you what, but you will know which > suits you, you have to trial and error. > ------------- KH: Most of all, Lucas, understand the present moment. There are only the presently arisen dhammas: no choosing - just the dhammas that have been conditioned to arise. Ken H #114013 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:17 pm Subject: 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 > > > >This is good - so there is still kamma, but a different kamma then if the kamma > > >patha takes place, since there is no kamma in the body door...? That would make > > >sense, if I understand you correctly. Less negative kamma than if the act was > >committed. > > KO: I could not say it is less negative kamma because the text did not compare > the kamma commit by the mind door and the body door. the comparision I > come across is more like the being we kill, for eg a heaviier kamma if the human > we kill is virtous than an evil one. > > KO: on another topic, on about conventional learning and direct learning. pg > 141, The All Embracing Net of Views, The commentary > > < dhammas (paramathadhamma); (1) the charcteristic of specific nature > (sabhavalakkhana); and (2) the general characteristics (samannalakkhana). The > comprehension of the characteristics of the specific nature is direct > experiential knowledge (paccakkanana); the comprehension of the general > characteristic is inferential knowledge (anumananana). Scripture, as a means > for is acquiring wisdom born of learning (sutamayi panna), issues only in > inferential knowledge. But by considering the things learned, one becomes > established in reflective acquiescence, give rise to the wisdom born of > reflection (cintamayi panna), and by meditative development (bhavana), gradually > achieves direct experiential knowledge.>> > > Then in A Treatise of Paramis, a little bit more details. > http://www.abhidhamma.org/Paramis-%20perfections%20of%20insight.htm > > This is an analysis of the sphere of learning: the five aggregates, the twelve > sense bases, the eighteen elements, the four truths, the twenty-two faculties, > the twelve factors of dependent origination, the foundations of mindfulness, > etc., the various classifications of phenomena such as the wholesome, etc., as > well as any blameless secular fields of knowledge which may be suitable for > promoting the welfare and happiness of beings, particularly grammar. Thus, with > wisdom, mindfulness, and energy preceded by skilful means, a bodhisattva should > first thoroughly immerse himself in this entire sphere of learning -- through > study, listening, memorization, learning, and interrogation; then he should > establish others in learning. In this way the wisdom born of learning (sutamayi > panna) can be developed. So too, out of his wish for the welfare of others, the > bodhisattva should develop the wisdom of ingenuity in creating opportunities to > fulfil his various duties to his fellow beings and the skilful means in > understanding their happiness and misery. > > > Then he should develop wisdom born of reflection (cintamayi panna) by first > reflecting upon the specific nature of the phenomena such as the aggregates, and > then arousing reflective acquiescence in them. Next, he should perfect the > preliminary portion of the wisdom born of meditation (pubbabhagabhavanapanna) by > developing the mundane kinds of full understanding through the discernment of > the specific and general characteristics of the aggregates, etc.22 To do so, he > should fully understand all internal and external phenomena without exception as > follows: "This is mere mentality-materiality (namarupamatta), which arises and > ceases according to conditions. There is here no agent or actor. It is > impermanent in the sense of not being after having been; suffering in the sense > of oppression by rise and fall; and non-self in the sense of being unsusceptible > to the exercise of mastery." Comprehending them in this way, he abandons > attachment to them, and helps others to do so as well. Entirely out of > compassion, he continues to help his fellow beings enter and reach maturity in > the three vehicles, assists them to achieve mastery over the jhanas, > deliverances, concentrations, attainments, and mundane direct knowledges, and > does not desist until he reaches the very peak of wisdom and all the > Buddha-qualities come within his grasp. You have been finding some very valuable things to read lately. I will study this at more length. It gives very specific information on the relationship between pariyatti and development of more direct insight. I appreciate the quotes. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #114014 From: "philip" Date: Sun Mar 13, 2011 11:38 pm Subject: Re: Problems again philofillet Hi again Lukas I will just add to what I wrote that even if we choose to seek comfort through pleasant forms of meditation or yoga of course the lobha involved can also be undersood as dhamma so there is always understanding all the time...there is even virya when we are lying in bed feeling sorry for ourselves! Understanding dhammas truly is our best medicine! metta, phil > #114015 From: han tun Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:18 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Ken H (Phil), [Ken H]: And that (at last) brings me to the point of my message. Han and Phil are talking about their death-bed arrangements. In other words, they are talking about a conventional aspect of Dhamma. Thankfully, I think they are both acknowledging that such arrangements are secondary to Dhamma study. Personally, I couldn't care less about my death-bed arrangements. I care only about understanding the present moment. There is birth and death now, in the present moment, and in every other moment past or future. That is the liberating truth of the Dhamma. So what is so special about a future death citta? ---------- [Han]: Fine! Thank you very much for your kind advice. Kind regards, Han #114016 From: "philip" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:26 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics philofillet Hi Ken H, Han and all > [Han]: Fine! > Thank you very much for your kind advice. Ph: I double Han's thank you. It is always good to have reminders that understanding the present dhamma is best. Metta, Phil #114017 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:50 am Subject: Which khandha/ayatana/dhatu is the brain? truth_aerator Hello all, What reality is the brain, especially the "firing of the neurons" that is one of the factors responsible for consciousness? 1) In what khandha(s) does it fit? 2) In what ayatana(s) does it fit? 3) In what dhatu does it fit? With metta, Alex #114018 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Thanks, Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E > > three good translations available online, > > Right View and its Commentary > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel377.html > > The Removal of Distracting thoughts and commentary > > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wheel021.html > > the Satipatthana sutta and commentary > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/soma/wayof.html > > I only read commentary written by ancient monks :-). There are a few other good > commentaries that are not online that maybe you could get your hands on > especially this on the Roots of Existence (MN1) and the commentary. It wrote > extensively on how cravings, wrong views and conceit cause the problem of > misconceivings there is a self. I wish I had an organized idea of what ancient commentaries were available in what forms - online, in book only but available for purchase in English; which are only in Pali and what suttas they correspond to, as well as commentaries on the Abhidhamma. I have some ideas, but generally when people give commentary and sub-commentary quotes, I have no idea where they are getting them from. Any thoughts on this from you or others would be appreciated. I guess my first priority should be the Vism and the commentaries on Anapanasati and Satipatthana suttas. Any ideas to what extent the ancient commentaries on these are available online or in English print? When I see you giving the link for Soma or Nanamoli on satipatthana or other suttas, should I assume this is a more modern commentary? I too am more interested in the ancient commentaries where they are available. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #114019 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:55 am Subject: the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E and Howard, > > Here's my latest entry in the Longest Post competition. :-) You're going to have to work harder to catch up with my exchanges with Sukin. I think we set the record. :-) > ---------- > > > KH: Let's be honest: no one at DSG has ever said that dhammas arose independently.The only dispute the only real, on-going dispute at DSG - has been over whether or not dependently arisen dhammas were ultimately real. > > > RE: Uh...that is incorrect, Ken. I've never said that dhammas aren't real so you must have me confused with someone else. > ---------- > > KH: Perhaps we have different ideas of what "real" means. :-) But my aim was to look beyond these interminable discussions and acknowledge the reasons behind them. > > It's not just you. Over the years *many* people at DSG have seemed desperately keen to find fault with the Abhidhamma. Why? That is a separate topic. "Real" no problem; fault with other areas - well, yeah. The reason is that parts of Abhidhamma and particularly the local interpretation here via commentary, sometimes seem at odds with established traditions as well as suttas. > ------------------ > > RE: What the ongoing dispute has been for *me* over the years, and we have talked about it many times, is whether dhammas > had an independent, definite identity that is fixed in character outside of arising conditions. > ------------------ > > KH: Perhaps I shouldn't have said "to find fault with the Abhidhamma" maybe the aim of those people has been to find fault with certain understandings of the Abhidhamma. The aim is not to find fault, but to find the truth. We have no choice but to inquire into things that don't seem to hold up to the principles of the Dhamma, and there are bound to be some disputes about that. That doesn't mean that either side is either insincere or necessarily wrong. > It has been generally agreed here (1) that there are only dhammas, and (2) that all dhammas are absolutely devoid of self. But the literal interpretation of that rule is a bit too cut and dried for some people. And so we have seen desperate attempts at finding exceptions to it, no matter how subtle or obscure. It is very easy to slip various presupositions into the mix when you try to draw conclusions from those two principles, such as the status of concepts as non-dhammic in nature, and the non-application of the prime principles of Buddhism to conventional experience; the supposed self-based nature of "formal meditation" and many other areas where the conclusions are not based directly on the two prime statements that you started on, but on various concepts that others disagree with. There are many other details that are not indisputable but which are treated as such by those who believe in a particular point of view of the Dhamma. The fact that there are only dhammas does *not* necessitate that cittas are single, unimpeded events that only interact as one dies as another arises, that there is only one citta at a time, or that each sense area is a completely separate universe. Those are all separate conclusions drawn from other sources, not directly derived from the prime realities we all agree on. And the list of those things which are just *assumed* to be true based on a particular set of doctrines goes on and on. > --------------------------- > > RE: That's *my* issue. There are other issues of course, but in terms of paramatha dhammas that is the main one. I have said many times that I did not like the idea of the dhamma being a sort of independent "monad" that has fixed, describable characteristics of definite function and duration. > --------------------------- > > KH: Yes, but *why* don't you like that idea? Why is it so threatening? It does not match my understanding of anicca as an absolute principle, that experience is a continual flux of interactive conditions, rather than a neat set of self-enclosed dominos that are predictably lined up and executed - a kind of clockwork if you will. I have not reached a definite conclusion and I get a lot of value out of the discussions of conditions and kamma according to the Abhidhamma view, and I continue to evolve in my understanding, but those issues remain as ones that need to be resolved, as they seem a very neat formulation of someone who has stopped the flow of dhammas to explain it thoroughly, rather than grappling with the great mass of continually arising factors that make up samsara. > ------------------------------ > > RE: To my mind, this kind of hyper-objective characterization with all its precise detail may be an idealized version of the way dhammas really arise. It is this precise "we know exactly how it works in detail" faith in the exact descriptions of conditions, characteristics and functions that I have had some doubt about, and have questioned in various ways. I tend to think that reality is sloppier than that, but I have been sincerely discussing and investigating and am open to the possibility that it really is a precisely constructed clockwork that will come out according to conditions in a predictable way - if one had the understanding and predictive power of a Buddha, that is. > ------------------------------- > > KH: Sounds to me like more desperate attempts at denying the undeniable. Sounds to me like you are too closed-minded to contemplate what I am suggesting to you here. If something gets too complex or confusing you fall back on your neat formulas of what must be taking place. It's not a "desperate attempt" to "deny the undeniable." It's called having an open mind that tries to look at the actual reality of what is there, not buy into a neat and convenient simple formula that is handed to you. I can understand how that might not make sense to you, or be too challenging for you to want to consider. So you can just see me as incredibly "desperate," since that's the only possibility you can see in your one-dimensional reality. > ----------------------- > > RE: Anyway, *that* is my issue with the Abhidhamma description of ultimate realities, *not* whether dhammas actually arise and have a momentary existence that is real. I think that the elements of experience - aka dhammas - most definitely *do* arise and leave a distinct mark of experience as they do, as well as further conditioning other experiential elements, and in many ways I am > very content with the way they are described and talked about here. So please, don't try to distract from the real issue of svabhava that has been raised in great detail in this thread, by raising a straw man that keeps us from confronting the actual point that has been made - that there is *no internal contents to a dhamma that would constitute any kind of being or entity* > ----------------------- > > KH: Or phenomenon (dhamma) . . Well, if to you "being" or "entity" are synonymous with "dhamma," that would explain a lot about your self-based view of dhammas. > -------------------------------- > > RE: and that dhammas merely arise and behave as the conditions that give rise to them dictate at the moment in which these same conditions bring them into existence, and they then fall away with just as little meaning as they arose. *That* is the point of this thread, and you are free to agree with it, or disagree and say that you believe that each dhamma has genuine "own-being" in the sense that, beyond being real, they *carry* their characteristic like a real entity should, and *have* that character rather than simply appearing and disappearing in a specific way. > > That's the issue at hand, and I urge you to be brave enough to address it, and not dissemble by making up some other nonsense about "existence" upon which we actually agree. > --------------------------------- > > KH: I will admit there may be some finer points about sabhava that I have not correctly grasped. That remains to be seen. But the main thing is that dhammas do have sabhava (essence). That is what makes them different from concepts, which have no essence. You'd better take a look at what you mean by "essence," because that is a self-based notion if there ever was one. You are assigning a little "self"-thingy to dhammas, rather than seeing them as empty and purely situational phenomena. I am afraid that is a view of entity that is anti-anatta. What do you think anatta means anyway? If there is no self or connection to self of any dhamma, the whole reason for that understanding is that there is no substantial core or substance to dhammas in any way shape or form. I'm afraid you have a real internal contradiction here. You are espousing anatta and at the same time giving dhammas a "hook" that you can hang onto. That does not breed detachment from dhammas, but attachment to essences. What is an essence in your view that ride around with or on or in a dhamma? What exactly do they consist of, these little eggs of meaning that you have assigned to momentary passing phenomena? > --------------------- > > > KH: If dependently arisen dhammas were *not* ultimately real then the only dhamma that *was* ultimately real would be nibbana. Nibbana would be what we are looking at now, and the secret to enlightenment would be simply to "look more closely." > > > RE: Well, we can discuss this in another thread. Right now I'm concerned about crushing the substantialist view of "own-being" as a possession of a dhamma, rather than a characteristic way of functioning and behaving, that's all. > -------------------- > > KH: OK, we'll discuss it on another thread, but my point was that all meditators all people who see the Dhamma as a list of things to do need to discredit the theory of paramattha dhammas. The theory of paramattha dhammas explains how the eightfold path (along with everything else that is real) is just a matter of uncontrolled, momentary dhammas. > > That doesn't fit with the idea of formal meditation. We'll continue to disagree about that, but it does not directly impact the idea that dhammas do or don't have own-being. Dhammas can arise *more* uncontrollably without own-being. Own-being adds a sense of predictability and order to the arising and effect of dhammas that leaves the universe in much better control. If you can understand the essences of dhammas and how they must respond to various conditions, you can actually live in a more ordered and substantial universe. I believe that is a significant increase in self-view, and that you are taking your self-view, which has not been eradicated, and inserting it into your beloved dhammas for safe-keeping, control and a sense of safety and order. It is an erected safe haven for the self-concept, much more so than "formal meditation" or any other merely worldly activity. > -------------------------------------- > > RE: As for whether anything is ultimately real other than nibbana, the point of agreement is that everything is *conditioned* other than nibbana, > -------------------------------------- > > KH: Every *reality* other than nibbana is conditioned. Even concepts arise for a reason. They still have conditions at the root of their arising. If a nama is entertaining a concept, the concept may not be real, but the conditions that lead to the concept arising and the nama entertaining it are still real. Everything that arises is conditioned in that sense. Taking the conditions away from concepts does not alter that reality. Therefore you seem to be creating a universe that just floats around arbitrarily and that does not reflect reality at all. > ------------------------- > > RE: and in that sense nibbana is the only thing that has an *independent* existence, whereas every single conditioned dhamma is just a temporary product of conditions. That is why all dhammas are anicca, they are subject to the changing winds of conditions which are constantly shifting. Nibbana is impervious to conditions and is separate and apart from conditions. So it has a different type or level of reality, but that is all. Dhammas *do* actually arise, but that is *all* they do. That's the extent of their "reality." The whole point of samsara is that it pivots on an extremely thin and tenuous fulcrum, and as soon as conditions stop arising, it's over! It's as if it had never been. > --------------------------- > > KH: I'm not sure if I have understood that properly, but it seems mostly accurate to me. The only part I would definitely disagree with was the explanation of anicca. > > I say anicca forms part of the essence of a dhamma. Hardness (for example) forms part the essence of a tangible rupa, and so too does anicca. You're falling back on a non-explanatory statement. I am talking about what anicca actually *is,* you are talking about where it lives. There is no understanding of anicca itself in your statement. It is just an empty mantra. You don't even know what you actually mean or what you are saying when you say "anicca forms part of the essence of a dhamma," because you cannot explain what that statement actually means. You have no idea, you just know that it is the right thing to say. Anicca is *meaningless* as a "part of" anything. Anicca has a meaning which is that all dhammas have a non-static, changing nature. That is not a static characteristic, it is a characteristic of how dhammas *behave.* They change, they don't stay the same. When the Abhidhamma talks about the three phases of the existence of a dhamma, how it arises, performs its function and then falls away, that is the actual mechanism of anicca, that is what anicca means. It is describing that process of arising, activity and falling away. That's what it is. It's not a weird unknown something *on* or *in* a dhamma. Do you think the Buddha just made up words because they sound pretty? "All dhammas have x, y & z." Sometimes your fear of investigating what your treasured concepts actually are lead you to a very unintelligent position, where you can only repeat generalities and never say anything that shows actual understanding of your own prime principles. You ought to cut that out and stop clinging to a few repeated sentences! Talk about, think about, what anatta and anicca are actually referring to, or you are never going to develop pariyatti, you will just keep repeating a few pat statements over and over again like a mindless parrot. If I go to the trouble of giving my description of how anicca works, I don't want to hear back the same old crap about it being a "characteristic of dhammas." I already know that. I want to know what you think anicca *is.* What kind of characteristic is it? How do you experience it? What does it do? If you disagree with my description you should be prepared to counter it with one of your own, not that it is a "characteristic." Any schoolboy in Burma knows that when they are five. > ---------------------------------- > > > KH: In that scenario, anatta would lose all relevance. At best it would be (as Ven Thanissaro claims it is) a mere technique for making looking less stressful. > > > RE: I challenge you to show a quote of Thanissaro that makes such a weird claim. > ---------------------------------- > > KH: It's no secret. I think almost everyone knows by now what Thanissaro B is trying to tell them. > ------------------- > > RE: I doubt it exists. No one says anatta is a "technique." > -------------------- > > KH: Just Google it! Here's something I found with my first click: > > The Not-self Strategy > by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu ... > KH: And on it goes. In all of his essays, TB clearly denies that anatta means there is no atta (no self). He makes no secret of his belief. I don't read it that way, although I can understand your reaction to seeing anatta as a way to end suffering, since you see it as an objective characteristic of dhammas, like non-magnetism. :-) I wouldn't talk about anatta the same way as Thanissaro, still he never says that "atta exists." He says concepts of self and not-self are both transcended in direct understanding, and that is true, even to you. You just suspect other things based on that, which aren't actually said. > ---------------------- > > RE: It is a realization, an understanding to be had, that there is no self at the heart of arising phenomena. But that is *all* that anatta is. Anatta means "no self." It doesn't mean anything else. It doesn't mean "great and holy characteristic." > It doesn't mean "wondrous lynchpin of the teachings." It means *no self,* nothing, nada, where self had been assumed to play a role. It's an absolute and smashing, devastating corrective to the whole deeply-rooted concept of self and the whole conceptual-emotional promontory that is built on the concept of self. > Its relevance is to take away the attachment to self and the supposed things of that self so that dukkha can be ended. That's all. It's like taking metaphysical rat poison and killing the self dead. Anatta is not some holy existent like nibbana. It is the *nothing* at the heart of self-hood, that's > it's point. Where we think there is self, nothing is there. It is that great freedom from the ball and chain of self that anatta represents. It is nothing at all unto itself. *Nothing.* > ---------------- > > KH: Anatta is everything. It is an inherent characteristic of everything that really exists, even nibbana. You still can't explain what it is or how it appears as part of a dhamma. I get nothing from you but generalized assertions. What you do assert though is that dhammas have "essences" the equivalent of an atta for every little dhamma. Your true beliefs totally contradict your empty assertions about anatta and anicca as characteristics. > --------------------- > > RE: Ken, you seem to have a tendency to make icons and entities out of your favourite parts of the Dhamma. I would watch out for that! :-) > --------------------- > > KH: Anatta can never be taken too far. Whenever there are problems with the Abhidhamma it is because anatta has not been taken far enough. Yes, and you are the one, Ken, who doesn't take it far enough. You believe that dhammas have little essences, and that anatta is an objective characteristic, a "thing" that is part of a dhamma. You deny the literal meaning of anatta as "no-self," thinking that it must be something else that you can hang onto. You deny the emptiness of dhammas thinking they are full of meaning and function that is substantial and owned by the individual dhamma, as if it were a little person in a special little universe. You have a lovely place called samsara that has essences and own-being, and where anatta and anicca are your special friends, rather than taking away your life as they were meant to do. You are clinging to dhammas with all your might. And you don't have the slightest interest in the real anatta which would leave you hanging in empty space with nothing in your hands. Best, and with all good wishes, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114020 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:22 am Subject: the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Ken H. I wanted to add a note: my paragraph on anicca in this post, not to mention one or two other paragraphs, were pretty harsh and pretty personal. I wanted you to know that the only reason I spoke to you so intensely is because of your absolute commitment to the reality of dhammas, otherwise I would not take such liberties. However, I may have overshot and been too unruly, and if so I hope you'll forgive me. Believe me there is no harm intended. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114021 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:18 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113603) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > ... > > > [J:] Similarly, a computer monitor does not break down into visible object. > > > > [RE] I disagree. The concept of a computer monitor is formed by visible object + interpretation, not interpretation *without* visible object. > > =============== > > J: Right. The concept of a computer monitor is formed by the mind on the basis of the experience of visible object. I've not been saying otherwise. We agree on that. > But this doesn't mean that there is something called a computer monitor to begin with that 'breaks down' into visible object. I didn't actually say that. I said the concept is formed on the basis of visible object + interpretation or conceptualization. There is no "computer monitor" per se, but there is the collection of visible moments and interpretations that give rise to the concept of computer monitor. In that sense they are intimately related. Even though one does not equal the other, the reality obscured by the concept is the actuality of visible object-moments, interspersed with other namas. > That is a projection or assumption based on how we think about the world conventionally. It's not how the world is actually experienced, in absolute terms. I agree, but I think it's important that the projection or assumption is a projection of what we think is there when we experience certain actual dhammas. It is not an arbitrary assocation, even though it is a deluded one. > > =============== > 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. > > =============== > > J: I don't see where there is any denial of a path. Simply put, while things are not seen to be as they are in actuality, because of accumulated ignorance and wrong view, the hearing of how things actually are can condition the arising of awareness and understanding that gradually erodes that ignorance and wrong view. > > To the unenlightened being, computer monitor (for example) is regarded as a part of the reality of the world. In absolute terms, as explained in the teachings, there is the experiencing of visible object with lots of levels of thinking/processing overlaid on that. > > The enlightened person still has multiple levels of thinking/processing following the sense-door experience, but he no longer takes anything for being other than as it is in the absolute sense. I agree with all of the above. > > =============== > > 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. > > =============== > > J: And if pariyatti arises a lot more quickly, enlightenment will come sooner ;-)) > > Seriously though, did the Buddha teach his followers to break everyday objects down into paramattha dhammas? I don't think so. He taught them what paramattha dhammas are, and the development of the understanding of their characteristics. He also talked about everyday life and looking at our lives according to principles of Dhamma. I know you disagree with that, but I feel obligated to repeat it. :-) > > =============== > > > 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. > > > > [RE] 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. > > =============== > > J: Yes, agreed. That is a shock! :-) > > =============== > > > [J] 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). > > > > [RE] Mental construction is constructed from what? What is the object of mental construction? It is proliferations of dhammas is it not? > > =============== > > J: Mental construction construes. It's object is concepts. Not all thinking of this kind is proliferation; the enlightened being also mentally construes based on objects experienced through the sense-doors. But all concepts are based on proliferation or interpretation or construction of some kind based on dhammas that are experienced. It's impossible for a concept to arise and be experienced unless there are also namas present that are experiencing it or forming parts of the experience. So concepts although deemed to be unreal are part of a real process that construes them, and delusion takes place as a real process of dependent arising and as part of conditions, not out of nowhere and not arbitrarily but based on the understanding of the namas that are present and their given activities. In that sense, conceptual construction is real, even though concepts are not. > > =============== > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Regarding your statement about mindfulness as being "something that can be developed within ordinary perceptions as one sees more clearly what [ordinary perceptions] really are - rupas and namas". > > There is some circularity here ;-)) Seeing more clearly that what are regarded as ordinary perceptions are really just namas and rupas can only occur if there is actual mindfulness (unless you mean seeing more clearly at an intellectual level). I don't see the same radical break between understanding and seeing that I think you do. I see them as coexisting and growing in clarity. In other words, I see your model that when the understanding of how to use a camera is perfected, a camera will suddenly appear, ready to be used perfectly, whereas I see the camera already in hand being used, but without much skill at focusing, and as focusing gets more skillful the picture gets clearer. > If you are talking about some other kind of 'seeing things more clearly', then what ensures cannot the mindfulness spoken of in the teachings. It's all a continuum to me. I don't think the human being has some useless properties and then some totally different other transcendent potential that is unrelated. I see the ordinary moments of mindfulness being built upon through Dhamma and practice and getting gradually more skillful. I have a workingman's view of the Dhamma, not one where it is delivered in whole cloth at some mystical moment when the right understanding has suddenly been reached. > Mindfulness is not something that can be made to arise by dint of any 'practice' (such as focusing on something, looking at things in a certain way, etc). Mindfulness practices itself once it has been discovered. Once noticed, namas and rupas gradually become more apparent. It's a self-less process, but still one that does develop through repeated experience. > It can arise only when mindfulness that has been previously accumulated (but is otherwise latent) is conditioned to re-arise. I have some disagreement with this mystical, absolutist model of what makes mindfulness arise. > This will occur at a time, and with an object, that is not of any person's choosing. That I agree, but I still think it's more of a process and less of a rabbit popping out of a hat as you seem to describe. > However, this is not to say that there is a 'practice' of doing nothing and waiting for something to happen. As mentioned before, the development of the path involves neither doing certain particular things nor doing nothing and waiting for things to happen. Well can you describe positively what that means? If you are not waiting and doing nothing, and you are not doing particular things, what is taking place? I love that sutta about not standing still and not pushing forward against the flood. I hope you'll linger here for a moment to give your interpretation using the example of "practice" above. > > =============== > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Yes, agreed. And all are potentially object of awareness/insight ;-)) Agreed again. I am shocked by all this agreement. Well, the percentage is rising; conditions must be improving. Here's to more agreement ahead... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #114022 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 12:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics nilovg Dear Sarah and friends, Just had more than three days of computer trouble, could not be on line. Sorry if I did not answer mail. Thanks for your discussion reports. And now in a hurry to go out. Nina. Op 11-mrt-2011, om 12:52 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > To be good is not enough if there's still the idea of 'I' as that > person. The point of this life is just 'understand' - understand > whatever it is, because when akusala arises there can be > understanding of that. Otherwise one is moved by the idea of self > or me who is so bad or so good." #114023 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:45 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics nilovg Dear Phil, I am so glad the trip went well and you appreciated listening to A. Sujin in person. Of ocurse we are following the news everyday and I do hope Naomi and you are all right. Nina. Op 11-mrt-2011, om 2:31 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Just got home, what a fantastic trip it was! Nina, now I can > absolutely understand why you all have listened to A. Sujin for so > long. #114024 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 2:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics nilovg Dear Han, Op 11-mrt-2011, om 2:51 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > Han: At the meeting, I mentioned a Pali word which I rarely find in > the books written by the Western scholars, but which is well-known > in Burma, and taught by the Burmese Sayadaws with regard to > vipassanaa meditation. That Pali word is "Pa~nca"ngika magga" (five- > fold Path). ------ N: Thank you. I read about the fivefold, sixfold and eightfold Path in "Dhamma Issues" I translated from Thai. The explanations are exactly as you found in the Burmese Manuals and quoted. Nina. #114025 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Which khandha/ayatana/dhatu is the brain? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 14-mrt-2011, om 1:50 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > What reality is the brain, especially the "firing of the neurons" > that is one of the factors responsible for consciousness? > > 1) In what khandha(s) does it fit? > 2) In what ayatana(s) does it fit? > 3) In what dhatu does it fit? ------- N: Brain is a concept, and it does not fit into any khandha. It is a story we can think of, but it cannot be directly experienced. What we take for brain are different ruupas arising and falling away immediately. Nina. #114026 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 3:18 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics nilovg Dear Phil, Op 14-mrt-2011, om 1:26 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > It is always good to have reminders that understanding the present > dhamma is best. ----- N: I appreciate your remark very much. Nina. #114027 From: Kevin F Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 4:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Suicide DN16 Ud8.9 farrellkevin80 Hi Sarah, [cut] I hope this helps clarify. Metta Sarah ======= K: That does help clarify. Thank you Sarah. All the best, Kevin #114028 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Which khandha/ayatana/dhatu is the brain? truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, Thank you for your reply. So you mean that brain is a concept of rupa? Can it be classified as color + concept of it? Also, how do you explain this: if one damages the brain, the cognitions will be damaged? If person drinks alcohol or takes drugs, or hits the head hard, it can alter the subsequent mental states. Thank you for all your replies, With best wishes, Alex #114029 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 14, 2011 9:56 pm Subject: FW: Just checking sarahprocter... From: Miyamoto Tadao [professortadaomiyamoto@...] Sent: Sunday, 13 March 2011 7:13 PM F/w message from our friend, Tadao who lives in Sendai, Japan and has occasionally written on DSG ========== >Hi Sarah and Jonothan: IT WAS A BIG ONE, but I've survived. It is the costal areas of the entire northern Japan, which were TOTALLY demolished by massive waves of Tunami induced by the earthquake, whose magnitude is said to be observed once every millennium. In the morning, those perished were with their families, and in the afternoon, they are not with them any more. People in the northern regions knew that they would have a big earthquake soon or later, but the magnitude was far beyond their imagination. tadao >>--- On Sun, 2011/3/13, Jonothan Abbott wrote: Hi Tadao Sarah has just had a thought that you may be based in Sendai, and a check back through our emails confirms that that is indeed so. Hoping you've not been too badly affected by the earthquake. Best wishes from us both Jon and Sarah #114030 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:29 am Subject: What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113625) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > 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. > > > > [RE] 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...? > > =============== > > J: Hope you don't mind if I say that, while I'm sure you're speaking to the best of your recollection, I'd like to see the text before I comment further (of course, no problem if it can't be found). ;-)) It will turn up eventually. :-) > > =============== > > [On the subject of the extent to which teachings other than that on satipatthana, etc. were already known] > > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: The idea of the Buddha pointing out *how the jhanas could be used to develop insight by suppressing defilements and cultivating mindfulness while the mind is deeply concentrated* is very much an interpretation of the suttas rather than a direct quote from them. I would not agree. A straightforward reading shows him giving these instructions, not saying "since you're already doing this..." So I would say that your view that it is geared for those already versed in jhana is more of the "interpretive" view. My understanding is that the further the explanation is from the text, the more substantiating evidence is required. Doesn't that make sense? > The orthodox Theravadan interpretation of suttas such as the Anapanasati Sutta and the Satipatthana Sutta is that the Buddha was explaining how, for the person developing jhana, insight could be developed at the same time (including insight having the just fallen away jhaana citta as object), with the further possibility that if enlightenment occurred it could be with jhana as basis (i.e., with the just fallen away jhana citta as object of insight immediately preceding the magga citta). Could you perhaps give a cite where this orthodox interpretation is laid out? I would appreciate it. I have not seen this orthodox interpretation in any of the writings of the Theravadin teachers I have read, nor in the suttas themselves. > But jhana as such was already known. Yes, but "as such" does not define the Buddha's use of jhana as a base for insight. Buddha was nothing if not innovative to the nth degree. He transformed the yogic practices of his day and philosophy of anicca and Higher Self into a universe of no-self and nibbana, and the most systematic meditation system ever known. Hard to outdo thousands of years of yogis and Patanjali's forbears, but he did. > > =============== > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Well, yes, he did show where jhana fitted into the scheme of things. But the question is what he said and meant in that regard. Yes, one could read what he did say to get some clues. He included jhana/concentration as a key item in the eightfold path, and he taught jhana in great detail. Must mean something... > > =============== > > 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. > > =============== > > J: But are you suggesting that the role of such conventional understanding could be any other than to support an understanding of dhammas, this latter being the real gist of the teachings? I'm not sure if it's an either/or proposition. However you look at it, it would have to lead to understanding what exists as it is in the final analysis. But I think that how understanding develops can be pretty complex. > > =============== > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Yes, correct conceptual understanding of dhammas is a prerequisite for the arising of awareness of/insight into dhammas. But the latter occurs at a time, and with an object, that is not of anyone's choosing. I don't think I ever said anyone could choose what arises. In fact, I've said the opposite over and over again. I think you don't believe I really mean it, because I think that meditation is a most important part of the path. > There is no 'converting' from one to the other by choice/deliberate intention. Certainly not in any direct way, anyway. But intention does arise, and it does have an effect, just as anything that arises and accumulates may. > > =============== > 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. > > =============== > > J: The idea of 'conventional insight and mindfulness practice' is not one that had ever been canvassed in the Theravada texts, to my knowledge. A definite 'interpretation', I think ;-)). I may not be using the right words, but the idea is that one develops initial insight within the setting of the conventional world. Denying that this is where the path starts in my opinion would be inaccurate. > > =============== > So in that sense it *is* the path. We just never know when it is going to strike. > > =============== > > J: Regarding your: "We just never know when it [panna] is going to strike." Couldn't have put it better myself!! Well that's the fourth time I've experienced agreement this week. It's a miracle! :-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = #114031 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 4:58 am Subject: What Would Be Revising 2? Re: Revising 1: Arising of Mundane Paññaa epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > RE: 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. > > =============== > > J: You are saying that the field of understanding for the development of the path cannot be dhammas because that would mean 2 separate planes that never cross. I do not see it that way, since the conventional world is not a plane but is just the way that dhammas are conceived or thought about by citta which is itself one of the dhammas. That's my view as well. > > =============== > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: We can certainly talk about a 'cycle of mutual influence' as regards *akusala* tendencies, especially before there was the hearing of the dhamma in this lifetime. > > It's the hearing of the teachings, and reflecting etc, that helps break that cycle from time to time. > > But I wouldn't say we can speak of a kusala cycle of mutual influence, in the sense that I take you to mean it here, at least not until insight has been developed to the higher levels. How would the mutual influence come into play once insight was developed? > PS Regarding > > > > It was almost as if he anticipated the later rise of Tony Robbins. > > :-))) > > =============== > > J: I had to Google that one. > > From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia > > Anthony "Tony" Robbins (born February 29, 1960) is an American self-help author and success coach. Robbins' books include "Unlimited Power: The New Science of Personal Achievement" and "Awaken The Giant Within". ... > > Career > Robbins started his career promoting seminars for Jim Rohn. ... > Later Robbins began teaching neuro-linguistic programming (NLP) which he had learned from NLP co-founder John Grinder. In 1983, Robbins learned how to firewalk from Tolly Burkan and he began to incorporate firewalking into his seminars and later began to develop and teach Neuro-Associative Conditioning (NAC). > Robbins calls himself a peak performance coach rather than a motivational speaker because he believes that peak performance coaching is more effective than temporary motivation. ... > > Robbins also conducts seminars, including four-day events such as Unleash the Power Within (UPW), Mastery University, Date With Destiny, and Business Mastery. > > During the UPW seminar participants walk barefoot on hot coals at the end of the first evening session. The main point of the seminar is that achieving greatness requires the ability to unleash one's personal power and take action. > > Full entry at: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Robbins > > Is it just me, or are there similarities with certain current-day interpretations of the teachings? Such as "Unleash the Power Within" (UPW). My understanding of Buddhism has always been 'unleash the understanding' and I think most Buddhists still believe this. > And this reference caught my eye: > > "In popular culture > "In Men in Black (1997), an image of Robbins and a Robbins infomercial is seen in the background during a tour of the control room used to track aliens living on earth." > > Men in Black is a movie I've enjoyed watching (more than once). Obviously, this allusion was lost on me at the time. (May have to watch it again now ;-)). Ha ha, well that entire biography missed the main point of reference. One of the main points of Grinder's NLP that Robbins popularized is that whatever is focused upon in the mind will tend to become prominent, believed in, and will tend to be reproduced in the circumstances of living. It is very much a pariyati to practice sort of path. ;-) I like Men in Black a lot too. Perhaps I'll review it too. :-) You can't miss Tony - he's a very big guy who really does look like an alien... Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #114032 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:31 am Subject: Neither a Self, nor a Substance Exists! bhikkhu5 Friends: No States have a Core, Self or Substance! The Buddha once epitomized a crucial, yet counter-intuitive fact by saying: "Sabbe Dhammā Anattā ", which means "All states are without self-&-core!" This entails an absence or voidness of a stable same core in any phenomena: Internally exists there no "self", "soul", "I", "you" "me", "agent" anywhere! Externally exists there no "substance", "matter", or "real world" anywhere! Mentally there is no "controller", "speaker" or "one-who-experiences" within mind... Physically is there no "reality" or "rock-solid-matter-stuff" outside in world... Both inner "EGO" & outer "SUBSTANCE" are illusionary ideas! Buddha emphasized that release from this Ego-Substance-Concept was Bliss: "Blissful is solitude for one who is content, learned & who sees the Dhamma. More blissful is harmlessness towards all living beings without exception. Even more blissful is freedom from any sensual urge & craving whatsoever. Yet, the supreme bliss, is the elimination of this abysmal conceit 'I Exists'" Udana – Inspiration: II – 1 No Substantial Object exists 'Out There', nor any Subject-Ego 'In Here'! The Blessed Buddha once said: "In the seen is merely the process of seeing... In the heard is merely the process of hearing... In the sensed is merely the process of sensing... In the thought is merely the process of thinking... So knowing, you will not be connected 'with that'... So disconnected you will not be absorbed 'into that'... So neither with that, nor into that You Are Not created by that sensation! When there is no 'You' inferred or conjectured by that very experience, then 'You' are neither 'here', 'there', 'both', 'beyond' nor 'in between'...! On realizing the importance of this incident the Blessed One exclaimed: Where neither solidity, fluidity, heat, nor motion find any footing, there no sun, moon nor star ever shines. There is neither any light, yet nor is there any darkness! When the Noble, through stilling of all construction, through quieting of all mental formation, directly experiences this, then is he freed from both form & formlessness, then is he released from both pleasure and all pain ..." Udana – Inspiration: I - 10. Further comments and explanation here: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/No_Substance_'Out_There'.htm The Buddha insisted on a subtle and profound quasi-pseudo-real world: "The world is bound up by and shrouded in delusion. It appears as real and is regarded as if it were fine! The fool bound to his illusive acquisitions, blinded by darkness, assumes it as eternal, but for one who sees & really understands, there is nothing real, stable or same, neither here nor there..." Udana – Inspiration: VII – 10 "This World both Begins and Ends within this 2 fathom frame of bones..." SN I 62 "The ALL is thereby actually just a sensed & experienced representation..." SN IV 15 A crucial core question is: What is actually an experienced phenomenon? See the equally vital answer here! If mind is directly involved in creating the very "thing" or "state" it perceives, as an active participatory observer, then there cannot ever be any "objective observation" or "world out-there", which is independent of the mind that intends, selects, and manifests it...! It entails that 'mind' is inseparable from 'matter'. They are Siamese-Twins ! In early Buddhism, the Buddha coined this subtle yet dual Unity: Nāma-Rupa ! Name-&-Form or Naming-&-Forming, since these are dynamic processes, that in mutual dependence creates each other like 2 creepers, that only can grow up, if growing up twisted & rotated around the other's stem like a DNA-helix. See, dig and ponder also intensive over what Buddha taught as "Reality": Maha-suññata Sutta: The Greater Discourse on Emptiness. MN 122 iii 109 Mulapariyaya Sutta: The Root of all Things. MN 1 i 1 Anatta-lakkhana Sutta: On the Characteristic of No-Self. SN 22.59 iii 66 See also what contemporary Quantum Mechanics deposits as "Maybe-Real": Quantum_Buddhism , Observer Participation, Some_Clues , Ontology , No_Substance_'Out_There' , Coincident_Cross-Consistency Discrete_States , Omniscient_Quantum_Mind . The anthropic universe develops by conscious selection of many participating observers. Please note that the U symbolizing the universe gets "fatter" left by increased observation! American physicist John Archibald Wheeler said: "No phenomenon is a phenomenon, until it is an Observed Phenomenon...!" "We are participators in bringing into being, not only the near, but also the far away both in time and space! Symbolic representation of the Universe is a self-excited system brought into being by self-reference or auto-creation by consciously selecting observers over an immensely long period of time... Such a recursive-reflecting creative concept is similar to the endless series of receding reflections one sees in a pair of mirrors facing each others....” Reference: J.A. Wheeler in Isham et al., eds., Quantum Gravity (Clarendon, Oxford, 1975), pgs. 564-565. (Edited Extract.) "No phenomenon is a phenomenon, until it is an observed phenomenon!" said by J.A. Wheeler from his delayed choice experiment ideas, is referenced in: The undivided universe: An ontological interpretation of quantum theory. p. 104 By David Bohm , and Basil J. Hiley. "The path of the electron comes into existence, only when we observe it." John S. Bell “Observations not only disturb, what has to be measured, they produce it! We compel [the electron] to assume a definite position! We - ourselves - produce the results of the measurements.” Pascual Jordan quoted by in: Max Jammer: The Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics, Wiley, 1974 p. 161. "Fundamental to contemporary Quantum Theory is the notion that there is no phenomenon until it is observed! This is known as the 'Observer Effect'. The implications of the 'Observer Effect' are profound because, if true, it means that before anything can manifest in the physical universe it must first be observed! This Observer Effect clearly implies that all the physical Universe is the direct result of consciousness itself!" Alex Paterson. <...> HELP! Please Help Me Out of this Empty Illusion! If you feel slightly weird or dizzy after reading this, you are right on track! Hihihi ;-) Keep on observing, studying, and reflecting. Never give up Examination ! It is not "reality" that seems to be evaporating under your feet, but rather the unseen, hidden, habitual and utterly false assumptions you had about it! <...> No Phenomenon is a Self, Ego or a Substance! Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #114033 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:15 am Subject: the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) kenhowardau Hi Robert E, There is no need to apologise for over-vigorous debate, I thrive on it. :-) ----------------- <. . .> > RE: I wanted you to know that the only reason I spoke to you so intensely is because of your absolute commitment to the reality of dhammas, otherwise I would not take such liberties. ----------------- KH: The absolute reality of dhammas means no one is being spoken to. (So nothing to worry about.) If, however, dhammas were not absolutely real, could we say with any certainty that no one was being spoken to? Something is happening. If it's not dhammas that's doing it, then what the hell is it doing it? Don't tell me its unreal dhammas. Things that are not real can't really do anything. ------------------------------- <. . .> > RE: > parts of Abhidhamma and particularly the local interpretation here via commentary, sometimes seem at odds with established traditions as well as suttas. ------------------------------- KH: It's true, most established Buddhist traditions are at odds with the ancient texts. ----------------------------------------- <. . .> > RE: there are bound to be some disputes about that. That doesn't mean that either side is either insincere or necessarily wrong. ----------------------------------------- KH: There is only one right path. Pretending otherwise wouldn't help anyone. ------------------------- <. . .> > > KH: It has been generally agreed here (1) that there are only dhammas, and (2) that all dhammas are absolutely devoid of self. But the literal interpretation of that rule is a bit too cut and dried for some people. And so we have seen desperate attempts at finding exceptions to it, no matter how subtle or obscure. >> > RE: It is very easy to slip various presupositions into the mix when you try to draw conclusions from those two principles, such as the status of concepts as non-dhammic in nature, and the non-application of the prime principles of Buddhism to conventional experience; the supposed self-based nature of "formal meditation" and many other areas where the conclusions are not based directly on the two prime statements that you started on, but on various concepts that others disagree with. ----------------------------- KH: That's a nice summing-up of the points of controversy. I feel sure, however, that they *can* all be decided simply by accepting the two principles. ----------------------------------------- >> RE: There are many other details that are not indisputable but which are treated as such by those who believe in a particular point of view of the Dhamma. The fact that there are only dhammas does *not* necessitate that cittas are single, unimpeded events that only interact as one dies as another arises, that there is only one citta at a time, or that each sense area is a completely separate universe. Those are all separate conclusions drawn from other sources, not directly derived from the prime realities we all agree on. And the list of those things which are just *assumed* to be true based on a particular set of doctrines goes on and on. ---------------------------------------- KH: Isn't all that just basic Abhidhamma? I know it is disputed by people who reject the Abhidhamma, but I didn't know it was disputed by people who rejected only the Commentaries. I'll leave the rest of the post and stop now, while we are still speaking. :-) Ken H #114034 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vi~n~naa.na and Naama-Ruupa: DN 15 Mahaanidaana sutta sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, Thank you for your helpful messages in this thread. --- On Fri, 11/3/11, han tun wrote: > The following is the translation by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi of the above Pali passage. 22. "It was said: 'With mentality-materiality as condition there is consciousness.' How that is so, Aananda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness were not to gain a footing in mentality-materiality, would an origination of the mass of suffering, of future birth, aging, and death, be discerned?" "Certainly not, venerable sir." "Therefore, Aananda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for consciousness, namely mentality-materiality. "It is to this extent, Aananda, that one can be born, age, and die, pass away and re-arise, to this extent that there is a pathway for designation, to this extent that there is a pathway for language, to this extent that there is a pathway for description, to this extent that there is a sphere for wisdom, to this extent that the round turns for describing this state of being, that is, when there is mentality-materiality together with consciousness." ... S: As we discussed and as the commentary made clear, at the moment of birth (patisandhi citta), the citta, cetasikas and particular kammaja rupas arise together, conditioning each other. In this case, the Buddha is stressing how that first moment of life cannot arise without the support of these other dhammas. Elsewhere, in the 'foreward order', the opposist is stressed. As I understand Howard's concerns, they are more linguistic than related to the Teachings as such. Just for the sake of others, let me re-quote the passages we gave before on the order of the Teaching of D.O.(#107788). These may be helpful for anyone who has doubts about the variation in the manner of teaching: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, han tun wrote: > Han:....In the book on D.O. by Nyaunglebin Sayadaw (who was well-known in Burma, but not so much out-side of the country), it is mentioned that the main cycle of twelve factors can be broken up into two smaller cycles. (1) Pubbantabhava cycle starting from avijjaa and ending in vedanaa; and (2) Aparantabhava cycle starting from ta.nhaa and ending in jaraa-mara.na. Sayadaw also explained how vedanaa can go back to avijjaa in Pubbantabhava cycle, and how jaraa-mara.na can go back to ta.nhaa in Aparantabhava cycle; and also how jaraa-mara.na can go back to avijjaa in the main cycle of twelve factors. The explanations given by Sayadaw are more or less the same as you have explained. .... >S: We read in the commentaries about the reasons given for teaching D.O. in different ways. For example, in the Sammohavinodanii, Classification of the Structure of Conditions 601ff(Dispeller p 162f)it compares the different starting points to the "four creeper-gatherers' ways of seizing a creeper": i) One of the men pulls the root out first, just as the Buddha starts with avijja. (M i 261) "Accordingly, bhikkhus, with ignorance as condition formations [arise]...." ii) Another pulls out the upper part of the creeper first, just as the Buddha starts from the middle with tan.ha and upadaana. (M i 266) "In him who delights in, welcomes, remains committted to that feeling, there arises delight. Delight in feeling is clinging...." iii) Another seizes the tip, follows it to the root and takes all of the creeper, just as the Buddha starts from the end up to the beginning. (M i 261) "With birth as condition ageing and death [arise]...." iv) The last of these creeper-gatherers cuts the middle of it first and traces it downwards, just as the Buddha teaches from the middle up to the beginning. (S ii 11 ff) "And these four nutriments, bhikkhus, what is their source? From what are they born? By what are they produced? These four nutriments have craving as their source........" Later it says: "But in particular it should be recognised that i) when he sees that people susceptible to teaching are confused about the analysis of the causes of the process [of existence], he employs his teaching of it forwards starting from the beginning for the purpose of showing that the process [occurs] for its proper reasons and for the purpose of showing the order of arising. And iii) when he surveys the world as fallen upon trouble in the way stated thus: 'This world has fallen upon trouble; it is born, grows old, dies, passes away and reappears' (D ii 30; S ii 5), he employs his teaching of it backwards starting from the end for the purpose of showing the reasons for the various kinds of suffering beginning with ageing and death, [which reasons were] arrived at by himself in the course of his penetration in the prior stage. And (iv) he employs his teaching of it backwards, starting from the middle up to the beginning, in order to show how the succession of cause and fruit extends back into the past, and again forwards from the past, in accordance with the definition of origin as nutriment (see M i 47ff). And ii) he employs [his teaching of it forwards] starting from the middle upon the origination of the cause of the future in the present." As we read "For the Dependent Origination is entirely excellent. [Starting] from any one [of the four starting points] it leads only to the penetration of the right path." ..... S: Thank you again for your detailed and helpful elaborations of all our discussions. Much appreciated! Metta Sarah ===== #114035 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bkk - with K.Sujin Mar 2011 (2) was: concepts can lead to awakening sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, --- On Mon, 7/3/11, Ken O wrote: >S: KS: People really do not understand what samatha is. They just know samadhi, but >they don't understand the difference between kusala and akusala - samma and >miccha samadhi - so they just want to develop or have samadhi without >understanding. The distinction between samadhi and samatha must be understood, >otherwise they will take miccha samadhi for samatha. >..... >KO: It does not matter in the difference between samantha and samadhi because samantha is path, samadhi is concentration. ... S: What do you mean when you say "samatha is path"? What cetasika is samatha? What cetasika is samadhi? ... >Samadhi is part of samantha. ... S: what do you mean by this? ... >Samadhi is not all of samantha as samantha includes virtue, sati, panna .... S: Again, is there samadhi now? Is there samatha now? Can there be micha samadhi now? Can there be micha samatha now? Metta Sarah ===== #114036 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, I appreciate all the time and trouble you have gone to in order to share our 'Breakfast topics':-) --- On Mon, 7/3/11, han tun wrote: >If not for kamma, how could I answer the following questions. After many years of neglect, why did I want to see our Dentist this time? Why did I go to the hospital without a prior appointment? Why must I meet with our Dentist at the right moment in the hallway? Some may say that these were all coincidence. But I attribute it to the effects of kamma. .... S: Like you, I think that kamma and its effects are very powerful. And when we appreciate all the more that there are just various different dhammas involved, no matter the seeming circumstances, we can begin to appreciate the interplay of kamma and other conditions giving rise to what ever dhammas arise at this very moment. As you say, no 'coincidence' at all in the Buddha's Teachings. Metta Sarah ==== #114037 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 7:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vi~n~naa.na and Naama-Ruupa: DN 15 Mahaanidaana sutta sarahprocter... Hi Howard, I know you're tired of this topic and on travels, but very briefly: --- On Mon, 7/3/11, upasaka@... wrote: > It would be the same for me. The "Therefore" starting the 3rd paragraph seems to be a non sequitor. ------------------------------------------- Consciousness (translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi) 22. "It was said: 'With mentality-materiality as condition there is consciousness.' How that is so, Aananda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness were not to gain a footing in mentality-materiality, would an origination of the mass of suffering, of future birth, aging, and death, be discerned?" "Certainly not, venerable sir." "Therefore, Aananda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for consciousness, namely mentality-materiality. "It is to this extent, Aananda, that one can be born, age, and die, pass away and re-arise, <....> ... S: Surely, it just says that if A was not conditioned/casused by B-C, thethen there would not be any Dukkha and so on. Therefore, as there is this mass of Dukkha and so on, it is because A is conditioned/caused by B-C. I'm sure it's just an issue of the wording. Happy travels! Are you going down to Dallas to see your favourite grand-daughter? Metta Sarah ===== #114038 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Dear Colette, Op 12-mrt-2011, om 23:26 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > When the Buddha EXISTED, what was "NORMAL" then is not WHAT IS > "NORMAL" TODAY. ------ N: Times change, but realities such as seeing, visible object, hearing or sound have their own characteristics which do not change. Seeing is always seeing no matter in the Buddha's time or today. Should we not learn more about it? It experiences what is visible and it is not a person or self. It arises just for a very brief moment and then gone. Nina. #114039 From: han tun Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:06 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vi~n~naa.na and Naama-Ruupa: DN 15 Mahaanidaana sutta hantun1 Dear Sarah (and Nina), Thank you very much for letting me know the fourfold teaching of the D.O. by the Buddha: (i) from the beginning up to the end, (ii) from the middle up to the end, (iii) from the end up to the beginning, and (iv) from the middle up to the beginning. I have heard vaguely about this since long time ago, and I wanted to know where I could find it. Now that you gave me the reference I know where to find it. I just bought the Dispeller of Delusion, but I have not yet read it. So your quote helps me where to find it. I am also interested in paragraph 607. < But why does he teach it thus? Because of the entire excellence of the Dependent Origination and because he has himself achieved elegance in teaching. For the Dependent Origination is entirely excellent. [Starting] from any one [of the four starting points] it leads only to the penetration of the right path [~naayappa.tivedhaaya sa.mvattatiyeva]. The Blessed One has achieved elegance in teaching; it is because he has achieved elegance in teaching through his possession of the four kinds of confidence and the four discriminations [catuvesaarajjappa.tisambhidaayogena], and through having reached the fourfold state of profundity [catubbidhagambhiirabhaavappattiyaa ca], that he teaches the Dhamma by various methods. > [Han: Pali words are inserted by me, taken from the Pali Canon.] Respectfully, Han #114040 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:07 am Subject: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. nilovg Dear Han and friends, Ch 4, no 6. Recapitulation: the previous text alluded to the four right efforts: the right effort to avoid akusala, overcome akusala, develop kusala and maintain kusala. In stating that the path is unarisen, it is emphasized that the lokuttara cittas arising at the moment of enlightenment did not arise before. At the moment of path- consciousness there is the fulfillment of the right effort to develop and to maintain what is wholesome. The following text of the Visuddhimagga refers to the different meanings of arisen, upanna. As we have seen in the text of the Dispeller of Delusion, the first four meanings of arisen were: (1) arisen as actually occurring, (2) arisen as experienced and gone, (3) arisen having got an opportunity and (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m). Then it continues with four more meanings of arisen, as was also explained in the Dispeller of Delusion . It adds a few examples in addition. ------ The Visuddhimagga, in Purity by Knowledge and Vision (XXII, 89) explains another four ways of arisen (upanna) [1] : (5) arisen as happening (samudaacaaruppanna.m), (6) arisen with apprehension of an object (aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m), (7) arisen through non- suppression (avikkhambhituppanna.m), (8) arisen through non-abolition (asamugghaatituppanna.m). -------- Herein, (5) arisen as happening is the same as arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m) [2]. (6) When an object has at some previous time come into focus in the eye, etc. , and defilement did not arise then but arose in full force later on simply because the object had been apprehended, then that defilement is called arisen with apprehension of an object. Like the defilement that arose in the Elder Mahaa-tissa after seeing the form of a person of the opposite sex while wandering for alms in the village of Kalyaana (cf. MA. 1, 66 and AA, to A.1, 4). (7) As long as a defilement is not suppressed by either serenity or insight, though it may not have actually entered the conscious continuity, it is nevertheless called arisen through non-suppression because there is no cause to prevent its arising [if suitable conditions combine]. (8) But even when they are suppressed by serenity or insight they are still called arisen through non-abolition because the necessity for their arising has not been transcended unless they have been cut off by the path. Like the Elder who had obtained the eight attainments and the defilements that arose in him while he was going through the air on his hearing the sound of a woman singing with a sweet voice as she was gathering flowers in a grove of blossoming trees. And the three kinds, namely, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object, (7) arisen through non-suppression, and (8) arisen through non-abolition should be understood as included by (4) arisen by having soil [to grow in] (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m) [3]. So as regards the kinds of arisen stated, the four kinds, namely, (1) as actually occurring, (2) as been and gone, (3) by opportunity made, and (5) as happening, cannot be abandoned by any [of these four kinds of] knowledge [4] because they cannot be eliminated by the paths. But the four kinds of arisen, namely, (4) by having soil [to grow in], (6)with apprehension of an object, (7) through non- suppression, and (8) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen. So here the kinds of states that ought to be abandoned, also the act of abandoning should be known in this way. ---------- footnotes: 1.The text is similar to the text of the Dispeller of Delusion. 2. This is the same as the way of upanna that was explained before as the first meaning. 3.This is the fourth way of upanna classified before; the latent tendencies are inhering in the past aggregates, they are unabandoned. Inhering in the future aggregates and in the present aggregates, they are also unabandoned. The Visuddhimagga, in the explanation about Purity by Knowledge and Vision (Ch XXII, 81-86), gives an additional explication about arisen in the sense of having obtained a soil. It states: (4) While unprofitable [kamma] is still unabolished in any given soil [plane], it is called arisen by having soil [to grow in]. This refers to the latent tendencies that lie dormant in the citta. 4. Of the four stages of enlightenment. -------- Nina. #114041 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems again nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 12-mrt-2011, om 19:04 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > I am trying to get back to Dhamma. It's hard to me to start read. > > Recently I had this 'falling in love' issues. I cant get over that. > This can pain a lot. > > How to deal with painful mental feeling? > > I am getting back to Dhamma only when I feel bad, I dint do so when > I feel well. > > ----------- N: It seems that you want to select certain dhammas you like to experience, not unhappy feeling. This you dislike. Now, while I write this, I realise that I am doing the same. But it is good to remind each other. We can learn that all naamas are equal in as far as they are only realities arising because of their own conditions. We tend to forget that they are anattaa. It is more important to understand unhappy feeling as naama than trying to eliminate unhappy feeling. As I mentioned before, when we tell Kh Sujin about problems we have, such as loss through death, she will always remind us about the present moment, saying: is there no seeing now? There is seeing time and again and we cannot order its arising, it arises because of its own conditions. Nobody can do anything about it. It is the same with unhappy feeling, it has arisen already before we realize it, and then gone immediatly. I like to quote Ken H who says actually the same: no choosing. 'Most of all, Lucas, understand the present moment. There are only the presently arisen dhammas: no choosing - just the dhammas that have been conditioned to arise. ' -------- Nina. > _ #114042 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Which khandha/ayatana/dhatu is the brain? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 14-mrt-2011, om 22:37 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > So you mean that brain is a concept of rupa? Can it be classified > as color + concept of it? -------- N: It is a just collection of ruupas, and we think of it as brain. When we take the brain out and look at it, we are thinking of brain on account of colour that was experienced through the eyesense. Through eyes only colour appears, no brain. When we touch it, just tangible object appears, no brain. ------- > > A: Also, how do you explain this: if one damages the brain, the > cognitions will be damaged? ------ N: This is a situation we can think of. It is the world of medical science, different from the world of paramattha dhammas. Naama and ruupa still arise and fall away. Cognitions do not stay to be damaged. They arise and then fall away immediately. ------- > A: If person drinks alcohol or takes drugs, or hits the head hard, > it can alter the subsequent mental states. ------ N: Again a situation. There are different conditions for the cittas that arise. We cannot say that cittas are altered by drugs or injuries. There is no time for alteration, since citta does not stay to be altered. ------- Nina. #114043 From: "philip" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 1:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics philofillet Hi Nina > > It is always good to have reminders that understanding the present > > dhamma is best. > ----- > N: I appreciate your remark very much. Thanks Nina. I don't know how long this confidence will last, but yes, I do appreciate it for now. Actually there were some passages in Perfections that I brought up because they seemed to indicate a different approach, somehow, and A Sujin couldn't really explain the discrepancy clearly, we all kind of agreed on a way of editing the passage to make it better, but you know, it really doesn't matter, because the passages I quoted were just stirring words or reminders as you said, but to whatever degree we understand the present dhamma those sort of ideas related to conventional behaviour fall away in importance. For now they will continue to be important for me, I will continue to place great value, for example, on whether I keep the precepts or not, and how much akusala kamma patha there is, but there is better understanding now that it is understanding the present dhamma that is really at the heart of it all. By the way, please say hello to Lodewijk for me, I have been listening to some talks from KK, 2007, and he asks such excellent questions, clearly he has great moral integrity so it is not easy for him to go along comfortably with the concensus on certain accepted wisdom such as "people are concepts" and I sense this causes him some hardship, but it is a kind of noble hardship. He also asked a great question on anusayas that resulted in a very clear and helpful explanation by A.Sujin. If I have time, I am going to try to transcribe some of his questions from that series of discussions, and A. Sujin's answers. Thanks also for your concern for our wellbeing. Even though there is not so much fear (yet) of the radiation threatening to blow towards Tokyo (soon I will *really* be able to radiate metta!) the bleakness of all those thousands of bodies washing up on the shore and other miseries people are going through is especially hard to witness because there is such a familiarity with and affection for the Japanese people now after having lived here for so long, you know that is just a concept but some concepts get more firmly formed than others. If there is more attachment to certain people there is more suffering when they go through hardship, that's no news to anyone. As you know, Japan is an incredibly homogeneous country racially and culturally, so the victims I see on the news inevitably remind me of students I have known. Isn't it said that a condition for dosa is when people you like have hardship and people you don't like get treated well? I should probably turn it off, but it is good for conditioning what I call tender cittas, little moments of karuna amoung all the lobha and dosa, I suspect... Metta, Phil #114044 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 3:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics nilovg Dear Philip, thank you for your post, I sent it on to Lodewijk. If you can indicate which year Lodewijk asked these questions, I may find it. I sure transcribed it. Was it in K.K.? But do not hurry. Nina. Op 15-mrt-2011, om 14:19 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > He also asked a great question on anusayas that resulted in a very > clear and helpful explanation by A.Sujin. If I have time, I am > going to try to transcribe some of his questions from that series > of discussions, and A. Sujin's answers. #114045 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:00 pm Subject: Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E and Ken H and all > > > > > KH: I think the problem was that Ken O, in all his years at DSG, had apparently not listened to a single thing. > > > > > > The one thing, above all else, that DSG people have been trying to impress upon us is that there is *only the present moment*. There are only the presently arisen conditioned dhammas. > > > > I agree that it is very sad that not all dsg members have the same faith and confidence in your purity that I do. I am sure you go to Dhamma meetings and such with no intention at all. ;-) > > Ph: How's it going guys? I just want to test my ability to understand Ken H now that I am seeing things a bit differently, Sukin suggested that I might. > > Let's see... > > Well, I don't know the full context, but I certainly have come to understand that saying "there are only the presently arisen conditioned dhammas" is not radical, anyone who knows about Dhamma could and would say that. So where does it fail to stick? I guess it is that there is intention in everything we do, and going to Dhamma discussions as I did was laden with as much desire for results, desire for happiness, as there is when I sit to meditate. Less wrong view about seeking to control dhammas?...ummm....maybe. I can see how meditators who are strongly fixed on one method could start getting too hungry for results, and joining Dhamma discussion on a habitual basis (unlike for me, for whom it was a rare treat) would probably be less likely to seek to speed understanding through it. I think I've been put off a bit by reading people at Dhamma wheel who suggest that it is just the meditation retreats that represent bhavana, obviously that is wrong view, but it does seem some people separate the time they are meditating from the time they are just going through daily life, that's got to lead to unwholesome expectations about the meditation, I think. If the meditation fits naturally into one's householder lifestyle and if one understands that dhammas are no more controllable in meditation than in daily life, fine. Or if one becomes a monk in a way that is in line with one's accumulated tendencies. > > "Only namas and rupas" is no longer a problem for me. But conventional behaviour is created by the operation of namas and (on?) rupas in predictable or probable ways, so conventional behaviour is important too, and the Buddha understood that. > > I'm going to be retreating from active participation again once I've summarized what I learned from my trip, because I can tell my understanding will have to develop in a subtle area that is not quite Ken H but not as far from him as I thought, and that subtle understanding is best fostered by listening and reflecting without too much immediate testing of the ideas, I think. The understanding needs quiet times to incubate or something like that... I think the points you have made in the past about real-life defilements and real-life experience, as opposed to "thinking about" paramatha dhammas as somehow more real than current experience, have been extremely helpful and very important. Of course it is good to understand and to contemplate the realities that exist for an undeluded perception and to understand that this is the reality that exists in a moment of clear seeing that can arise at any time, and that there is no control involved in such an event. But it is also important to understand the difference between life now, and conceptual understanding of what is not now experienced, so that we don't confused the "holy concept" with the "unholy reality" we actually live with every day. To ignore current reality in favor of imagined "ultimate" reality is a big mistake. It will not allow us to root out defilements now, through understanding this conventional reality for what it is, and isn't. Anyway, just reflecting back to you some of what you have taught me. Hope your "silent contemplations" are fruitful ones. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114046 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:03 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Ken H > > As a dhamma friend and for the sake of dhamma, why your view is wrong. > > Expositor, pg 493, 494 > > < alms' means that, whereas we know one can give anything to anybody, one grasp > the idea that there is no fruit, no result from what is given. A smiliar > meaning attaches to the phrases about a great 'sacrifice' and an 'offering'. We > know that there may be offerings by invitation, to guests, and in > marriage-ceremonies, but the opinion here is that there is no fruit, no result > to such. In the phrase 'of good and bad deeds' the ten courses of moral action > and the ten courses of immoral action are respectively meant. One knows that > they exist, but takes it they yield no fruit, no result. 'There is no such thing > as this world. i.e. being mentally establisehed in the next world he take it > that there is no present world. 'There is no such thing as next world. i.e. > being mentally established in the this world he take it that there is no next > world. 'There is no such thing as mother or father,' i.e. he knows the existent > of mothers and fathers, and takes it there is no fruit, no ripening on account > on anything done to them. 'There are no such beings as spring into birth without > paretns.' i.e. he takes it thath there are no beings who after decease are > reborn.">> > > The Debates Commentary pg 41, 42 > < deva or a brahma, he who is able to understand, comprehend its meaning, or get > out (of this world) or attain victory of an arahan, him the Exalted One teaches, > at the very outset about a being, a person, a man, a deva or a brahma. He who > on hearing differently in discourse on highest meaning about impermanence, or > ill or the like is able to understand, comprehend its meaning, or get out (of > this world) or attain the victory of an arahan, him (the Exalted One) teachers > differently about impermanence and so forth. Thus he does not teach at first > the highest meaning discourse to anyone, even to one who understands him in > popular discourses. Taking his stand on popular discourse, he on the other > hand, teaches the highest meaning afterwards. He does not teach at first > popular discourses to one who can understand him in the hightest meaning. On > the other hand having enlightened him in highest meanings discourse, he teaches > popular discourses afterwards....... > .. > . > The Enlighted One, best speakers, spoke of two kinds of truth, namely the > popular and that of highest meanings, a third is not got at. > > Therein, discourse meeting with agreement is true and is by way of world > convention. Hightest meaning discourse expression is also true and as such, > characteristics of things (as they are) > > [35] There is another way of putting it. The teaching of the Exalted One is of > two kinds, the hightest-meaning teaching consisting of the aggregates and so > forth, and the popular teaching consisting of "butter jar" and so forth. The > Exalted One does not indeed, overall run consistency. Hence on the mere > expression "there is the person who," must not command adherence. The highest > meaning has been declared by the Teacher, without transgressing the concept. So, > another wise man also should not, in explaining the highest meaning, overrun a > concept.>> > > IMHO - the teaching of highest characteristics which is about nama and rupa is > not about nama and rupa vs concept. As describe on the above, they work hand > in hand and not one is better than the other. Learning nama and rupa is about > understanding anatta, and not again on the view it is about nama and rupa vs > concept. > > Dhamma is not just about paramatha dhamma and the texts has always > explain paramatha dhamma are just acutality dhammas. Hmm maybe I will start to > write a few emails about concepts vs reality, not about paramatha dhamma, it > is about why development cannot go without concept. This is excellent! I hope you will explain more about how bhavana works with concept and regarding concept vs. reality. That would be most valuable for many of our endless discussions here. ;-) Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #114047 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:21 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Robert E > > (113603) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > ... > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Well, I would say he is a relative beginner in terms of jhana attainment, but advanced when compared to the run-of-the-mill lay follower (the likes of you and me ;-)). Me, I can understand. I am just a Dhamma baby. But you? That is interesting. You have been steeped in Dhamma for many many years. Why are you a beginner, and what would have to happen for you to be more advanced? Are you saying you are in an early life in the succession of lives necessary to accumulate advanced tendencies and understandings? It does not seem to me that this person is advanced in some unexplained way, and only a beginner in samatha. That does not make any sense, as anyone with advanced accumulations would have the basic concentration to follow the breath without having to count. That is a non-sequitur. There is no way to achieve advanced accumulations in mindfulness or insight without at least basic concentration and samatha, at least to the degree that this beginner is being taught from scratch. I understand why you feel the way you do, in order to match your preferred philosophy, but on the face of it, this interpretation seems incorrect, and the evidence is directly against this view. If he can't follow a breath and stick with it without counting, a very basic crutch, in what sense is he supposedly more advanced that you and me, and especially you? :-) Are you saying after so many years that you have spent on Dhamma study, that this person who can't concentrate from one breath to the next is more advanced than you? That is nonsensical. He is said to be "a beginner," period, not "an advanced person who is a beginner in samatha." That is really stretching it to the breaking point. > And yes, there is significance in the expression "who is of good birth". Yeah, well, your birth can't be that bad if you are successful in your professional career, have a happy Dhamma-based marriage and have had the good fortune to study Dhamma with K. Sujin all these years. I mean, it can't get much better than that can it? > > =============== > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: The mundane path, as referred to in the texts, is a moment of awareness/insight (into the true nature of a presently arising dhamma). > > All moments of awareness/insight are mundane (lokiya, literally, 'worldly'), except the actual moments of enlightenment which are supramundane (lokuttara, literally 'beyond the world'). > > So yes, the mundane path is part and parcel of the development of the path. Good to know. > However, this is quite different from what you've been describing in recent posts, and which you referred to at one stage as the conventional path (and above as the mundane path). Well, I may not be getting at it well enough. What I am saying is that in allowing awareness to cultivate within the things of the world as they are actually experienced now allows one to have those moments of mundane insight, whereas holding the wrong view that the "right concept" is superior to a "real unanticipated moment of awareness now" will keep one from progressing. Maybe that is more clear...? K. Sujin has said similar things in a different way, such as not to worry about what things are called or how they are supposed to work, what is experienced now? > > =============== > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: You mention a practice involving 'seeing ordinary objects and life-situations clearly, and applying the understanding of anicca and anatta to them'. > > My question would be, Where does the understanding of anicca and anatta come from in the first place? Without actual awareness of dhammas having been developed, it can only be an *idea* of what these terms mean, rather than an *experienced* understanding of them. What is the experience of mundane insight prior to enlightenment which allows for actual direct seeing? What is the mundane seeing that is free of concept in your understanding? > In the suttas, the terms anicca and anatta are invariably linked to the direct experience of dhammas. They are characteristics/aspects that are to be experienced by panna, rather than something to be conceptualised about and then 'applied' (whether to dhammas or to conventional objects). It is conceptualization that I am trying to get away from here, advocating looking now at what appears now. > > =============== > > 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. > > =============== > > J: I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. The starting point must be that what is experienced by hearing consciousness is just sound/audible object. That can only take place if one attends the sound experience now. At one moment one may be "listening to the music," at the next they may understand that it is "audible object." There is no break in listening, just in understanding. > The perception/recognition of a particular persons' voice, meaning of words spoken, etc, occurs subsequent to those moments of hearing consciousness, and is the work of the multiple mind-door processes that follow each moment of sense-door experience. And those represent real moments of real namas. To see what is taking place now, one must see the namas and rupas now, not some other ones that take their place. Only concept has to be removed, not the experience. > It is not the teaching, as far as I understand it, that the sound experienced started out as a person's voice that then 'breaks down' into sound dhammas. That would be something that is assumed about the experienced audible object rather than something known by direct experience. The development of insight is about the direct experience of presently arising dhammas. It is the characteristic of these that are to be understood, rather than an understanding of, for example, how certain external rupas come to be experienced. See above. > > =============== > 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. > > =============== > > J: So now I'm a 'radical splittist'? I'll add that one to my collection ;-)) I wouldn't turn it into a noun, and attribute it to you that roughly, but it does have a lovely Abhidhamma-like complexity to it. I think "radical splittist" should be added to the list of ways of perceiving. It's a winner! > Along with the synopsis of the radical split view that 'there's not much to do now, one must wait for something to arise, probably much later'. I'd agree there's not much prospect there ;-)) Well that's the question: how does one attend the world of actual current [conventional] experience? That's what we experience all the time, so what to make of that? See what it is now, no? If one looked at current experience, say "keyboard," one would see that actually seeing object + concept is actually arising. Isn't that true? > > =============== > 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. > > =============== > > J: Your continuum view of the development of insight seems to be based on the idea that it would allow quicker attainment of enlightenment ;-)) That's an assumption. Not necessarily quicker, but instead of casting aside current experience, one would attend it and see it for what it is now. I guess I'm just an inveterate continuumist. :-) Its the conventional continuumists against the radical splittists! May the most enlightened arising citta win! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #114048 From: han tun Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:09 pm Subject: Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. hantun1 Dear Nina, Thank you very much for the recapitulation of the following eight kinds of arising: (1) arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m) (2) arisen as experienced and gone (bhutvaa vigatuppanna.m) (3) arisen having got an opportunity (okaasakatuppanna.m) (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m) (5) arisen as happening (samudaacaaruppanna.m) (6) arisen with apprehension of an object (aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m) (7) arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppanna.m) (8) arisen through non-abolition (asamugghaatituppanna.m) It is very clear now. There is only one point. (5) "arisen as happening" (samudaacaaruppanna.m) in Visuddhimagga is translated in the Dispeller of Delusion as "arisen as behaviour". I think the translation in the Dispeller of Delusion is more correct, as the Dictionary meaning of "samudaacaara" is behaviour; habit; practice; familiarity. What do you think? Respectfully, Han #114049 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 12:49 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics philofillet Hello Nina Yes, it was in KK, from the series of discussions in 2007, A. Sujin's 80th birthday. It might have been in the second session, on the first session he asked about metta and people, on the second or later in the first he asked a great honest question saying "after all this time I still don't understand what sati is" and his next question was on anusayas. The answer is very condensed and clear, easy to transcribe, so I would be happy to do it if you haven't done so already. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip, > thank you for your post, I sent it on to Lodewijk. #114050 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:12 am Subject: Re: notes from KK philofillet Hi Azita and all > here are some of my short notes from our discussion in wonderful Kang Krajaan. Ph: I will read through your notes and see if they jog any memories of what was said, because sati at the level of remembering words and ideas doesn't seem to be functioning to well these days! > :whatever the Buddha taught was about realities. Ph: I don't agree with this yet, but I guess yes for sure at the very least indirectly about realities. > : it can be a burden to have attachments. > : how come conventional death without momentary death. Ph: Yes, I asked a few times about this, I said I thought that there was too much and too easy talking about momentary death, if we don't have direct understanding of cittas rising and falling away, isn't it premature to base our understanding of death at the citta level? But I think I am feeling a little differently on this issue, and a similar issue I raised when i protested that there is not necessarily anything "courageous" about being aware of realities in daily, it can just be pleasant thinking about deep topics etc. But after hearing her talk about courage as virya, I have been remained confident about our ability to develop understanding of the present dhammas, and our ability to do so. There is seeing now, there is visible object, there is thinking based on visible object, these are all cittas that can gradually be understood better and better and indeed there is no Phil who is dying when there is understanding even at that nascent level, there are very momentarily moments of understanidng opening a little that solid table, that solid dome of ignorance and attachement, there are such openings now and then, ever so briefly, then back to the usual programming. So momentary death is something that can be understood. Still, I will continue to put primary emphasis on the recollection of ageing, illness and death in conventional terms, I don't believe that this blocks the deeper understanding, but as A.S said several times, "not enough." > : we live in the rapidity of signs Ph: A lot of talk about nimitta, thanks to Maeve and Ann for bringing it up a lot on the second morning. Very important topic that has made me more relaxed and confident about believing that there can be understanding of the present moment. And I know this is not just an interpretation by A Sujin, recently I found a very good passage from a U Silananda talk about how the many many ininitesemally (dictionary??) brief moments of cognition give rise to nimitta. > : to eliminate the idea of self, it must be the arising of understanding of present moment. > > : What abbout one separate world, thro anyone of the 6 doorways. These senses dont know ea other. Thinking puts it all together and makes a whole, if not yet enlightened. Ph: Yes, the six worlds. Always a good topic. And the talk about the dark citta, always so interesting that only visible object is light, all other cittas are dark. > : no one can stop thinking. > : the concept hides the reality. > : the important thing is to have understanding rathe than focus on awareness. > > : no one can condition understanding. > : ignoring that which appears... > clinging to that which has gone...... > never being aware of now! > : what appears now is that which can be known Ph: I think I will stop there and see if I can add any of my own. :citta viveka(? means seclusion) and kaya viveka. I asked about why the Buddha taught kaya viveka, and I think I still don't understand that and still believe in some degree of physical seclusion that is *not* only about akusala clinging to "quiet place" but I think it was Sarah that asked "which one is more important?" and of course citta viveka is more important. :killing. I am always confused about how there can be killing if there are actually no beings but I was happy to hear an explanation of "citta stream of person A" and "citta stream of person B" (this was from someone else, not A.S) and how killing is ending of life factulty within a citta stream, and it is the vipaka of person B to receive the killing, so to speak, but of course caused by that person's own kamma, not the kamma that is the kiling done by person A which will have its own vipaka results for person B. If I have misinterpreted that, please clarify someone, I think it will have Ken H in a bit of a fit. :) Oh, I think I will stop there. No need to dredge up details now, I will be able to listen to the talks later. I think the main thing I will hold from this is be confident of understanding and "not enough" re such things as conventional kusala. If A Sujin denied that the Buddha taught conventional morality I would have to reject her teaching, but when she says "not enough", that is something I can completely agree with, it is only deeper understanding that can cut the ties that bind us. Metta, Phil #114051 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:30 am Subject: Re: Questions on Samatha. philofillet Hi Rob E > I think the points you have made in the past about real-life defilements and real-life experience, as opposed to "thinking about" paramatha dhammas as somehow more real than current experience, have been extremely helpful and very important. Of course it is good to understand and to contemplate the realities that exist for an undeluded perception and to understand that this is the reality that exists in a moment of clear seeing that can arise at any time, and that there is no control involved in such an event. But it is also important to understand the difference between life now, and conceptual understanding of what is not now experienced, so that we don't confused the "holy concept" with the "unholy reality" we actually live with every day. To ignore current reality in favor of imagined "ultimate" reality is a big mistake. It will not allow us to root out defilements now, through understanding this conventional reality for what it is, and isn't. Anyway, just reflecting back to you some of what you have taught me. Hope your "silent contemplations" are fruitful ones. Ph: "Current" reality vs. "ultimate" reality is an interesting idea. Maybe we could say that what we might call "current reality" (Phil typing a message to Rob) for example is not in deep truth a reality so cannot be called current reality but it is a concept that has been proliferated and locked in so clearly and strongly through moha and lobha etc that it is not helpful to say that it is a concept in the same way...oh, I can't go there Rob, too deep for me. But I certainly agree that whether it is current reality or a concept or whatever it is the truth of the way we currently experience life so to try to skip by it or to see no value in appreciating developments within it would be a mistake. Re the parammatha topics, to my current hunch there is almost always only thinking and thinking and more thinking about them, but there can be very rare openings of more direct reflection/contemplation of them and of course all that thinking itself and all that lobha that is of different intensities can be understood as well. And as for all the paramattha dhammas that are in fact concepts for us (objects of thinking) it is good food for the mind and if the content of our thinking is filled with thoughts about paramattha dhammas instead of thoughts about Jennifer Lopez's bottom or some person we have a grudge against or worries about our financial future or whatever it is good food for our mind and can be supporting more direct understanding. (I still wonder though and it hasn't been clearly answered for me if all those objects of our thinking about paramattha dhammas could in fact turn out to be obstacles to direct understanding in the way it is said that awareness of postures in meditation can be obstacles to direct understanding, but it is not something I feell a need to work out or have answered immediately. Re the "silent contemplation" there was evidence during my recent trip and participation in the discussions about how physical seclusion and quiet contemplation support understanding, on at least two key occasions the fruit of discussion that had happened earlier was harvested, if you will, during quiet contemplation by myself later. One occasion was when Sukin and I talked in a taxi cab and then in a crowded shopping mall food court and at the time I couldn't really "hear" him if you know what I mean by later when I was in my hotel room by myself doing some quiet contemplation things clicked together somewhat and I "heard" him and By God I also "heard" Ken H in that quiet hotel room. By the way, if you have an opportunity I really suggest you go to Bangkok the next time there is a gathering, Rob. A Sujin is great to listen to and you will find your discussion buddy Sukin to be a really wonderful and warm guy, which I guess you already know. OK, I've heard that my school will be closed for another few days at least so I am going to use the opportunity to get off the internet for awhile. Consuming news, news, news is not good food for the mind. Metta, Phil #114052 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 3:52 am Subject: Re: notes from KK kenhowardau Hi Phil, ------- <. . .> Ph: A lot of talk about nimitta, thanks to Maeve and Ann for bringing it up a lot on the second morning. ------- KH: Over the years I have heard a lot about nimita, but it has never seemed very important to my way of understanding. Consequently I tend to forget most of what I have heard. ----------------------- > Ph: Very important topic that has made me more relaxed and confident about believing that there can be understanding of the present moment. ----------------------- KH: I don't see how understanding the present moment can be difficult. Right now there is consciousness, the base of consciousness, and the object of consciousness. Isn't that right understanding of the present moment? From there on there is the matter of filling in the details. And nimitta is one of the details. I'll get around to it one day, but in the meantime I can still understand the present moment, can't I? Ken H #114053 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:14 am Subject: Re: notes from KK philofillet Hi Ken > I'll get around to it one day, but in the meantime I can still understand the present moment, can't I? Kneeling in my living room with i-phone with wind howling and our bags nearby because there was an alarm about a powerful aftershock and we were ready to flee but there has been a lot of calmness about all this and again amd again thinking abput the present moment and understandong at an intellectual level of what is going on amd of cpurse thete os a steady slab of lobha seeking cpmfort fr mpment to moment...so if that is unferstamdong the present moment, ok.... .....as for nimitta I think it is especially helpful fpr cpnsoderong visual object but maybe that is me, sprry for all the typos, still new at i-phone tapping.... ....,over and out for a few days... Radiating Metta, Phil #114054 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 4:52 am Subject: the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Howard. Appreciate your comments. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Ken) - > > [Howard butting in uninvited! ;-] > > Robert, I agree with what you say in this post, but I take it a bit > further, I'd say. I will quote below what I am in basic agreement with and > also add what additional there is to my perspective: > > In a message dated 3/7/2011 10:35:04 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, > epsteinrob@... writes: > > Hi Ken H. > > > > > I have said many times that I did not like the idea of the dhamma being a > sort of independent "monad" that has fixed, describable characteristics of > definite function and duration. To my mind, this kind of hyper-objective > characterization with all its precise detail may be an idealized version of > the way dhammas really arise. > > > [With regard to the idea of nibbana being the only ultimate reality] Well, > we can discus this in another thread. Right now I'm concerned about > crushing the substantialist view of "own-being" as a possession of a dhamma, > rather than a characteristic way of functioning and behaving, that's all. > > As for whether anything is ultimately real other than nibbana, the point > of agreement is that everything is *conditioned* other than nibbana, and in > that sense nibbana is the only thing that has an *independent* existence, > whereas every single conditioned dhamma is just a temporary product of > conditions. That is why all [Howard: conditioned] dhammas are anicca, they are > subject to the changing winds of conditions which are constantly shifting. > Nibbana is impervious to conditions and is separate and apart from > conditions. So it has a different type or level of reality, but that is all. > Dhammas *do* actually arise, but that is *all* they do. That's the extent of > their "reality." The whole point of samsara is that it pivots on an > extremely thin and tenuous fulcrum, and as soon as conditions stop arising, it's > over! It's as if it had never been. > -------------------------------------------------- > Howard: I go further here. As I view the matter, there IS a variation, ebb > & flow, and distinguishability in the quality of experience - sometimes > mental, sometimes physical; and when physical, sometimes visual, sometimes > auditory, sometimes olfactory, sometimes gustatory, and sometimes tactile > (i.e., bodily), but the naming and characterization in this fashion is in part > a matter of concept, and the slicing up into distinct, separate, and > self-existent physical and mental entities, "monads" in your terminology, > Robert, namely rupas and namas, is strictly conventional and mind-imposed, and, > if thought to be more than that a matter of convention, then delusive. I basically agree with that, but on the other hand, I think even that requires a lot more specification. Is it correct to say that x arises, but incorrect to say that it is exactly thus and such? In that kind of realm, I think there are descriptions that are skillful in terms of sharpening mindfulness, and probably others that stick one with a fixed view, and I guess we could have a pretty extensive fine-tuning discussion to sort of take a look at what works and what takes one away from the actuality of the experiential path. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114055 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 5:05 am Subject: the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > Hi Robert E, > > > There is no need to apologise for over-vigorous debate, I thrive on it. :-) Good to hear! :-) > ----------------- > <. . .> > > RE: I wanted you to know that the only reason I spoke to you so intensely is because of your absolute commitment to the reality of dhammas, otherwise I would not take such liberties. > ----------------- > > KH: The absolute reality of dhammas means no one is being spoken to. (So nothing to worry about.) > > If, however, dhammas were not absolutely real, could we say with any certainty that no one was being spoken to? I don't think it impacts it one way or the other. If people are not real as such, and dhammas are ephemeral and fleeting - as they are - and of no ultimate importance, real or not, then that does not somehow improve the reality of persons. They are nonexistent as such, either way. I don't see how the "absolute reality" of dhammas does anything but leave you carrying dhammas around on your back instead of being completely free of such encumbrances. It's one thing to experience them clearly as nama or rupa, and quite another to insist on *how incredibly real* they are, as if somehow your life depended on their solidity; whereas in fact they are worthy only of being let go, so what's all the bother? > Something is happening. If it's not dhammas that's doing it, then what the hell is it doing it? You sound like an entity-man here. Nothing's doing it. Dhammas arise because of conditions, period, and there is nothing else to them. They're conditional all the way through, otherwise they'd be real and substantial entities and we'd be in a real world, not a delusory world of samsara. Dhammas are not nothing, but they're the next best thing. Human experience is a load of crap. > Don't tell me its unreal dhammas. Things that are not real can't really do anything. No one's saying they're not real. They arise and fall away, that's all. They have no "essences" which would make them entities, and they have no "own-being" as something solid, because that would make them entities. They are ephemeral arising configurations of experience which fall away immediately. That's all. Yes, they are real, for about a mili-second. They are only important to clinging, period. > ------------------------------- > <. . .> > > RE: > parts of Abhidhamma and particularly the local interpretation here via commentary, sometimes seem at odds with established traditions as well as suttas. > ------------------------------- > > KH: It's true, most established Buddhist traditions are at odds with the ancient texts. Nope. > ----------------------------------------- > <. . .> > > RE: there are bound to be some disputes about that. That doesn't mean that either side is either insincere or necessarily wrong. > ----------------------------------------- > > KH: There is only one right path. Pretending otherwise wouldn't help anyone. There is nothing but human interpretations of the path. Citta develops clarity regarding experience as it awakens, but that's the only path. There's no "path path" that is objectively shining in the sun, waiting to be discovered. There's just awakening, and delusion. > ------------------------- > <. . .> > > > KH: It has been generally agreed here (1) that there are only dhammas, and (2) that all dhammas are absolutely devoid of self. But the literal interpretation of that rule is a bit too cut and dried for some people. And so we have seen desperate attempts at finding exceptions to it, no matter how subtle or obscure. > >> > > > RE: It is very easy to slip various presupositions into the mix when you try to draw conclusions from those two principles, such as the status of concepts as non-dhammic in nature, and the non-application of the prime principles of Buddhism to conventional experience; the supposed self-based nature of "formal meditation" and many other areas where the conclusions are not based directly on the two prime statements that you started on, but on various concepts that > others disagree with. > ----------------------------- > > KH: That's a nice summing-up of the points of controversy. I feel sure, however, that they *can* all be decided simply by accepting the two principles. Without your many presuppositions, that would be true. We could just agree that there are nothing but experiences and objects of experience, and that they are all free of self and free of substantial essence that stays the same, because they are in a state of continual flux. But you find a way to turn anicca into a static characteristic, which is more than wrong, it is taking the teaching on impermanence and turning it into a wrong view of static stability. > ----------------------------------------- > >> RE: There are many other details that are not indisputable but which are treated as such by those who believe in a particular point of view of the Dhamma. The fact that there are only dhammas does *not* necessitate that cittas are single, unimpeded events that only interact as one dies as another arises, that there is only one citta at a time, or that each sense area is a completely separate > universe. Those are all separate conclusions drawn from other sources, not directly derived from the prime realities we all agree on. And the list of those things which are just *assumed* to be true based on a particular set of doctrines goes on and on. > ---------------------------------------- > > KH: Isn't all that just basic Abhidhamma? I know it is disputed by people who reject the Abhidhamma, but I didn't know it was disputed by people who rejected only the Commentaries. The singularity of cittas and their objects is more explicit in commentary, from what I understand. You can correct me if wrong. > I'll leave the rest of the post and stop now, while we are still speaking. :-) Whoops! Looks like someone's getting their spiritually enhanced self-concept bruised. I'm sorry! ;-( Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #114056 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Mar 15, 2011 10:06 pm Subject: Serene is Equanimity! bhikkhu5 Friends: Equanimity of the Mind, Serenity & Beyond! The Blessed Buddha once explained: And what then, Bhikkhus, is this simple indifference of the flesh? There are these five strings of sense-pleasure. What five? Visible forms, which can be experienced by the eye ... Hearable sounds, which can be experienced by the ear ... Smellable odours, which can be experienced by the nose ... Tastable flavours, which can be experienced by the tongue ... Touchable objects, which can be experienced by the body ... That all are attractive, captivating, desirable, irresistible, lovely, charming, tempting, pleasing, sensually enticing, seductive, alluring, and tantalizing! These are the 5 strings of sense-pleasure. The indifference that arises from these 5 strings of sense-pleasure when bored, is simply indifference of the flesh... And what, Bhikkhus, is the equanimity, which is not of this world? With the leaving behind of both pleasure and pain, & with the prior fading away of both joy & sorrow, one enters & dwells in the 4th jh�na absorption, which is an entirely stilled mental state of utter awareness, purified by the equanimity of neither-pain-nor-pleasure. This is called the equanimity, which is not of this world! Finally, what is serenity beyond the equanimity, which is not of this world? When a bhikkhu, whose mental fermentations are eliminated, reviews his calmed mind, which is liberated from all lust, freed from all hatred, and released from uncertainty, then there arises a transcendental serenity... This is the serenity beyond that equanimity, which is not of this world! <....> Source (edited extract): The Grouped Sayings of the Buddha. Samyutta Nik�ya. Book IV [235-7] section 36:11 On Feeling: Vedan�. Joys beyond this world ... http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam�hita _/\_ * <....> #114057 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 8:36 am Subject: Fwd: earthquake. nilovg Dear Sarah and friends, I fwd Tadao's post. Nina. Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: Miyamoto Tadao > Datum: 16 maart 2011 5:49:13 GMT+01:00 > Aan: Nina van Gorkom > Onderwerp: Antw.: earthquake. > > Hi Khun Nina: > > Thank you for your mail. > My condolences are to those perished with Tsunami. > Presumably more than twenty thousand souls have perished. > I feel that it is almost impossible to rebuild these costal > communities. > > I was originally going to visit Bangkok in May, but I might have to > postpone it until August. (I like the Foundation very much.) > > tadao > #114058 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:01 am Subject: Re:Q. [dsg] Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. nilovg Dear Han, Op 15-mrt-2011, om 23:09 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > (5) "arisen as happening" (samudaacaaruppanna.m) in Visuddhimagga > is translated in the Dispeller of Delusion as "arisen as > behaviour". I think the translation in the Dispeller of Delusion is > more correct, as the Dictionary meaning of "samudaacaara" is > behaviour; habit; practice; familiarity. ------ N: Yes, the translations differ slightly. I return to our correspondence about the eight items. (5) Tattha sampati vattamaana.myeva samudaacaaruppanna.m naama. (5) Herein, that existing now is what is called [arisen as behaviour] (samudaacaaruppanna.m). ------- N: Samudaacaara is behaviour or practice. This is similar to the first item, that refers to the defilements that occur. Akusala cittas rooted in lobha, dosa and moha habitually occur at the present moment. These are not to be annihilated by the Path. When magga-citta arises akusala citta cannot arise at the same time. Now back to item 1: (1) Tattha ye kilesaa vijjamaanaa uppaadaadisama"ngino ida.m vattamaanuppanna.m naama. (1) Herein, those defilements which are existent, being possessed of arising and so on, are [arisen as actually occurring] (vattamaanuppanna.m). ----------- Herein its word-definition: present or existing is called uppanna, because it has arrived at the portal, so to speak, of genesis, etc. , after the end of the previous state". N: The three moments of arising, presence and ceasing of citta. ----- This kind of upanna, arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m), is not to be annihilated by the path, as we have read. -------- N: Samudaacaaruppanna refers to the defilements that habitually occur, just as lobha now after the experience of any object through one of the six doors. Visuddhimagga translates as happening, perhaps the translator thinks of item 1, occurring. For me it does not matter, so long as we understand the meaning. It pertains to the defilements that occur. ------ I have a point that is not so clear: (8) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen. I do not know which kind of mundane knowledge it refers to. For this I would need the Tiika which may give an explanation, but it takes too much time to find the right passage. ------- Nina. #114059 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 9:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Keang Krachan, no 1. nilovg Dear Philip and friends, Some transcriptions Philip referred to I repost. no 1. During our trip I listened again to the talks in Kaeng Krachan, and I found that I listened differently. I could appreciate more the way Kh Sujin was leading us to the present moment. Lodewijk was not satisfied with the way she answered his questions and therefore we went over them again. I quote and add my reflections now, marking them with N. He asked what sati is. ----------- L: What is sati, different from thinking of realities? I know that there is hardness, but what is awareness of it? There is seeing and touching, but this is not sati. Kh S: It is pa~n~naa that knows that there is no sati at that moment. One is very truthful when one realizes that there is no sati at the moment there is no sati. --------- N: It is encouraging to learn that there is a beginning of pa~n~naa when it is known that there is no sati. It is also truthful to realize this. This is better than talking oneself into it that there is sati while there is not ---------- Kh S: One can see attachment to wanting to have sati, trying so hard, but this does not work, there is no pa~n~naa. Leave it to conditions. Also awareness is conditioned, it has to be understood as not self. One has to be patient. Pa~n~naa can understand reality right now. It arises and falls away now but it is not known. -------- N: Lodewijk expected a definition of sati but this does not work. One can only know it when it arises but by trying to have it, one will not know it. Kh Sujin will help people to see sati as a conditioned dhamma that cannot be controlled. That is very essential. ------- Kh S: Anything that appears has its own characteristic. No one can condition its arising. This is a level of understanding. ------ N: this is very basic, and necessary to understand sati as a conditioned dhamma. Kh Sujin will return to the basics before she explains more about sati. It is not useful to only understand sati in a theoretical way. ------- Kh S: Seeing, hearing, thinking, they all are different. We have to begin to understand realities, they have their own characteristics. As soon as sound appears, there is already attachment or aversion. ------ L: How do I know when there is sati? ------- Kh S: When there is more understanding about sati because of hearing about it and considering what one hears. No one can condition its arising. All dhammas are anattaa. At this moment of touching there is no sati. When sati arises the hardness is the same but there is awareness of it. Usually we touch without sati, but when sati arises there is a slight difference. The moment of sati does not last, but when there is sati the characteristic of hardness appears. ------- Nina. #114060 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:02 pm Subject: Re: Questions on Samatha. epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > OK, I've heard that my school will be closed for another few days at least so I am going to use the opportunity to get off the internet for awhile. Consuming news, news, news is not good food for the mind. Object of hearing arising and falling away. :-) Best, Robert E. - - - - - - - - - #114061 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:13 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 > > (113625) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Jon. > > ... > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Well I do think it's significant that the kinds of dhammas that can be object of insight is finite and is relatively small in number. > > For example, the rupas that are experienced through the sense-doors in the course of ordinary daily life in the human plane are only 7 (visible object, etc), experienced by only 5 kinds of consciousness (seeing consciousness, etc). What we take for the 'world out there' is, in terms of direct experience, only those few kinds of rupas, which are themselves momentary in nature. > > If the number of dhammas was very large or, as in the case of concepts/conventional objects, infinite it could not safely be assumed that what is so in respect of the few that are directly experienced (i.e., that they are anicca, dukkha and anattaa) must also be so as regards the rest. > > > =============== > 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. > > =============== > > J: That assumes there is something to be known about concepts ;-)) Well there is - that they are concepts. If one does not identify concepts as concepts where exactly would that leave one? Aren't you knowing something about them right now as you write about them? > It also begs the question whether knowledge gained about concepts is of any value as far as the development of insight is concerned. Unless you are contemplating a class of insight that is insight into the "true nature of concepts" (but anything that has a 'true nature' is, by definition, included in the dhammas of which the Buddha spoke). There isn't anything else. Even thinking about concepts is a nama, apprehended by citta. > > =============== > > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Well, dhammas are always associated with other dhammas. But what makes a dhamma a dhamma is that each dhamma of its kind has a unique characteristic, discernable by panna, that distinguishes it from all other kinds of dhammas. It is a point of interest whether such objective thingy-ness really arises with such mechanical clarity. Since none of us have seen one with such clarity [I assume] it is just theoretical. > And when a dhamma is the object of consciousness-with-panna, it is not intermingled with other dhammas. So in that sense I would say that dhammas can indeed be seen in their 'pure form'. I think that's a theory rather than a verified reality. > > =============== > > > 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. > > =============== > > J: Yes, pariyatti is understanding *about* dhammas, but patipatti (awareness/insight) is understanding *of* dhammas by direct experience. If this were not possible for the worldling, the path could not be developed. I agree direct experience can be developed through awareness, but exactly what that experience is and whether it arises in crystalline isolation of each pristine dhamma with its little function being purely carried out, is a matter of conjecture, and I don't see why that is the way it has to work in order for there to be insight into the nature of dhammas. That seems like a Platonic ideal of dhammas. It is possible that such a model is confusing the explanation of dhammas with the way in which they actually occur. > > =============== > > > J: In any event, this is not consistent with the way dhammas are described in such suttas as 'The All'. > > > > RE: 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. > > =============== > > J: What you call 'looking at our experience as namas and rupas' is not the same thing as direct awareness of a presently arising dhamma as I understand that expression. It is imposing a view or idea of what namas and rupas are onto the present moment. As you say, it is just adding concept to perception. In essence it is just a kind of 'thinking about'. I was describing pariyatti in my own way. How would you describe the process of pariyatti, understanding dhammas correctly and seeing that they are the constituents of reality? Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114062 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:41 pm Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Ph: I am not so sure about this now, feel more confident that we can all study the characteristics of dhammas, thanks especially to the teaching of nimitta, there can be many dhammas forming the nimitta that is the characteristic we study, more understandable. But I still don't see why we couldn't do so in meditation as well as in daily life, unless our meditation was driven by some crazy hunger for insight or something like that, or locked into a very wrong method. I agree. I like the idea of the nimitta as well, it gives a lot of leeway for experiencing dhammas. It seems that study of dhammas gets all the "breaks" with things like nimittas that allow us to get early access, while meditation is shut out from any exceptions. Oh well! Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #114063 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 2:08 pm Subject: Re: A cheerful smile epsteinrob Hi Phil. > > http://sankei.jp.msn.com/affairs/photos/110313/dst11031319000085-p1.htm Beautiful pic. I hope everything goes well for you and your wife. If there was ever a time for metta, this is a good one. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = #114064 From: han tun Date: Wed Mar 16, 2011 10:07 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. hantun1 Dear Nina, I have been reading and re-reading the books, and please allow me to recapitulate the way I understand now. In Abhisamayakathaa (Pa.tisambhidaamagga) in paragraph 11, it states that: "He does not abandon past defilements, he does not abandon future defilements, he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements." and "That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas." Then the simile of a young tree with unborn fruit is brought up in paragraph 12. This is repeated in Visuddhgimagga (XXII, 79). From the above, four statements can be made as follows: (i) He does not abandon past defilements, (ii) he does not abandon future defilements, and (iii) he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements. (iv) That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas. But how? --------------- Han: The above four statements are explained in detail in Visuddhimagga and the Dispeller of Delusion, by way of eight arisings. ----- (i) He does not abandon past defilements is explained by (2) arisen as experienced and gone (bhutvaa vigatuppanna.m). ----- (ii) he does not abandon future defilements is explained by (3) arisen having got an opportunity (okaasakatuppanna.m). ----- (iii) he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements is explained by (1) arisen as actually occurring (vattamaanuppanna.m), and (5) arisen as happening (samudaacaaruppanna.m). Since (1) and (5) are the same, it should be regarded as *one* arising. ----- (iv) That is not so. There is development of the path, there is realization of its fruition, there is convergence of ideas. But how? is explained by (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m), (6) arisen with apprehension of an object (aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m), (7) arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppanna.m), and (8) arisen through non-abolition (asamugghaatituppanna.m). Han: Here, according to Vism XXII, 90, (6) arisen with apprehension of an object (aaramma.naadhigahituppanna.m), (7) arisen through non-suppression (avikkhambhituppanna.m), (8) and arisen through non-abolition (asamugghaatituppanna.m), should be understood *as included by* (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m). Thus, although four arisings are mentioned, they should be considered together. If we understand No (4), we should understand (6), (7), and (8) in the same manner. To understand (4) arisen having obtained a plane (bhuumiladdhuppanna.m), Visuddhimagga explains starting with para 82, pointing out the difference between the "soil" and "what has soil". The "soil" (plane) means the five aggregates in the three planes of becoming, which are the object of insight. The "what has soil" is an expression for defilements capable of arising with respect to those aggregates. Then, we have to read paragraphs 83 to 88. The most important points are in para 88 as follows: "So too the clansman who feels revulsion (dispassion) for the occurrence of aggregates, undertakes to develop the four paths in his own continuity which is like the man's application of poison to the tree on all four sides." Han: Here, I like the way "the man's application of poison to the tree on all four sides" is compared to "the development of the four paths" or the four magga ~naa.nas, namely, sotaapatti magga ~naa.na, sakadaagaami magga ~naa.na, anaagaami magga ~naa.na, and arahatt magga ~naa.na. --------------- As regards the statement, < "But the four kinds of ‘arisen’, namely, (iv) by having soil [to grow in], (vi) with apprehension of an object, (vii) through non-suppression, and (viii) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen." > I think mundane knowledge refers to jhaanas or the mahaggata cittas, and supramundane knowledge refers to magga ~naa.nas. Respectfully, Han #114065 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:37 am Subject: re notes from KK philofillet Hi Ken and all Needless to say, I'm still online. There are times to try to stay off the internet, but when a crisis that has the whole modern world transfixed to their TVs and computer screens is unfolding around me, I don't want to feel left out. :) Re understanding the present moment, a lot of opportunity to reflect on just how much attachment is involved in that. There is so much calm these days, a lot of reflection on present dhammas, seeing now, hearing now, irritation now, tender affection now, strong attachment now, not me, just dhammas performing their functions. And I feel calm and strangely happy today, as Sarah often says, it feels that there isn't a burden and the almost harsh appeals from overseas to GET OUT! are just not causing panic on my part. But is that happiness I feel today, that lack of a burden of stress caused by correct understanding or sucking comfort out of the Dhamma? I'm not wracking my brain over that, there is an understand of present dhammas to a certain degree, that is good. But certainly the Dhamma is a comforter for me today whether the comfort is rooted in kusala understanding or just a lot of lobha, no doubt about that. Metta, Phil #114066 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:39 am Subject: Re: A cheerful smile philofillet Thanks Rob E > > Beautiful pic. I hope everything goes well for you and your wife. If there was ever a time for metta, this is a good one. Understanding is best! :) Metta, Phil #114067 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:45 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Keang Krachan, no 1. philofillet Hi Nina Thanks for posting this transcript. I will listen again and reflect. I share Lodewijk's difficulty with understanding sati, but it is a topic where understanding will only develop gradually without forcing the point. And it is clear to me now that the kind of sati that is discussed here is very refined, "higher" is the word she used, I think. On the other hand, there are levels of sati that involve remembering in a more conventional way, for example remembering the benefits of kusala and the disadvantages of akusala, and there is no doubt or confusion about that level of sati. But as A. Sujin said about those levels, "not enough", I appreciate that. When you have an opportunity, could you print out the question that followed a bit later on anusayas? I found A. Sujin's answer particularly clear on that. One thing I remember is Lodewijk asked "can we eradicate the anusayas" and A.Sujin said of course, if it was not possible there would be no Buddha, or something like that. Metta, Phil #114068 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:50 am Subject: Re: notes from KK epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Phil, > > ------- > <. . .> > Ph: A lot of talk about nimitta, thanks to Maeve and Ann for bringing it up a lot on the second morning. > ------- > > KH: Over the years I have heard a lot about nimita, but it has never seemed very important to my way of understanding. Consequently I tend to forget most of what I have heard. > > ----------------------- > > Ph: Very important topic that has made me more relaxed > and confident about believing that there can be understanding of the present moment. > ----------------------- > > KH: I don't see how understanding the present moment can be difficult. Right now there is consciousness, the base of consciousness, and the object of consciousness. > > Isn't that right understanding of the present moment? > > From there on there is the matter of filling in the details. And nimitta is one of the details. > > I'll get around to it one day, but in the meantime I can still understand the present moment, can't I? What do you mean by "understand?" Do you mean understand the description of the way dhammas are said to work? Or do you mean actually understanding them in the moment by direct apprehension? I think you mean the former. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #114069 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:38 am Subject: Re: notes from KK philofillet Hi Rob E, Ken and all > > > > I'll get around to it one day, but in the meantime I can still understand the present moment, can't I? > > What do you mean by "understand?" Do you mean understand the description of the way dhammas are said to work? Or do you mean actually understanding them in the moment by direct apprehension? I think you mean the former. Ph: Very succinctly asked, Rob. And Jon, I will find it again, but I was listening to a very good talk where you, Nina, Sarah, Ivan and A.Sujin and others were talking about dosa, that if we think about dosa being conditioned, if there is thinking about such a characteristic of dosa, it is akusala. I will have to find that again, but I was confused, it sounded contrary to what is always said about intellectual understanding, we have to understand intellectually, and that means thinking about characteristics surely. I will have to track down the exact passage, after my shower. (Just back from a run during which I listened to that talk.) Metta, Phil #114070 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 7:32 am Subject: Re: notes from KK ( thinking about dhammas vs knowing them) philofillet Hi again Jon and all I found that passage: Ivan: If there is dosa, and there is thinking that it's just dosa rising and falling away, it's just thinking. Jon: It's akusala. Ph: Well, I guess it's akusala in the sense that it is rooted in lobha? But I would say then that all of our dhamma reflections are therefore akusala, except for some very minute openings, very rare, in the solid dome of lobha, that table with the minute spaces. I find this hard to accept. If reflecting that dosa is rising and falling away is akusala, there is no hope for understanding to develop. (Unless understanding can be condition by akusala reflection, doesn't seem likely...) Metta, Phil > And Jon, I will find it again, but I was listening to a very good talk where you, Nina, Sarah, Ivan and A.Sujin and others were talking about dosa, that if we think about dosa being conditioned, if there is thinking about such a characteristic of dosa, it is akusala. I will have to find that again, but I was confused, it sounded contrary to what is always said about intellectual understanding, we have to understand intellectually, and that means thinking about characteristics surely. #114071 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:03 am Subject: Change Spells Danger! bhikkhu5 Friends: Change means Fragility & Danger! The Buddha pointed out the fact of impermanence by saying: Sabbe Sankhara Anicca. All constructions are Impermanent The Blessed One was once asked: What is the World? He answered: The eye disintegrates. Forms disintegrate. Consciousness disintegrates. All contact, all feeling, all organs, all bodies & all sensations disintegrate... The intellect disintegrates. Ideas disintegrate. The mind disintegrate! Insofar as it disintegrates, is it called the world. SN 35.82 The Blessed One pointed out: Perception of inconstancy, when developed & pursued, is of great fruit, of great benefit. It gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its final end. AN 7.46 And what is the perception of inconstancy? There is the case where a monk having gone to the wilderness, to the shade of a tree, or to an empty building reflects thus: All form is inconstant, all feeling is inconstant, all perception is inconstant, all fabrications are inconstant, all consciousness is inconstant. Thus he remains focused on inconstancy with regard to the five clusters of clinging. This, Ananda, is called the perception of inconstancy. Going forth is hard. Household life is hard. This Dhamma is a deep wealth, hard to obtain. It's hard to keep going with whatever we ever can get. Therefore we should ponder continually on this continual inconstancy. Thag 111 Impermanent are all component things, They arise and cease, that is their very nature: They come into being and pass away... Release from them is bliss supreme. DN 16 The five clusters are impermanent. Whatever is impermanent is dukkha, suffering. Whatever is dukkha, suffering, that is without att�, a self! What is without self, that is not mine, that I am not, that is not my self. Thus should it be seen by perfect wisdom as it really is. Who sees by perfect wisdom, as it really is, his mind, neither grasping, nor clinging is detached from fermentations... He is liberated. SN 22.45 Material form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness, monks, are impermanent (anicca). Whatever causes and conditions there are for the arising of these aggregates, they, too, are impermanent. How could anything arisen from what is impermanent, ever be permanent? SN 22.7-9 Whatever material form there be: whether past, future, or present; internal or external; gross or subtle; low or lofty; far or near; that material form the monk meditates upon, examines systematically with acute attention, he thus seeing, meditating upon, and examining with systematic attention, would find it empty, he would find it insubstantial and without essence. What essence, monks, could there be in any form? What essence, monks, could there be in feeling, in perception, in mental formations and in any consciousness? SN 22.95 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam�hita _/\_ * <...> #114072 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:39 am Subject: Re: re notes from KK kenhowardau Hi Phil, ------ > Ph: Needless to say, I'm still online. There are times to try to stay off the internet, but when a crisis that has the whole modern world transfixed to their TVs and computer screens is unfolding around me, I don't want to feel left out. :) ------ KH: I have been checking the news every hour. ----------------- > Ph: Re understanding the present moment, a lot of opportunity to reflect on just how much attachment is involved in that. There is so much calm these days, a lot of reflection on present dhammas, seeing now, hearing now, irritation now, tender affection now, strong attachment now, not me, just dhammas performing their functions. ----------------- KH: Just like now! ------------------------------------------ > Ph: And I feel calm and strangely happy today, as Sarah often says, it feels that there isn't a burden and the almost harsh appeals from overseas to GET OUT! are just not causing panic on my part. But is that happiness I feel today, that lack of a burden of stress caused by correct understanding or sucking comfort out of the Dhamma? ------------------------------------------ KH: Either way it's only dhammas. --------------------- > Ph: I'm not wracking my brain over that, there is an understand of present dhammas to a certain degree, that is good. But certainly the Dhamma is a comforter for me today whether the comfort is rooted in kusala understanding or just a lot of lobha, no doubt about that. --------------------- KH: Enjoy it regardless. The way I think of it is: right understanding is kusala, wrong understanding is akusala. That way, I don't have to think of *my* understanding, right or wrong. Ken H #114073 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 8:55 am Subject: Re: notes from KK kenhowardau Hi Robert E, -------- <. . .> > > KH: but in the meantime I can still understand the present moment, can't I? > RE: What do you mean by "understand?" Do you mean understand the description of the way dhammas are said to work? Or do you mean actually understanding them in the moment by direct apprehension? I think you mean the former. -------- KH: Definitely the former. The later is solely for the wise - "those with little dust in their eyes." Ken H #114074 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:03 am Subject: Re: re notes from KK philofillet Hi Ken > > Ph: Re understanding the present moment, a lot of opportunity to reflect on just how much attachment is involved in that. There is so much calm these days, a lot of reflection on present dhammas, seeing now, hearing now, irritation now, tender affection now, strong attachment now, not me, just dhammas performing their functions. > ----------------- > > KH: Just like now! No doubt about that. But questions remain about whether panna develops when reflections like this are rooted in lobha, which they are for me, almost always. (See question to Jon.) So be it? Yes, I guess that's right. Understanding will develop or not develop, can't be forced, and understanding can understand the lobha involved in paramattha reflections. I won't deprive myself of reflection in parammatha terms any more because of concerns of lobha involved, it is good food for the mind at the very least. Metta, Phil #114075 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 9:41 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bahiya Sutta sarahprocter... Dear Patrick, A little belatedly, welcome to DSG! I thought your reflections on the Bahiya Sutta (to Jessica) were interesting and useful. I think we can consider the following a little further: --- On Sat, 12/3/11, patrick ohearn wrote: >This accords with my understanding of the sutta. A sense of self is built out of various impersonal dhammas/processes within experience. Seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and observing thought with a pure understanding means seeing the object in and of itself, as it really is. This is not me. This is not mine. This I am not. This object is impermanent, dependent on causes, fabricated out of ever changing elements. This object is a distraction, a weight caught in the net of awareness. It is stressful. >Thinking, "There is a flower" is much less stressful than thinking, "I see my beautiful yellow daffodil. It has been beautiful in the past and will continue to be beautiful in the future. It was given to me in the past and will continue to be mine in the future." .... S: And understanding that, in reality, there is no "flower", just the "seen", i.e. the visible object which appears, just the "heard", the sound which appears and so on, leads to detachment from what is experienced at this very moment. It is the seeing, the visible object, the hearing, the sound which are impermanent and thereby inherently unsatisfactory and anatta. So the aim is not to stop the thinking about flowers and so on, but to understand the realities for what they are at this moment. A flower is a concept contemplated on account of the various sense objects experienced only. ... >It is not as stressful when we just observe. When we cling to things we set ourselves up for future suffering. The flower will not beautiful forever. It will wilt and fade. It will decay and return to the earth. When the beauty fades there will be no joy at the sight of it. We cannot possess the flower when we die. The flower is only in our reach for a short time. We can look upon it and use it for a short time. When the flower decays, crumbles in our grasp and the wind carries it away we will feel the pain of loss. >Smile. There is a flower. Let it be. ... S: This is the dukkha of change. And the deepest meaning of dukkha is the unsatisfactoriness of all conditioned dhammas - so rather than being concerned with 'stress', through the development of understanding, there is a growing appreciation that all dhammas, that is all conditioned mental and physical elements are dukkha. ... >I hope this was helpful. This is one of my favorite suttas. I have pondered on it often. ... S: Very helpful reflections and we may discuss these various kinds of dukkha further if you'd like and also discuss more on the Bahiya Sutta which we both appreciate. Where do you live, Patrick? You've obviously been studying the Buddha's Teachings carefully. Metta Sarah ===== #114076 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- On Tue, 8/3/11, han tun wrote: >I said that according to the direction of the arrows it appears that the D.O. is one way traffic. I said that there should be an arrow flowing from (3) back to (2), meaning the present causes not only produce future effects in the next life, but also produce the present effects in the present life itself. I have discussed this point with some of my friends who are the followers of Mogok Sayadaw, but they refuse to accept this idea. ... S: I think that we all tend to underestimate the complexity of conditions including kamma. As discussed in the nama-rupa conditioning vinnana thread, we forget about conditions such as mutuality and association. People prefer simple rules and diagrams to really considering how the dhammas arising now condition other dhammas at this moment as well as in the future. ... >I said that if it were only in one direction, one can do anything one likes in this present life and another person who is reborn in the next life will bear all the effects. It would be dangerous as some may not be afraid to do evil things in this life if the effects were to come only in the next life. Besides, if the present causes in the present life produce the future effects only in the future life, the teaching of the Di.t.thadhamma-vedaniya kamma (kamma which bears fruits in the present life) will have no meaning at all. .... S: And again, all these conditioned dhammas, whether in this life or a future life are all anatta. The vipaka dhammas arising now and experiencing objects through the senses are the results of past kamma. Just as the attachment now likes experiencing pleasant objects, so it will in future....on and on with ignorance until even such pleasant experiences are understood as truly dukkha. ... >So far, I have not been able to introduce this idea of an arrow on the chart flowing back from No (3) quadrant to No (2) quadrant, with my Burmese friends. The DSG members may consider about this idea. .... S: I appreciate your bringing it to our attention for deeper reflection and understanding. I met a Chinese Buddhist friend for lunch, but sometimes our Buddhist friends are not really interested in understanding dhammas at this moment! Thank you again for your wonderful series! Metta Sarah ====== #114077 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:41 am Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your comments on the complexity of the Dependent Origination. < Sarah: I think that we all tend to underestimate the complexity of conditions including kamma. As discussed in the nama-rupa conditioning vinnana thread, we forget about conditions such as mutuality and association. People prefer simple rules and diagrams to really considering how the dhammas arising now condition other dhammas at this moment as well as in the future. > This also reminds me of your message in which mentioned the fourfold teaching of the D.O. by the Buddha: (i) from the beginning up to the end, (ii) from the middle up to the end, (iii) from the end up to the beginning, and (iv) from the middle up to the beginning. with metta and respect, Han #114078 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 10:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, --- On Fri, 11/3/11, han tun wrote: >>S:8. 5 fold and 8 fold path. Lokuttara cittas - 8 fold path, object is nibbana. 5 fold path doesn't include the virati cetasikas (right speech, action and livelihood) and yet 6 factors can arise together in the mundane path. The object must be the same. --------------- >Han: At the meeting, I mentioned a Pali word which I rarely find in the books written by the Western scholars, but which is well-known in Burma, and taught by the Burmese Sayadaws with regard to vipassanaa meditation. That Pali word is "Pa~nca"ngika magga" (five-fold Path). >At *mundane level* when a meditator meditates on vipassanaa, he/she can meditate with only five Path, namely, two pa~n~naa magga"nga (sammaa di.t.thi, sammaa sankappa), and three samaadhi magga"nga (sammaa vaayaamo, sammaa sati, sammaa samaadhi). He can develop three siila magga"nga (sammaa vaacaa, sammaa kammanta, sammaa aajiiva) at other times, but not during vipassanaa meditation. .... [S: This relates to a post you wrote before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/98367] .... H:>Why? >Because the objects of attention are different at the *mundane level*. The objects of attention for the five-fold Path are the three characteristics of anicca, dukkha, anatta of naama and ruupa; whereas the objects of attention for the three siila magga"nga are the objects to be abstain from. .... S: And yet, we read in the texts that the mundane path can be five-fold or six-fold, depending on whether one of the viratis (one of the siila magga"ngas) arises with the other 5 path factors. As I understand, at such moments of mundane path factors arising, the object is a dhamma, a reality and therefore, at such moments, the object of that virati has to be the same reality. ... >The most a meditator can develop together during meditation is a six-fold Path. For example, if a meditator is bitten by a mosquito during meditation, if he abstains from killing the mosquito, he is developing a six-fold Path at that moment. ... S: Yes, there can be the six-fold path and at such a moment of the path arising, the object has to be a reality. In between there may be the ordinary non-satipatthana moments of virati when one abstains from killing the mosquito, but these are not path moments because a concept is the object at such times. There has to be a distinction. ... >However, at the *supramundane level*, when the magga ~naa.na arises, the meditator develops all eight magga"ngas together. That is possible because, the objects of attention shift to a single object, that is, Nibbaana, at that moment. .... S: Yes, when any lokuttara (supramundane) cittas arise, the object is nibbana. Still conditioned dhammas which experience the unconditioned dhamma - no meditator at all:-) The quotes you give from Ledi Sayadaw below are interesting, but, as I understand, a little different from those given in the ancient commentaries which make it clear that in the mundane path, 6 path factors can arise together, taking the same object and I don't believe there is a reference to "observing the three constituents of the morality-group of the Eightfold Path" before "the practice of the wisdom-group of the Eightfold Path is undertaken". I don't have a single text with me in Hong Kong and you now have a copy of the Dispeller. Perhaps you may like to check and share what you find on this. I also recall reading more detail in the Atthasalini and the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha which I know Ledi Sayadaw objected to in part. All very controversial, I know and no need to "debate" or reply, my Good Friend:-)) Metta Sarah ... >The following are the excerpts taken from The Manuals of Buddhism by Ledi Sayadaw. (excerpts from Magga"nga Dipani by Ledi Sayadaw) >After observing the three constituents of the morality-group of the Eightfold Path, the practice of the wisdom-group of the Eightfold Path is undertaken. The three constituents of the concentration-group of the Eightfold Path come along together with the two constituents of the wisdom-group of the Eightfold Path, and these two sets are termed *pa~nca"ngika magga* (the five constituents of the Eightfold Path. (excerpts from Bodhipakkhiya Dipani by Ledi Sayadaw) >Just as trees grow in the soil, the six visuddhi beginning with citta visuddhi develop in the soil of siila-visuddhi. In particular, siila visuddhi does not mix with the five middle visuddhi beginning with citta visuddha, but supports them by securing antecedent purity. In the case of lokuttara-~naa.nadasana visuddhi, siila visuddhi operates in conjunction with it as three constituents of siilakkhandha-magga"nga. The reason is, the objects of attention of siila visuddhi are of a different order from those of the five middle visuddhi, while they are identical with those of the lokuttara visuddhi, thus operating together with it as sahajaata (co-existent). #114079 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:50 am Subject: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) philofillet I heard a reference to A Sujin saying this. Interesting, I guess the meaning is that altthough they fall away and are gone, we invest so much in the dream worlds they give arise to cuz of moha. Especially nama? At KK I was trying to remember where in the tipikita or in more modern commentary etc I read that it is especially rupa that is "bad" because of how treacherous this body is that we love and cling to so... Metta, Phil #114080 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 5:55 pm Subject: Re: notes from KK epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > -------- > <. . .> > > > KH: but in the meantime I can still understand the > present moment, can't I? > > > RE: What do you mean by "understand?" Do you mean understand the description of the way dhammas are said to work? Or do you mean actually understanding them in the moment by direct apprehension? I think you mean the former. > -------- > > KH: Definitely the former. The later is solely for the wise - "those with little dust in their eyes." My concern is that I think that so much focus on Right Concept, and so little consideration that what is actually seen might be kusala at certain moments, can lead to a conceptual block against living and experiencing the moment rather than constantly thinking about it. The philosophy that you and others have that is so totally focused on pariyatti only, with the idea that it is only by wise consideration that sati and panna arise, is very one-sided and ignores the developmental, practical, experiential aspects of the path, which Buddha clearly laid out as a seamless, integrated, all-points process. While wise consideration and theoretical understanding give an important framework, I don't share the faith that you have that this will lead by itself to direct experiencing. It does not accord to all the things that the Buddha recommended we pay attention to, that goes well beyond only focusing on Right Understanding. I think that is a mistaken imbalance. These ideas are *not* directly necessitated by "dhammas only" understanding; they are add-ons. The idea that Right Effort cannot be practiced but only arises as a kind of citta, that satipatthana is not a practice but also something that arises in a given moment based on consideration of Dhamma at some other time - these are all beliefs that do *not* come directly from the understanding of dhammas, but represent a very particular passive view of the world as a momentary experience within which we take no action and partake of no practices or efforts. That is not what the Buddha taught in my view, though Right Understanding has an important place amid the other elements of the path. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114081 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:05 pm Subject: Re: notes from KK epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E, Ken and all > > > > > > > I'll get around to it one day, but in the meantime I can still understand the present moment, can't I? > > > > What do you mean by "understand?" Do you mean understand the description of the way dhammas are said to work? Or do you mean actually understanding them in the moment by direct apprehension? I think you mean the former. > > > Ph: Very succinctly asked, Rob. > > And Jon, I will find it again, but I was listening to a very good talk where you, Nina, Sarah, Ivan and A.Sujin and others were talking about dosa, that if we think about dosa being conditioned, if there is thinking about such a characteristic of dosa, it is akusala. I will have to find that again, but I was confused, it sounded contrary to what is always said about intellectual understanding, we have to understand intellectually, and that means thinking about characteristics surely. I will have to track down the exact passage, after my shower. (Just back from a run during which I listened to that talk.) While you are talking about this, I would like to mention that I am also confused about the role of nimittas in this process. It seems that wise consideration of Dhamma is sometimes said to be the only mechanism for the arising of sati and panna, but then this idea that one can directly experience the nimitta and that even though it is a concept it has a special status that allows us to directly experience dhammas, even though they are no longer present. In other words, the conceptual image of the dhamma that is left over and that is able to be apprehended by our "slower processing" as worldlings is able to provide the real information about the nature and characteristics of dhammas "in absentia." That is fine, but how does that relate to pariyatti, and doesn't it confuse the issue? In one model there is pariyatti(accumulation) -----> arising of panna. In the other model there is pariyatti + nimitta[indirect but correct experiencing of dhammas) --------> eventual direct seeing with the arising of panna. I suppose the two can coexist, but the nimitta seems like a way out of the trap of delusion especially designed for those of us tired of waiting for direct seeing to arise several million lifetimes from now. Recently, several people have asked A. Sujin about the nature of the nimitta, but she always seems to reply that it's not important whether you are perceiving a nimitta or not, that what is important is that you are apprehending the nature of the dhamma correctly one way or the other. Which is great, but I would just like to know what is actually going on and how this kind of nimitta is part of the path - it being a concept and all. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #114082 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 6:08 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > I heard a reference to A Sujin saying this. Interesting, I guess the meaning is that altthough they fall away and are gone, we invest so much in the dream worlds they give arise to cuz of moha. > > Especially nama? At KK I was trying to remember where in the tipikita or in more modern commentary etc I read that it is especially rupa that is "bad" because of how treacherous this body is that we love and cling to so... I vote for namas, which actually produce proliferations and delusions. Without akusala namas, rupa would be no problem at all. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #114083 From: "philip" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:52 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) philofillet Hi Rob E and all > > I vote for namas, which actually produce proliferations and delusions. Without akusala namas, rupa would be no problem at all. But on the other hand, therw is potential for namas to develop in a way that can lead to liberation, whereas rupas understand nothing and can only betray us in the end, there is no rupa that does us any good in the end inless it is the object of understanding, the liberating nama... Metta, Phil #114084 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 4:33 am Subject: Re: notes from KK kenhowardau Hi Robert E, ------ <. . .> > RE: My concern is that I think that so much focus on Right Concept, and so little consideration that what is actually seen might be kusala at certain moments, can lead to a conceptual block against living and experiencing the moment rather than constantly thinking about it. ----- KH: I think by "living and experiencing the moment" you basically mean "doing something." In fact, living and experiencing are done by conditioned dhammas. There is no controller. There is no way of doing anything other than what has already been done by conditioned dhammas. ---------------------- > RE: The philosophy that you and others have that is so totally focused on pariyatti only, ---------------------- KH: But we don't *do* pariyatti. We just see it as being the first stage of right understanding. ----------------------------- > RE: with the idea that it is only by wise consideration that sati and panna arise, ----------------------------- KH: We aren't trying to make right understanding arise. We don't have a preference for anything. --------------------------------------- > RE: is very one-sided and ignores the developmental, practical, experiential aspects of the path, which Buddha clearly laid out as a seamless, integrated, all-points process. --------------------------------------- KH: The what? :-) ------------------- > RE: While wise consideration and theoretical understanding give an important framework, I don't share the faith that you have that this will lead by itself to direct experiencing. It does not accord to all the things that the Buddha recommended we pay attention to, that goes well beyond only focusing on Right Understanding. ------------------- KH: What should we pay attention to, if not the Dhamma? --------------------------- > RE: I think that is a mistaken imbalance. --------------------------- KH: If only you would see the world as the present moment, you would begin to see how "balance" can be something that takes place in a single moment. ---------------------------------- > RE: These ideas are *not* directly necessitated by "dhammas only" understanding; they are add-ons. The idea that Right Effort cannot be practiced but only arises as a kind of citta, that satipatthana is not a practice but also something that arises in a given moment based on consideration of Dhamma at some other time - these are all beliefs that do *not* come directly from the understanding of dhammas, but represent a very particular passive view of the world as a momentary experience within which we take no action and partake of no practices or efforts. That is not what the Buddha taught in my view, though Right Understanding has an important place amid the other elements of the path. ----------------------------------- KH: I know how you feel; for us on the no-control side it is equally as baffling. You ask why can't we see the Dhamma as a list of things to do, and we ask why can't you see the Dhamma as right understanding of the present reality. Ken H #114085 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 11:51 pm Subject: The Great Helper! bhikkhu5 Friends: Karunã: The Great Good Helper! Karunā is feeling the pain of other beings, either partially or completely; Possible translations: 1: Pity not from above: “I am better”, but as if in the other being’s shoes… 2: Compassion is OK, but that is difficult to reach up to for many beings… 3: Fellow feeling, sympathy, empathy, understanding are all OK, but somewhat missing these essential points: A: It is an inability to see and accept other being’s suffering and distress! B: It is a deep desire to make others feel free, glad, happy and peaceful! C: It is extended to and pervaded over many beings simultaneously… The proximate cause of Karunā = pity is noticing other being’s helplessness. The immediate effect of Karunā = pity is evaporation of all evil cruelty! <....> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #114086 From: "maitreyi" Date: Thu Mar 17, 2011 1:16 pm Subject: Online Buddhist LIbrary maitreyi144 Dear Dharma Friends, I came across an extensive buddhist library. Please explore the site and you will find quite a few good books on ABhidhrama as well. Here is the link - it's russian site but one can easily follow the ENglish part for accesing the books. http://lirs.ru/lib/ Many Regards, - Maitreyi #114087 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:40 am Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob E and all > > > > I vote for namas, which actually produce proliferations and delusions. Without akusala namas, rupa would be no problem at all. > > But on the other hand, therw is potential for namas to develop in a way that can lead to liberation, whereas rupas understand nothing and can only betray us in the end, there is no rupa that does us any good in the end inless it is the object of understanding, the liberating nama... I guess I'm saying that rupas are neutral. They are magnets for attachment, but only for akusala namas. The clinging, like the liberation, is always in the nama, not the rupa. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = #114088 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 5:49 am Subject: Re: notes from KK epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E, > > ------ > <. . .> > > RE: My concern is that I think that so much focus on Right Concept, and so little consideration that what is actually seen might be kusala at certain moments, can lead to a conceptual block against living and experiencing the moment rather than constantly thinking about it. > ----- > > KH: I think by "living and experiencing the moment" you basically mean "doing something." No, it's not what I mean and that is a straw man argument to keep from considering what I am saying, so you can hang onto your position without consideration of an alternative. I am saying that the right understanding one should have should be one of being open, or available to living dhammas if and when they arise, and not being so committed to the idea of lifetimes of pariyatti that there is no availability or attention to what is being experienced now. It's not doing anything; it's understanding that realities now are what is actual, including what is being experienced now in pariyatti. I think it is very easy to get lost in concept and attached to concept and think you are having right understanding. K. Sujin has said things like this many times, reported here, but you don't like it if I say it. Ha ha. > In fact, living and experiencing are done by conditioned dhammas. There is no controller. There is no way of doing anything other than what has already been done by conditioned dhammas. Nobody said otherwise. You are very defensive about hearing anything that is outside your concept, even your own philosophy about experiencing dhammas now. You ought to relax and listen to what is being said. > ---------------------- > > RE: The philosophy that you and others have that is so totally focused on pariyatti only, > ---------------------- > > KH: But we don't *do* pariyatti. We just see it as being the first stage of right understanding. I'm suggesting that you see something else as well, not *do* anything. Stop putting words in my mouth and try reading. I haven't said anything about doing anything, only you have. I've been talking about understanding the entire time. > ----------------------------- > > RE: with the idea that it is only by wise consideration that sati and panna arise, > ----------------------------- > > KH: We aren't trying to make right understanding arise. We don't have a preference for anything. You can still consider what I said; otherwise you are exercising your preference for something else that you think is better. That is self-view. > --------------------------------------- > > RE: is very one-sided and ignores the developmental, practical, experiential aspects of the path, which Buddha clearly laid out as a seamless, integrated, all-points process. > --------------------------------------- > > KH: The what? :-) Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort and all the specific things he said to engage with in all these areas and others. > ------------------- > > RE: While wise consideration and theoretical understanding give an important framework, I don't share the faith that you have that this will lead by itself to direct experiencing. It does not accord to all the things that the Buddha recommended we pay attention to, that goes well beyond only focusing on Right Understanding. > ------------------- > > KH: What should we pay attention to, if not the Dhamma? What is arising in the moment - dhammas. > --------------------------- > > RE: I think that is a mistaken imbalance. > --------------------------- > > KH: If only you would see the world as the present moment, you would begin to see how "balance" can be something that takes place in a single moment. You would rather see the world *as* the present moment [philosophy,] then see the world *in* the present moment [actual Abhidhamma/Buddhism as it is taught.] You are walking backwards. > ---------------------------------- > > RE: These ideas are *not* directly necessitated by "dhammas only" understanding; they are add-ons. The idea that Right Effort cannot be practiced but only arises as a kind of citta, that satipatthana is not a practice but also something that arises in a given moment based on consideration of Dhamma at some other time - these are all beliefs that do *not* come directly from the understanding of dhammas, but represent a very particular passive view of the world as a momentary experience within which we take no action and partake of no practices or efforts. That is not what the Buddha taught in my view, though > Right Understanding has an important place amid the other elements of the path. > ----------------------------------- > > KH: I know how you feel; for us on the no-control side it is equally as baffling. You ask why can't we see the Dhamma as a list of things to do, and we ask why can't you see the Dhamma as right understanding of the present reality. Right understanding has to be correct. It can't just be a version of Right understanding that looks good to you on paper. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #114089 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 6:40 am Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah, Thank you very much for your kind feed-back on 8 fold and 5 fold paths. [Sarah]: I don't have a single text with me in Hong Kong and you now have a copy of the Dispeller. Perhaps you may like to check and share what you find on this. I also recall reading more detail in the Atthasalini and the commentary to the Abhidhammattha Sangaha which I know Ledi Sayadaw objected to in part. All very controversial, I know and no need to "debate" or reply, my Good Friend:-)) -------------------- [Han]: I have checked with all the books. It is very confusing. Vibha"nga Pali (The Book of Analysis), for which the Commentary Sammohavinodanii (The Dispeller of Delusion) was written, is even more confusing. There is no distinction between para 491. a.t.tha"ngiko maggo (the Eight-fold Path) and para 494. pa~nca"ngiko maggo (the Five-fold Path) except in the enumeration of the 8 and 5 paths. Similarly, there is no distinction between para 499 and para 501 except in the enumeration of the 8 and 5 paths. In the Burmese translation it is a little bit better. The words [kusala citta] and [vipaaka citta] are inserted in the questions, to differetiate the two pairs. --------------------- Excerpts from Vibha"nga Pali, 11. Magga"ngavibha"ngo 491. Tattha katamo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo? Idha bhikkhu yasmi.m samaye lokuttara.m jhaana.m bhaaveti niyyaanika.m apacayagaami.m di.t.thigataana.m pahaanaaya pa.thamaaya bhuumiyaa pattiyaa vivicceva kaamehi [pe] pa.thama.m jhaana.m upasampajja viharati dukkhapa.tipada.m dandhaabhi~n~na.m, tasmi.m samaye a.t.tha"ngiko maggo hoti sammaadi.t.thi [pe] sammaasamaadhi. English Translation: 491. Therein what is the Eight Constituent Path? [And so on.] Burmese Translation: 491. Therein what is the Eight [kusala citta] Constituent Path? [And so on.] ---------- 494. Tattha katamo pa~nca"ngiko maggo? Idha bhikkhu yasmi.m samaye lokuttara.m jhaana.m bhaaveti niyyaanika.m apacayagaami.m di.t.thigataana.m pahaanaaya pa.thamaaya bhuumiyaa pattiyaa vivicceva kaamehi [pe] pa.thama.m jhaana.m upasampajja viharati dukkhapa.tipada.m dandhaabhi~n~na.m, tasmi.m samaye pa~nca"ngiko maggo hoti sammaadi.t.thi, sammaasa"nkappo, sammaavaayaamo, sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi. English translation: 494. Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? [And so on.] Burmese Translation: 494. Therein what is the Five [kusala citta] Constituent Path? [And so on.] ---------- 499. Tattha katamo a.t.tha"ngiko maggo? Idha bhikkhu yasmi.m samaye lokuttara.m jhaana.m bhaaveti niyyaanika.m apacayagaami.m di.t.thigataana.m pahaanaaya pa.thamaaya bhuumiyaa pattiyaa vivicceva kaamehi [pe] pa.thama.m jhaana.m upasampajja viharati dukkhapa.tipada.m dandhaabhi~n~na.m, tasmi.m samaye phasso hoti [pe] avikkhepo hoti. Ime dhammaa kusalaa. Tasseva lokuttarassa kusalassa jhaanassa katattaa bhaavitattaa vipaaka.m vivicceva kaamehi [pe] pa.thama.m jhaana.m upasampajja viharati dukkhapa.tipada.m dandhaabhi~n~na.m su~n~nata.m, tasmi.m samaye a.t.tha"ngiko maggo hoti sammaadi.t.thi [pe] sammaasamaadhi. Aya.m vuccati "a.t.tha"ngiko maggo". Avasesaa dhammaa a.t.tha"ngikena maggena sampayuttaa. English translation: 499. Therein what is the Eight Constituent Path? [And so on.] Burmese translation: 499. Therein what is the Eight [vipaaka citta] Constituent Path? [And so on.] ---------- 501. Tattha katamo pa~nca"ngiko maggo? Idha bhikkhu yasmi.m samaye lokuttara.m jhaana.m bhaaveti niyyaanika.m apacayagaami.m di.t.thigataana.m pahaanaaya pa.thamaaya bhuumiyaa pattiyaa vivicceva kaamehi [pe] pa.thama.m jhaana.m upasampajja viharati dukkhapa.tipada.m dandhaabhi~n~na.m, tasmi.m samaye phasso hoti [pe] avikkhepo hoti. Ime dhammaa kusalaa. Tasseva lokuttarassa kusalassa jhaanassa katattaa bhaavitattaa vipaaka.m vivicceva kaamehi [pe] pa.thama.m jhaana.m upasampajja viharati dukkhapa.tipada.m dandhaabhi~n~na.m su~n~nata.m, tasmi.m samaye pa~nca"ngiko maggo hoti sammaadi.t.thi, sammaasa"nkappo, sammaavaayaamo, sammaasati, sammaasamaadhi. Aya.m vuccati "pa~nca"ngiko maggo". Avasesaa dhammaa pa~nca"ngikena maggena sampayuttaa. English translation: 501. Therein what is the Five Constituent Path? [And so on.] Burmese translation: 501. Therein what is the Five [vipaaka citta] Constituent Path? [And so on.] -------------------- Han: There is no contradiction between The Dispeller of Delusion and Ledi Sayadaw's book, in terms of 8 paths and 5 paths. The 6 paths that I had mentioned was not taken from the books but from a tape by a Burmese Sayadaw. Anyway, I personally will not be able to verify these by practice, as my meditation is falling back almost to square one. So it will not really matter which one I believe in. They will just be the book knowledge and an intellectual treat for me. So I welcome your [All very controversial, I know and no need to "debate" or reply, my Good Friend:-))] and I will not go into any debate. Thank you very much. Respectfully, Han #114090 From: "philip" Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 7:25 am Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) philofillet Hi Rob E Sure, I see your point. The first noble truth is defined ultimately as the khandas of clinging, so the rupa aggregate is only(mainly?) dukkha in terms of the clinging involved, eh? Metta, Phil p.s thanks in passing all for the presence of this group, it's helped me to keep my mind on the Dhamma during these stressful days. There's a feeling of life getting back to normal in Tokyo, by the way. #114091 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, Again, thank you for your detailed and thorough explanation of the topic we briefly discussed. --- On Sat, 12/3/11, han tun wrote: >On page 296 of the CMA, Step (2): Dependent on kammic formations arises consciousness: That is, the kammic formations (the 29 wholesome and unwholesome volitions) condition the arising of the 32 kinds of resultant consciousness. At the moment of conception one especially potent kammic formation accumulated in the mental continuum of the deceased being generates one of the 19 types of rebirth consciousness in the realm appropriate for that kamma to mature. Thereafter, during the course of existence, other accumulated kammas generate other resultant types of consciousness according to circumstances. >Step (3): Dependent on consciousness arises mind-and-matter: Whereas in step (2) vi~n~naa.na refers exclusively to resultant consciousness, here it signifies both resultant consciousness and kammic consciousness of previous lives. The term "mind" (naama) denotes the cetasikas associated with resultant consciousness, the term "matter" (ruupa) denotes material phenomena produced by kamma. ..... S: I hadn't heard/read that vi~n~naa.na in "step (3)" has a broader meaning than vi~n~naa.na in "step (2)". I understood it was sankhaara that referred to "kammic consciousness of previous lives" and that in both instances, vi~n~naa.na referred only to patisandhi and subsequent vipaka cittas. Hence, apart from at the moment of birth, subsequent kammaja rupas (as well as vipaka cittas) are conditioned by past kamma (sankhaara in this context) and not by a vipaka citta arising at the same instant as at birth. Not having CMA to hand, I'm wondering if this is in the text or is just in BB's Guide note? It's interesting. .... >Han: We now see the two different roles played by vi~n~naa.na in step (2) and step (3). In step (2) vi~n~naa.na is a paccayuppanna or a conditioned dhamma with the emphasis on pa.tisandhi citta, the very beginning of the present life in Dependent Origination. Whereas in step (3), vi~n~naa.na is a paccaya or a conditioning dhamma, and as Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi put it, signifies both resultant consciousness and kammic consciousness of previous lives. For these reasons, vi~n~naa.na is considered as a separate factor in the D.O. ... S: Again, I'm curious about the point 3). Metta Sarah ===== #114092 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Great to read all your inspiring reports w/ your humourous touches:) --- On Sat, 12/3/11, philofillet wrote: >Ph: The hardest part for me was when we were driving back to Bangkok and I really felt miserably ill and tired for a while compounded by dosa about giving my illness to you or Ivan (who started sneezing at one point) or others. It's hard to understand that worrying about giving your illness to someone is akusala, technically speaking, but it is. Perhaps there can be moments of kusala concern mixed in there. .... S: Yes, different moments. When we appreciate that painful bodily feeling is really a result of past kamma, then it can condition more equanimity and less dosa. In any case, I appreciate your concern and am glad to report that this time round there was some past kusala kamma which prevented me from catching the cold:-) .... >I got some sleepiness inducing drugs at Silom and more at the airport, and it was let's-get-stoned-nothing-about-cold-medicine-in-the -precepts time. And it was a pleasant trip home. A particularly nice moment when I was sitting at a Starbucks in the airport way down at the end of all the shops and the drugs started setting in and I read through SPD and really kind of had nice sleepy understanding of what was going on through the sense doors at the time. I do enjoy drugs. .... S: There you were with your happy, sleepy, drug-filled understanding, whilst it was my turn to be concerned about you sick at the airport.... we hear a lot about conditioned dhammas and yet, such strong tendencies for thinking about various stories, worrying and as you say, usually taking the akusala for kusala! Different cittas - all anatta. "What about visible object now?", as KS would say. ... >Ph: Yes, I sense I did quite well. Of course lobha and mana wanted to overcome past bad behaviour on the list and be liked by the-friends-I-formerly-called-"Sujinists" and Project Success Confirmed I think. You probably didn't realize I was trying to be likable, did you? ... S: Well, it didn't and doesn't matter - just more conditioned dhammas, not belonging to Phil, Sarah or anyone else. Kusala, akusala, vipaka, kiriya cittas all day. Talking of stories, are you still having after-shocks? Any problems where you are in getting supplies? We're having some interrupted internet connections here because of damaged lines to N.America across the Pacific. Metta Sarah ====== #114093 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Problems again sarahprocter... Hi Lukas, Always glad to see you posting! --- On Sun, 13/3/11, Lukas wrote: > I am trying to get back to Dhamma. It's hard to me to start read. Recently I had this 'falling in love' issues. I cant get over that. This can pain a lot. How to deal with painful mental feeling? >I am getting back to Dhamma only when I feel bad, I dint do so when I feel well. ... S: My sympathies. As Howard said (in effect), dhamma is everywhere. These are all just dhammas. The dosa and domanassa arise because of the importance we attach to "me, me, me" and all we hold dear. Whilst we look at the Dhamma as a tonic to feel less bad, rather than to understand conditioned dhammas as anatta, the tonic will not really help at all, because there is no detachment from the idea of self. As K.Sujin commented in Kaeng Krajan: People are different. Some people, when they hear about the Teachings, after that think suddenly about themselves - "I, I, I, previously, today...". Instead of leading to more detachment and understanding, (it leads to) more clinging to themselves. But people who just read with understanding and don't mind at all (what arises) - (they understand)they are all elements, the way elements keep going by conditions. So, Lukas, when we hear the Teachings, is it leading to more attachment or to more detachment? Metta Sarah ===== #114094 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han (& Phil), --- On Sat, 12/3/11, han tun wrote: >>[Phil]: May I ask a question, Han. I asked A. Sujin about it during the discussion but I can't remember the answer now. Are the anusayas only abandoned at enlightenment? I guess the sotapanna has abandoned killing completely, for example. Does the complete removal of the anusayas equal enlightenment? >[Han]: At the moment of arising of magga ~naa.na anusaya kilesas are abandoned according to the level of magga ~naa.na. Sotaapatti magga ~naa.na eradicates di.t.thaanusaya and vicikicchaanusaya. Anaagaami magga ~naa.na eradicates kaamaraagaanusaya and pa.tighaanusaya. Arahatta magga ~naa.na eradicates maanaanusaya, bhavaraagaanusaya, and avijjaanusaya. The complete removal of all anusayas equal enlightenment. Sotaapanna never breaks the five precepts, and thus abandons killing completely. Sarah will correct me if I am wrong. .... S: Nicely summarised and explained! Metta Sarah ===== #114095 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? sarahprocter... Hi Alex & all, --- On Sun, 13/3/11, truth_aerator wrote: >I agree that there is no freedom of will, and everything is anatta. >I also agree that one can't force any results whether on meditation cushion or in daily life. But does this mean that conventional actions do not occur? Even though the mind is fully conditioned, it still thinks. The body still does its things even though it has no control, and no self. ... S: What we refer to as "conventional actions" such as "sitting on the meditation cushion" are in actuality, just namas and rupas. So, namas and rupas arise and fall away. Some namas are "results", some are "causes". Rupas are conditioned by kamma, temperature, citta or nutriment. That's all! Yes, cittas think by conditions. Rupas conditioned by cittas arise and fall away in various groups. We think that we make a decision to stretch out our hand or take a walk, but actually, there are just various conditioned cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising, performing their functions and falling away. The purpose of the Teachings is just to understand dhammas appearing now as they are - inherently impermanent, dukkha and anatta. That's all! Metta Sarah ====== #114096 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han, Phil & all, --- On Sun, 13/3/11, han tun wrote: >11. Death and chanting, sila again at such times. --------------- >Han: We talked about dhamma chanting and reminding the dying man of his past kusala activities so that he may have a better aasanna kamma (death proximate kamma), and a fortunate rebirth. It is largely practiced in Burma. But one cannot be sure. In mara.naasanna viithi, the last mental process of a dying man, in accordance with the kamma that is going to produce next rebirth, an akusala or kusala citta normally functions 5 times as mara.naasanna javanas. This viithi is very rapid and it is beyond control of anybody. So all the chanting and reminding may not produce the desired results. .... S: Very true. It all depends on past kamma and the last javanas and cuti citta may arise anytime - completely beyond control. ... >Besides, when a person is in great pain before dying (like the sort of pain that I had when I recovered from anesthesia after gall bladder surgery) one may not be able to think anything else besides the intense pain. So, a more reliable (hopefully!) approach is to develop a good aacinna kamma (habitual kamma) while a person has the opportunity to do so, that is, while he is still healthy, and not at the last moment of death. And for me, I consider that the observance of siila is the most important activity to develop a good habitual kamma. .... S: I like the emphasis on the present moment. Instead of thinking/worrying about what hasn't come yet, there can be a greater appreciation of all kinds of kusala at this moment, especially (I'd say), a growth of understanding and detachment from the idea of atta, even now as we speak. .... >Furthermore, in Vism I, 23. among the benefits of Virtue, I have noted the following. Again, one who is virtuous, possessed of virtue, on the breakup of the body, after death, reappears in a happy destiny, in the heavenly world; this is the fifth benefit for the virtuous in the perfecting of virtue' (D.ii,86).> >Thus, I will stick to my observance of siila, although it may not be an adhi-siila. .... S: Without an understanding of the importance and value of siila, it couldn't be developed or "stuck to":-) And by conditions, I know you have a greater and greater appreciation of adhi-siila and the understanding of dhammas as anatta. Not by "choice", but by conditions......:-) Thank you again for your wonderful elaborations. Jon and I are also very fortunate to have such helpful "partners in dhamma" as you, Phil and everyone else here. Metta Sarah ===== #114097 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:09 am Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah, On page 296 of the CMA, Step (2): Dependent on kammic formations arises consciousness: That is, the kammic formations (the 29 wholesome and unwholesome volitions) condition the arising of the 32 kinds of resultant consciousness. At the moment of conception one especially potent kammic formation accumulated in the mental continuum of the deceased being generates one of the 19 types of rebirth consciousness in the realm appropriate for that kamma to mature. Thereafter, during the course of existence, other accumulated kammas generate other resultant types of consciousness according to circumstances. Step (3): Dependent on consciousness arises mind-and-matter: Whereas in step (2) vi~n~naa.na refers exclusively to resultant consciousness, here it signifies both resultant consciousness and kammic consciousness of previous lives. The term "mind" (naama) denotes the cetasikas associated with resultant consciousness, the term "matter" (ruupa) denotes material phenomena produced by kamma. ---------- > [Sarah]: I hadn't heard/read that vi~n~naa.na in "step (3)" has a broader meaning than vi~n~naa.na in "step (2)". I understood it was sankhaara that referred to "kammic consciousness of previous lives" and that in both instances, vi~n~naa.na referred only to patisandhi and subsequent vipaka cittas. Hence, apart from at the moment of birth, subsequent kammaja rupas (as well as vipaka cittas) are conditioned by past kamma (sankhaara in this context) and not by a vipaka citta arising at the same instant as at birth. Not having CMA to hand, I'm wondering if this is in the text or is just in BB's Guide note? It's interesting. [Han]: It is in BB's Guide note. But the fact is that vi~n~naa.na in step (2) and step (3) are indeed different. As a second opinion, I will produce the excerpts from Dr Mehm Tin Mon's The Essence of Buddha Abhidhamma. --------------- [Step 2. Sa"nkhaara-paccayaa Vi~n~naa.na.m.] Here, sa"nkhaara means the 29 wholesome and unwholesome cetanaas (kammas) mentioned above. Vi~n~naa.na means rebirth-consciousness which is the initial resultant of kamma-formations. But sa"nkhaara goes on producing vipaaka-cittas throughout the whole new life. So all the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas are taken to represent vi~n~naa.na as the direct effect of sa"nkhaara. Thus the second causal relation should be interpreted as follows. At pa.tisandhi-kaala, 11 akusala cetanaas (excluding uddhacca cetanaa) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanaas (excluding the 2 abhi~n~naa cetanaas) condition the arising of the *19 rebirth consciousness*. At pavatti-kaala all the 12 akusala cetanaas and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanaas (excluding the 2 abhi~n~naa cetanaas) continue to condition the arising of the *32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas*. These can be split up as follows. (i). Apu~n~naabhisa"nkhaara (12 akusala cetanaas) conditions the arising of 7 akusala-vipaaka cittas. (ii). Pu~n~naabhisa"nkhaara (8 mahaa-kusala cetanaas and 5 ruupaavacara kusala cetanaas) conditions the arising of 8 kusala-ahetukavipaaka cittas, 8 mahaa-vipaaka cittas and 5 ruupaavacara-vipaaka cittas. (iii). Anenjaabhisa"nkhaara (4 aruupaavacara cetanaas) conditions the arising of 4 aruupaavacara-vipaaka cittas. So it should be understood that from the very first moment of conception in the mother's womb the kamma-resultant consciousness of the embryonic being is functioning, and it goes on functioning as life-continuum and seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, etc., throughout the whole new life. Of course, it terminates as death-consciousness finally. --------------- [Step 3. Vi~n~naa.na-paccayaa Naama-ruupa.m.] Here, Vi~n~naa.na represents *two entities*: *vipaaka-vi~n~naa.na* and *kamma-vi~n~naa.na*. (i). *Vipaaka-vi~n~naa.na* means the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas mentioned in the second causal relation. (ii). *Kamma-vi~n~naa.na* means cittas associated with cetanaa-kamma, and *it refers back* to the 29 wholesome and unwholesome kammas we have described as sa"nkhaara. *This back-reference* is required because only kusala and akusala kammas, and not the vipaaka cittas, can produce 18 types of kammaja-ruupa. In naama-ruupa.m, naama indicates the 35 cetasikas which associate with the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas. In terms of groups of existence, the 35 cetasikas represent three mental groups, viz., vedanakkhandhaa, sa~n~nakkhandhaa and sa"nkhaarakkhandhaa. The second part, ruupa.m, means the 18 kammaja ruupas. To summarise, 32 lokiya *vipaaka-vi~n~naa.nas* condition the arising of 35 cetasikas or three naamakkhandhaas, whereas 29 *kamma-vi~n~naa.nas* condition the arising of 18 kammaja-ruupas. These phenomena constitute the third causal relation. ==================== > > [Han]: We now see the two different roles played by vi~n~naa.na in step (2) and step (3). In step (2) vi~n~naa.na is a paccayuppanna or a conditioned dhamma with the emphasis on pa.tisandhi citta, the very beginning of the present life in Dependent Origination. Whereas in step (3), vi~n~naa.na is a paccaya or a conditioning dhamma, and as Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi put it, signifies both resultant consciousness and kammic consciousness of previous lives. For these reasons, vi~n~naa.na is considered as a separate factor in the D.O. > [Sarah]: Again, I'm curious about the point 3). [Han]: It was *my own* conclusion based on the above excerpts. You may disregard my conclusion if you do not agree. Respectfully, Han #114098 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:08 pm Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah again, > [Sarah]: I hadn't heard/read that vi~n~naa.na in "step (3)" has a broader meaning than vi~n~naa.na in "step (2)". I understood it was sankhaara that referred to "kammic consciousness of previous lives" and that in both instances, vi~n~naa.na referred only to patisandhi and subsequent vipaka cittas. Hence, apart from at the moment of birth, subsequent kammaja rupas (as well as vipaka cittas) are conditioned by past kamma (sankhaara in this context) and not by a vipaka citta arising at the same instant as at birth. Not having CMA to hand, I'm wondering if this is in the text or is just in BB's Guide note? It's interesting. --------------- [Han]: If you insist that "vi~n~naa.na" represents only 19 rebirth-consciousness at pa.tisandhi-kaala, and 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas at pavatti-kaala, how will you write the third step? It will be "vi~n~naa.na paccayaa naama" and not "vi~n~naa.na paccayaa naama-ruupa" because vipaaka cittas cannot produce 18 kammaja-ruupas. (Or) If you say that, apart from at the moment of birth, it is sa"nkhaara (or kamma-vi~n~naa.na, as it is called by BB and Dr Mehm Tin Mon) that conditions vipaaka cittas as well as kammaja ruupas, the second step will not be necessary. It can then be written as: Step (1) "Avijjaa paccayaa sa"nkhaara," Steps (2) (3). "Sa"nkhaara paccayaa naama-ruupa." and give the definition of "naama" to include pa.tisanbdhi cittas, vipaaka cittas and cetasikas, and "ruupa" as 18 kammaj-ruupas. Respectfully, Han #114099 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Keang Krachan, no 1. nilovg Dear Philip, Han and friends, Again trouble with internet, but it seems to be corrected now. But not quite sure. It may go wrong again. Forgive my slowness in answering mails, I am behind. Op 17-mrt-2011, om 2:45 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > When you have an opportunity, could you print out the question that > followed a bit later on anusayas? I found A. Sujin's answer > particularly clear on that. One thing I remember is Lodewijk asked > "can we eradicate the anusayas" and A.Sujin said of course, if it > was not possible there would be no Buddha, or something like that. ------- N: I may have to look at another part, not sure where to find it. But more is to follow. But exactly, that is what happens at the moment of enlightenment: anusayas are eradicated by the path-consciousness, stage by stage. These lie dormant in each citta and condition the arising of akusala citta when the conditions are right. ------- Nina. #114100 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:33 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 2. nilovg Dear Philip and friends, K.K. no 2. Kh S: Sati can arise any time when there are the right conditions for it. It can arise after the experience of any object through any doorway. Body-consciousness arises and falls away as usual, but sati can follow and experience the object that is experienced by body- consciousness very naturally. Understanding can know that that is sati. One can learn the difference between the moment with sati and the moments without sati. Doubt about sati will arise time and again after the experience of objects through each doorway. --------- N: addition: we can know the difference between such moments if we do not have an idea of self (surreptiously) who wants to make sati arise. We first have to clearly understand that we cannot create sati. It arises unexpectedly. -------- Lodewijk: We also have to develop the perfections. ------- Kh S: The perfections develop now. While we are listening to the dhamma there are patience, energy, pa~n~naa, siila. ------- N: We cannot make the perfections arise. That is why Kh Sujin said before that there should not be an idea that I have to develop the perfections. She leads us to the present moment so that we have more understanding. At this moment the perfections can develop and they develop together. -------- Kh S: Develop understanding, then there is sati already. We are used to studying by words, but not to studying the characteristic which appears. We know in theory about nama and rupa, but that is not awareness of them. When awareness arises it is the moment of real study. We talk about seeing, but there is seeing at this moment. It is different from visible object. It sees, it is conditioned. Can we be seeing at will? As soon as it sees it falls away and then there are moments of thinking. --------- N: Again, she leads us to the present moment, to seeing now. There is seeing all the time, but we are forgetful of what is right at hand. ---------- L: What is sati? There is no answer to it, it has to develop. ------ Kh S: It has to develop with understanding. -------- Kh S: Begin with understanding realities.... If there is the intention to be aware it is not satipatthana. But when sati arises it is because of the proper conditions. If there is not enough understanding there is the intention to be aware. ------- N: Kh Sujin wants to help people so that they do not cling to an idea of intending to be aware, that does not lead anywhere. If there is not enough understanding of sati as a conditioned dhamma, not self, one tries to have it and that is wrong. -------- L: : It can be developed in daily life. And then one can understand what sati is? That is the answer. When do I know the difference between nama and rupa and how do I know? ------- Kh S: When there is the idea of self, trying so hard it is very uneasy. It is not natural. One is encaged in the cage of lobha. Only pa~n~naa can see this. There can be pa~n`naa right now, be contented with what is understood already. Knowing that one has not much understanding conditions more listening, studying. When there is more understanding of seeing and visible object there can be awareness that is very natural. Visible object, sound, all realities appear in our life without understanding. And now we are talking about realities in order to have less clinging to the idea of self. Intention to be aware is motivated by the idea of self. Pa~n~naa will see that this is not the right Path. Do not think of experiencing realities directly, that is a hindrance. Whatever arises has conditions, nobody can do anything. There is no need to look for anything else. ------ N: We may be thinking of stages of insight with expectation to experience realities directly, but this clinging to insight. It is counteractive. ***** Nina. #114101 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:35 pm Subject: An encouragement. attention Lukas. nilovg Dear Lukas and friends, Lukas, I know you like an encouragement and reminder now and then and I thought of you. I read to Lodewijk the following from my Vipassanaa letter 4: Khun Sujin writes in her book "A Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" (Citta, Ch 16) about this passage in the commentary: "... Someone may be unhappy and he may worry about it that he is growing older and that sati arises very seldom. When one worries the citta is akusala. We should not because of the Dhamma have akusala cittas, we should not be worried. The Buddha taught the Dhamma in order that people would be encouraged to apply it, develop it with perseverance and be inspired by it. Akusala arises when there are conditions , there is no self who can prevent its arising. When akusala citta has already arisen, we should not be downhearted, but we can take courage if there can be awareness of the characteristic of akusala which appears. We should not waste any opportunity to be aware. Then we shall know that also akusala dhamma which appears at such a moment is not a being, not a person or self. It can be clearly seen that at the moment of awareness there is no akusala, no downheartedness. One will not be troubled about akusala if one does not take it for self..." The monks were inspired and gladdened because of the benefit they acquired from the teachings. The Commentary adds: "We all can attain this benefit." We can really benefit from the teachings when satipatthna is developed. The development of satipatthna should not make us discouraged. The realities which appear can be penetrated and realized as they are. They arise and fall away, they are not self, not a being or person. When we consider the great value of the truth and know that we can realize it one day, although not today, we shall not be disheartened. One should not worry about it that one cannot know realities as they are today. Sati can arise and begin to be aware today, and then the characteristics of realities will surely one day be wholly penetrated and clearly known as they are. When we see that the truth of Dhamma is for our benefit and that it can be attained, we shall not become discouraged. We shall continue to listen and to study the realities the Buddha taught in detail, and then we shall not be forgetful of realities, there will be conditions for the arising of sati. -------- Nina. #114102 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 1:35 pm Subject: Dhamma in Nalanda. no 1. nilovg Dear friends, Recorded in India, Nalanda. 1. It takes time to understand realities appearing right now, and this is not merely thinking. No matter how much one thinks of the characteristic of seeing, so long as seeing right now is not understood as a mental reality, it is impossible to really understand the arising and falling away of seeing. We cannot know what will be the next moment, be it thinking, seeing or hearing; this cannot be predicted. Who conditions sound or hearing, hardness or the experience of hardness? Each moment is conditioned. If one realizes this understanding can be developed of one characteristic at a time; understanding is not developed by a self, but it develops because of conditions. No one can tell at which moment there will be awareness. There should be understanding of a moment of awareness as different from a moment without awareness. This is the beginning of the development of awareness. Otherwise we keep on talking about awareness without there being understanding of the characteristic of awareness. Awareness is very natural, there is no self who is aware. There may be intention with an idea of self to be aware. One may try very hard to cause its arising but that is not the way; it is motivated by attachment, unknowingly. Whenever awareness arises, it does so before there is thinking about it. It is like hearing which arises before there is thinking about it. Hearing-consciousness can arise after seeing-consciousness very naturally, just like now. Evenso awareness can arise very naturally. --------- Nina. #114103 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:05 pm Subject: Fwd: earthquake. nilovg Begin doorgestuurd bericht: > Van: Nina van Gorkom > Datum: 18 maart 2011 15:05:14 GMT+01:00 > Aan: Miyamoto Tadao > Onderwerp: Antw.: earthquake. > > Dear Tadao, > Op 17-mrt-2011, om 7:17 heeft Miyamoto Tadao het volgende geschreven: > >> Hi Khun Nina: >> >> I have a question. What kind of mental states should I develop, >> concerning those >> perished with the Tsunami. If it is Karuna, how can I develop it >> without contaminating it with any akusala, such as sorrow? > ---------- > N: It is natural that moments of true compassion are interspersed > with moments of dosa-muulacitta, with sorrow. We can learn to > distinguish between such moments. But in this case, where we see > that people are beyond help we need a lot of equanimity, > tatramajjhattataa. Remembering that kamma conditions vipaaka, that > we are 'heirs' to past deeds. > I quote from Acharn Sujin's book on the Perfections: > < We read about equanimity: > > Equanimity has the characteristic of evolving the mode of > neutrality as regards beings; its function is seeing equality in > beings; its manifestation is quieting both aversion and attachment; > its proximate cause is seeing the heritage of the occurring kamma > as beings are the property of their kamma. By its influence they > will attain to pleasure, or be free from pain, or not fall from the > prosperity already acquired. Its consummation is the quieting of > aversion and of attachment; its failure is the production of an > unintelligent indifference which is based on the home life. > > Unintelligent indifference means indifference based on ignorance, > moha. When we have ignorance, we do not know realities as they are, > and then we shall not understand kamma, which produces its > appropriate result. > With regard to the expression about equanimity based on the home > life, this means, based on visible object, sound, odour, flavour > and tangible object, thus, the sense objects. When we see what > appears through the eyes and we are indifferent, we do not seem to > have attachment or aversion, but we should not believe that that is > necessarily kusala. It is indifference based on the home life > because at such moments we do not know the truth. We shall not > abandon defilements if we do not listen to the Dhamma and if we do > not understand it; if there is no pa which knows the > characteristics of realities as they really are. There is > indifference which is the near enemy of the brahmavihra of > equanimity when we do not consider what is right and what is wrong, > and we do not investigate the true nature of the realities that are > appearing. > Our thinking of other people and their actions can be motivated by > the four brahmvihras of loving-kindness, compassion, sympathetic > joy and equanimity. > > And further on I read: > < The Commentary to the Basket of Conduct defines the perfection > of equanimity, upekkh, as follows: > > Equanimity has the characteristic of promoting the aspect of > neutrality; its function is to see things impartially; its > manifestation is the subsiding of attraction and repulsion; > reflection upon the fact that all beings inherit the results of > their own kamma is its proximate cause. > > 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.thna, 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. People who are free > from sorrow are unaffected by attachment and aversion with regard > to people and events, and this means that they have developed the > perfection of equanimity. > > < The perfection of equanimity is evenmindedness, it is non- > disturbance by controversial conduct of people, by trying events or > by the vicissitudes of life, no matter whether they are desirable > or undesirable, such as gain and loss, praise and blame. At present > we suffer because of being easily disturbed and unstable, but > someone who has firm understanding of kamma can become unaffected > by the vicissitudes of life.> > ----------- > I think that awareness and understanding of whatever naama or ruupa > appears now helps most of all to understand that whatever happens > in life is conditioned, that it is beyond our control. Seeing now > is there already, it is conditioned by past kamma. How could we > change it? We cannot cause the arising of seeing, hearing, > touching. And even when we see and hear what is distressing, how > could we change it? It is conditioned whether pleasant or > unpleasant objects are seen, heard or experienced through the other > senses. Instead of having sadness, we can only help people with non- > aversion and kindness. But when sadness arises it can also be seen > as a conditioned dhamma. We cannot force ourselves not to have > sadness. > > With best wishes, > Nina. > > > > > #114104 From: "philip" Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:32 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Keang Krachan, no 1. philofillet Hi Nina > Again trouble with internet, but it seems to be corrected now. But > not quite sure. It may go wrong again. Forgive my slowness in > answering mails, I am behind. Ph: Please don't give it a second thought, it is better to be behind and looking at the posts carefully than spinning ahead of one's self like I always am! > > > When you have an opportunity, could you print out the question that > > followed a bit later on anusayas? I found A. Sujin's answer > > particularly clear on that. One thing I remember is Lodewijk asked > > "can we eradicate the anusayas" and A.Sujin said of course, if it > > was not possible there would be no Buddha, or something like that. > ------- > N: I may have to look at another part, not sure where to find it. But > more is to follow. Ph: Not to worry, if it doesn't come up eventually in your transcriptions from Lodewijk's discussions at Kaeng Krachan (which I assume you transcribed before) I will eventually do one. > But exactly, that is what happens at the moment of enlightenment: > anusayas are eradicated by the path-consciousness, stage by stage. > These lie dormant in each citta and condition the arising of akusala > citta when the conditions are right. Ph: Thank you. By the way, speaking of Kaeng Krachan, I know there was a thread for a long time entitled "a lovely dream of Kaeng Krachan" or something like that. I think of that a lot these days, it was only last week, but it seems like a lovely dream now with all the people I had known on the internet for so long there, and now they are gone again (in a way) and the stuff that is going on in Japan now a kind of bad dream that seems so much more real. But during the trip I was also dreaming, dreaming laden with lobha and moha too, and *all* the dreaming has to end. We're always dreaming whether awake or asleep. I didn't recognize the voice, but there was one man in a talk who said that we are lucky to find an expert in ending dreaming. Of course the Buddha is the greatest expert, but I have come to see that A. Sujin really has a gift for snapping us out of the dream again and again, or at least in the right direction. Metta, Phil #114105 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Keang Krachan, no 1. nilovg Dear Philip, Op 18-mrt-2011, om 15:32 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > We're always dreaming whether awake or asleep. I didn't recognize > the voice, but there was one man in a talk who said that we are > lucky to find an expert in ending dreaming. Of course the Buddha is > the greatest expert, but I have come to see that A. Sujin really > has a gift for snapping us out of the dream again and again, or at > least in the right direction. ------- N: Very well said. Acharn brings us back to reality right now, and then we can start waking up. Nina. #114106 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 3:14 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. nilovg Dear Han, thank you very much for your summary. I would include 7 and 8 as referring to the arising of defilements in the future. Op 16-mrt-2011, om 23:07 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > As regards the statement, < "But the four kinds of arisen, > namely, (iv) by having soil [to grow in], (vi) with apprehension of > an object, (vii) through non-suppression, and (viii) through non- > abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or > supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of > these modes of being arisen." > > I think mundane knowledge refers to jhaanas or the mahaggata > cittas, and supramundane knowledge refers to magga ~naa.nas. ------ N: But jhaanas do not eradicate, the temporarily eliminate, as said under VII. Is that included in nullifies? I also like the poison part. The now upcoming section deals with what you just summarized. It also repeats previous statements. After that there will be the last section with quotes from the Kathavatthu and this is a difficult part for me. Nina. #114107 From: han tun Date: Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:26 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. hantun1 Dear Nina, [Nina]: I would include 7 and 8 as referring to the arising of defilements in the future. [Han]: Why I am reluctant to include 7 and 8 as referring to the arising of defilements in the *future* is that once you label it as *future* it will belong to the arising that cannot be abandoned by any of the four Paths. I refer back to Abhisamayakathaa paragraph 11, which states that: "He does not abandon past defilements, he does not abandon *future* defilements, he does not abandon presently-arisen defilements." Secondly, Vism, 90 says "And the three kinds, namely, (vi) arisen with apprehension of an object, (vii) arisen through non-suppression, and (viii) arisen through non-abolition, should be understood as included by (iv) arisen by having soil [to grow in]." Now, if (iv) can be abandoned by the Four Paths (like four poisons), 7 and 8, which are included by (iv), must also be possible to be abandoned by the Four Paths. If they can be abandoned by the Four Paths, they cannot belong to the *future* that cannot be abandoned by the Four Paths. That is my reasoning. It is a bit complicated, and my reasoning may be flawed. -------------------- [Nina]: But jhaanas do not eradicate, the temporarily eliminate, as said under VII. Is that included in nullifies? [Han]: It is true that jhaanas can abandon the defilements only *temporarily* by vikkhambhana-pahaana. But then, I cannot think of any *mundane* knowledge that can eradicate the defilements permanently by samuccheda pahaana. With regard to the word "nullifies" let me see the Pali text: [Pali]: Ya.m paneta.m bhuumiladdha-aramma.naadhiggahita-avikkhambhita-asamuuhatasa"nkhaata.m uppanna.m, tassa ta.m uppannabhaava.m vinaasayamaana.m yasmaa ta.m ta.m lokiyalokuttara~naa.na.m uppajjati, tasmaa ta.m sabbampi pahaatabba.m hotiiti. [Translation]: But the four kinds of 'arisen', namely, (iv) by having soil [to grow in], (vi) with apprehension of an object, (vii) through non-suppression, and (viii) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen. Here, the word "nullifies" is translated from "pahaatabba.m". Pahaatabba.m is a term which can be vikkhambhana-pahaana or samuccheda pahaana. So, I think the abandoning of all that can be abandoned by a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, is included in the word "nullifies". -------------------- [Nina]: The now upcoming section deals with what you just summarized. It also repeats previous statements. After that there will be the last section with quotes from the Kathavatthu and this is a difficult part for me. [Han} I will look forward to your upcoming presentations. Respectfully, Han #114108 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 4:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 3. nilovg Dear Philip and friends, K.K. no 3. Continuation of a Dialogue between Kh Sujin and Lodewijk. Lodewijk: It does not make sense to me to say that there is no Nina, no Lodewijk, it seems that in this way Buddhism is dehumanized. It seems that there is nobody towards whom one can have metta. ----------- Kh S: The truth is the truth, no matter whether we like it or not. Why are people so different? ---------- L: They are born with different accumulations which are conditioned. Kh S: Can we control it? If there are no paramattha dhammas, no citta, cetasika and ruupa, can there be Lodewijk or Nina? There must be something, and what is the nature of it? ---------- Remark Nina: Kh Sujin leads Lodewijk to paramattha dhammas by asking him why people are so different. What we take for a human being is in fact citta, cetasikas and ruupa. These arise and fall away. ------- Kh S: When there is seeing, is it I who sees or is it a conditioned nama? There are different realities, no matter how one calls them: rupa cannot experience anything and nama experiences an object. If one closes ones eyes what is seen? When there is no seeing, visible object does not appear. When there is no hearing, sound does not appear. In reality there are only different namas and rupas that can be experienced through the different doorways. At the first moment of life there is no one there, no seeing, hearing, smelling or thinking yet. Citta arises and experiences an object, but the object of experience does not appear. --------- Remark N: The rebirth-consciousness and the following bhavangacittas experience an object but this is not experienced through a sense-door or the mind-door, thus, it does not appear. It is the same object as the last javanacittas arising shortly before dying, and it is not known to us. Kamma produces the rebirth-consciousness and rupa which is infinitely tiny, and then one does not think of a person yet. ------- Kh S: There is no Nina, no one yet. It keeps on arising and falling away by conditions. Later on there is the idea of someone after seeing. What is seen is only a reality but you think of someone who is there all the time. This is conditioned by memory, by sa~n~naa which marks the shape and form of what is seen. What is seen is just a reality. It is very difficult to get rid of the idea of self, of people. But what is the truth? While one is asleep where are we? Where are our homes, our friends? When we wake up there are seeing, hearing and thinking again and again, the whole day. These arise and are then gone completely. Life is like this, from moment to moment. One has to be brave that life is like this. Last life one was born as someone, very different from this life. Who will be the beloved one in the next life? Lobha keeps on being attached. If there is no seeing of this or that object there is no attachment. What one gets in this life is more attachment. ------- Nina. #114109 From: han tun Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 5:33 am Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah again, Since you have not yet responded to me on this subject, you are giving me the opportunity to provide you with more of *my own thoughts* about the 29 cetanaas. It is the 29 unwholesome and wholesome cetanaa kammas (associated with the 12 akusala cittas, 8 mahaa-kusala cittas, 5 ruupaavacara-kusala cittas, and 4 aruupaavacara-kusala cittas) that assume different name at different time frames. (1) Looking from the present life, these 29 cetanaa kammas of *the past life* are called [sa"nkhaara] that conditions the arising of pa.tisandhi citta at the time of conception of the present life, and 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas throughout the present life. These 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas are called *vipaaka vi~n~naa.na*. (2) Looking from the present life, these same 29 cetanaa kammas, that condition the arising of the 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas throughout *the present life*, are called [kamma vi~n~naa.na]. They condition the arising of 35 cetasikas, and 18 kammaja ruupas of the present life. (3) Looking from the present life, these same 29 cetanaa kammas, that condition the arising of pa.tisandhi citta at the time of conception of *the future life*, and 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas throughout *the future life* are called [kamma-bhava]. (4) Looking back from the future life, these same 29 cetanaa kammas that are called [kamma-bhava] from the perspective of present life, becomes [sa"nkhaara] from the perspective of *the future life*. This is how Kamma-vatta (round of kamma) goes round and round throughout the samsaara. The above are *my own ideas*. If they do not make sense, kindly ignore my message. Respectfully, Han #114110 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 3. philofillet Hi Nina and all I join Lodewijk in finding this topiv very difficult, perhaps it is an unponderable, if we say "there is no Nina" we imvite a lot of struggling to wtap understanding around it, especially when pne comes across sentences such as "in the past life we were born as someone different" like you write near the end, what is the "as" refer to, it sounds again as though one is saying there is the person. I think it is not worth pondeting, for two main reasons. First of all, we cuurently do in fact beliwve in the existence of people, that is our currently accumulated ignorance, so we can make the best of it, care for people etc, Secondly, and more imporyantly and I think this might be the truth of the matter, when there is a momemt of seeing, of hearing, of tasting. touching, smelling or cognize mental object, there is no Nina at such times, there is only one of the six worlds for a moment, then falling away. That I am sure Lodewijk woyld agrre, at moments of understanding the present dhamma, there is certainly no Nina, and if we continue to develop understanding of the present dhamma, we will be fostering factors that leaf to kinder, more generous and helpful cittas. So I think the best response to there is no Nina is "is there seeing now?" Wow, as I was typing a long and quite strong aftershock hit and I kept typing. Is that virya as courage or stupidity? Metta, Phil p.s. sorry to mods, I don't know how to snip off ling tauls yet when writing on i-phone. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Philip and friends, > > K.K. no 3. > > Continuation of a Dialogue between Kh Sujin and Lodewijk. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > #114111 From: "egberdina" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:35 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? egberdina Hello Sarah, > Yes, cittas think by conditions. Rupas conditioned by cittas arise and fall away in various groups. We think that we make a decision to stretch out our hand or take a walk, but actually, there are just various conditioned cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising, performing their functions and falling away. The purpose of the Teachings is just to understand dhammas appearing now as they are - inherently impermanent, dukkha and anatta. That's all! > No, this is not correct. The purpose of the teachings is unbinding. Nibbana, you know? The quest for understanding is for gluttons :-) Cheers Herman #114112 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 10:47 am Subject: What I heard, in Nalanda, 2. nilovg Dear friends, Nalanda 2. Acharn Sujin: In a day seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, body- consciousness and thinking arise without there being any awareness. One should be sincere and know that there is no awareness. But when awareness arises, it is just there and you do not have to try to have it. Awareness can begin to follow different realities, such as the hardness that appears through the bodysense. Body-consciousness is not accompanied by sati but sati can follow and be aware of that characteristic. We can begin to understand the characteristic of right awareness which arises because of conditions, not by our will or expectations. There should not be any expectation when sati will arise again. Once it has arisen and it is there one can see how natural it is. All characteristics appear as different dhammas and there will be less attachment to the idea of self. Then right understanding can discern the true nature of realities more and more. ------- Nina #114113 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 12:00 am Subject: Today is Medin Poya Day! bhikkhu5 Friends: How to be a Real Buddhist through Observance? Medin Poya day is the full-moon of March. This holy day celebrates that the Buddha visits his parental home after his supreme Enlightenment, and ordains his son prince R hula , & half brother Nanda . This day is also called: The Sangha Day, since on this full-moon 1250 Arahats spontaneously met & assembled around the Buddha without any call. Buddha then spoke the famous Ovada Patimokkha core teaching! On such Full-Moon Uposatha Poya Observance days: Any Lay Buddhist simply join the Three Refuges and undertakes the Five Precepts like this: Newly bathed, shaved, white-clothed, with clean bare feet, one kneels at a shrine with a Buddha-statue, and bows first three times, so that feet, hands, elbows, knees & head touch the floor. Then, with joined palms at the heart, one recites these memorized lines in a loud, calm & steady voice: As long as this life lasts: I hereby take refuge in the Buddha. I hereby take refuge in the Dhamma. I hereby take refuge in the Sangha. I hereby seek shelter in the Buddha for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Dhamma for the 2nd time. I hereby seek shelter in the Sangha for the 2nd time. I hereby request protection from the Buddha for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Dhamma for the 3rd time. I hereby request protection from the Sangha for the 3rd time. I will hereby respect these Three Jewels the rest of my life! I accept to respect, keep & undertake these 5 training rules: I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Killing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Stealing. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Sexual Abuse. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Lying & Cheating. I hereby accept the training rule of avoiding all Alcohol & Drugs. As long as this life lasts, I am thus protected by these 5 precepts... Then, one keeps and protects these sacred vows better than one's own eyes & children!, since they protect you & all other beings much better than any army! They are the highest offer one can give in & to this world! The journey towards Nibbna: The Deathless is hereby started! This is the Noble Way to Absolute Peace, to Complete Freedom, to Ultimate Happiness, initiated by Morality , developed further by Dhamma-Study and fulfilled by training of Meditation ... Today indeed is Pooya or Uposatha or observance day, where any lay Buddhist normally keeps also the Eight Precepts from sunrise until the next dawn... <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <...> #114114 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 1:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 3. philofillet Hi again Nina, I was thinking, couldn't the simile of the acrobats help us understand how to understand this topic better? When there is friendly concern (metta) with people as object, we protect ourselves by protecting the other even with the concept of a person as object, and when we protect ourselves by developing satipatthana (seeing now etc) we foster conditions to naturally be more and more prone to protect the other by being helpful etc.. So perhaps Lodewijk needn't be concerned if he turns to SN 47.19 for a more comprehensive approach, and perhaps A Sujin could acknowledge rhat concepts of people are not just fabrications of distorted percepton (vipalassas) that lead to more amd more clinging, but are also objects of kusala at a certtain level when they are the object of metta, for example. And perhaps for many or most of us. , understanding. won't develop past this understanding of people. We can still patiently begin (in my case) to consider more and more in terms of satipatthana of the six worlds where there is no Nina and also develop a kusala understanding whete there is Nina as object of patience, kindness etc, With all respect to A Sujin, I think Sn 47.19 teaches at a broader approach to understanding ourselves and others and the dhammas at thw heart of the matter, and does so in a way that gives opportunity for different degrees of understanding to develop at different moments, for we cannot expect to have understanding of the degree of "there is no Nina" at all times, it must surely be a rarer opening in the black sheet of moha, if we claim it as our habitual understanding, isn't it too soon,,,? I am sleepy, I don't know if that makes any sense. Metta, Phil > #114115 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 2:50 pm Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. nilovg Dear Han, Op 18-mrt-2011, om 23:26 heeft han tun het volgende geschreven: > > [Han]: Why I am reluctant to include 7 and 8 as referring to the > arising of defilements in the *future* is that once you label it as > *future* it will belong to the arising that cannot be abandoned by > any of the four Paths. I refer back to Abhisamayakathaa paragraph > 11, which states that: "He does not abandon past defilements, he > does not abandon *future* defilements, he does not abandon > presently-arisen defilements." > > Secondly, Vism, 90 says "And the three kinds, namely, (vi) arisen > with apprehension of an object, (vii) arisen through non- > suppression, and (viii) arisen through non-abolition, should be > understood as included by (iv) arisen by having soil [to grow in]." > > Now, if (iv) can be abandoned by the Four Paths (like four > poisons), 7 and 8, which are included by (iv), must also be > possible to be abandoned by the Four Paths. If they can be > abandoned by the Four Paths, they cannot belong to the *future* > that cannot be abandoned by the Four Paths. > ------- > N: I have to think this over, also in the light of what is coming next. What makes it complicated is: looking at it in one way: defilements of past future and present cannot be abandoned by the Path. Looking at it in another way: the Path abandons defilements that are past, future and present because there is no more opportunity for their arising. As we read before (Ch 4, no 2): < When the magga-citta, path-consciousness, has eradicated latent tendencies there are no more conditions for the arising of akusala, since there are no germs of it in the form of latent tendencies. That is why it is said that when someone eradicates latent tendencies he actually eradicates akusala of past, future and present. Thus, akusala has no opportunity to arise. As it is said This person eradicates defilements of the past, the future and the present. 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.> This seems contradictory, but just different aspects are emphasied. > > -------------------- > > > [Han]: It is true that jhaanas can abandon the defilements only > *temporarily* by vikkhambhana-pahaana. But then, I cannot think of > any *mundane* knowledge that can eradicate the defilements > permanently by samuccheda pahaana. > > With regard to the word "nullifies" let me see the Pali text: > > [Pali]: Ya.m paneta.m bhuumiladdha-aramma.naadhiggahita- > avikkhambhita-asamuuhatasa"nkhaata.m uppanna.m, tassa ta.m > uppannabhaava.m vinaasayamaana.m yasmaa ta.m ta.m > lokiyalokuttara~naa.na.m uppajjati, tasmaa ta.m sabbampi > pahaatabba.m hotiiti. > > [Translation]: But the four kinds of 'arisen', namely, (iv) by > having soil [to grow in], (vi) with apprehension of an object, > (vii) through non-suppression, and (viii) through non-abolition, > can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane > knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of > being arisen. > > Here, the word "nullifies" is translated from "pahaatabba.m". > Pahaatabba.m is a term which can be vikkhambhana-pahaana or > samuccheda pahaana. So, I think the abandoning of all that can be > abandoned by a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, is included > in the word "nullifies". > > -------------------- > N: Thank you very much for this clear explanation. The Pali makes it much easier. Nina. > #114116 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 3. nilovg Dear Philip, Op 19-mrt-2011, om 11:01 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Secondly, and more importantly and I think this might be the truth > of the matter, when there is a momemt of seeing, of hearing, of > tasting. touching, smelling or cognize mental object, there is no > Nina at such times, there is only one of the six worlds for a > moment, then falling away. That I am sure Lodewijk would agree, at > moments of understanding the present dhamma, there is certainly no > Nina, and if we continue to develop understanding of the present > dhamma, we will be fostering factors that lead to kinder, more > generous and helpful cittas. So I think the best response to there > is no Nina is "is there seeing now?" ------ N: Very good, you summarized this very well. When being aware (if possible) of seeing and investigate it, we shall eventually understand more the difference between the world of paramattha dhammas and the world of conventional truth. Different moments as you suggest. And no conflict. Knowing more the paramattha dhammas can condition kusala cittas with kindness, patience, gentleness, but such moments are rare. We know that there are more often akusala cittas than kusala cittas. ------ Nina. #114117 From: "philip" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:01 pm Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? philofillet Hi Herman > > No, this is not correct. The purpose of the teachings is unbinding. > > Nibbana, you know? > > The quest for understanding is for gluttons :-) This is interesting, in the recent past I've accused Sarah and others of being greedy about having access to deep teachings and here I am now feeling much more comfortable about considering deep teachings so I like your reminder. Do you see the gluttony as the collecting pf cpncepts or rather as the desire for comfort from thinking about understanding , albeit disguised as understanding (appropriation of understanding) or both or something else? I continue to insist that there must surely be lobha at the root of almost all of our Dhamma thinking, but there might be moments of understanding without attachment, very rare but valuable moments. Metta, Phil #114118 From: "colette" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 4:19 pm Subject: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) ksheri3 Hi Nina, How absurd: > Should we not learn more about it? It experiences what is visible and > it is not a person or self. You are merely avoiding the issue that I've presented to you. I AM SAYING THAT "SEEING" EXISTS, THAT "SEEING" IS USUALLY EXPERIENCED BY THE EYE CONSCIOUSNESS BUT in today's advances of science and technology, WE NOW HAVE A NEW UNDERSTANDING OF SEEING AND WHAT SEEING IS, WHAT SEEING ENTAILS, ETC. We cannot MISS THE BOAT on this, we have to be accessable and reasonable of the reality. WE have to accept the position of an EARLY ADOPTERS so that we can maintain an EQUALIBRIUM throughout the entire CONSCIOUSNESS RAISING experience. Why run away from advancements and from future advancements? By adopting the ability to have ALTERNATE VIEWS we are RIDING THE WAVE that we call THE FUTURE. What good is it to deny that ONLY WHAT THE BUDDHA SAID IS RELEVENT? It's denying that SHUNYATA is SHUNYA? All you are doing is POLARIZING YOURSELF AND THOSE WHO FOLLOW YOU. This only condemns yourself to THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND in a CIRCULAR LOGIC OF BLINDNESS i.e. SELF FULLILLING PROPHECY. Allow for OFF RAMPS to exist on the "beaten path" and accept that people will take them, the off ramps, but also accept that you will be there for those people when they find, IF THEY FIND, that their excursion was NON-FRUITFUL. toodles, colette #114119 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:20 pm Subject: Clever is Calm Kindness! bhikkhu5 Friends: Calm Kindness Protects All Beings! The Blessed Buddha often said: With good will for the entire cosmos, Cultivate an infinite & boundless heart: Above, below, all across and all around, Beaming, without any hostility or hate! Sutta Nipta I, 8 May all creatures, all breathing things, all beings one and all, without exception, experience a joyous good fortune only! May they never fall into any harm. Anguttara Nikya II, 72 Let no one deceive another or despise anyone anywhere, or through anger or irritation wish for another to suffer. Sutta Nipta I, 8 <...> Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * <....> #114120 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Mar 20, 2011 1:45 am Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi Rob E > > Sure, I see your point. The first noble truth is defined ultimately as the khandas of clinging, so the rupa aggregate is only(mainly?) dukkha in terms of the clinging involved, eh? Yes, exactly, that's what I would say. > p.s thanks in passing all for the presence of this group, it's helped me to keep my mind on the Dhamma during these stressful days. There's a feeling of life getting back to normal in Tokyo, by the way. Very good to hear that things are a little more normal in Tokyo after such a great disaster. I know that other areas are still suffering a lot, but glad that you are okay. I am all in favor of the world community coming in and helping to the fullest extent. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #114122 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Mar 19, 2011 11:15 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Just Returned from Vacation upasaka_howard Hi again - Typo-corrected version: Hi, all - I had no chance to read email this past week, and I returned to (literally) hundreds of posts, many of which were dissertations. With regret, I could only skim through them and delete as I went, without making reply. Now I'll be able to start anew. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #114123 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Mar 20, 2011 3:15 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Just Returned from Vacation dhammasaro Good friend Howard, Well home... you were missed... trust you and yours had a great and wonderful time... please share as you have the time... peace... metta (maitri), Chuck #114124 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Dear Colette, Op 19-mrt-2011, om 17:19 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > You are merely avoiding the issue that I've presented to you. I AM > SAYING THAT "SEEING" EXISTS, THAT "SEEING" IS USUALLY EXPERIENCED > BY THE EYE CONSCIOUSNESS > > BUT > > in today's advances of science and technology, WE NOW HAVE A NEW > UNDERSTANDING OF SEEING AND WHAT SEEING IS, WHAT SEEING ENTAILS, ETC. ------ N: Science and technology are not wrong, but they are of a different field. They cannot tell us about what citta is, they cannot tell us what the way is leading to the end of clinging and the end of dukkha. The Buddha did teach the way to become detached and the way leading to the end of dukkha. Nina. #114125 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:08 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 4. nilovg Dear Philip and friends, K.K. no 4. L: What about metta towards other persons? --------- S: Who had metta most of all? ---- L: the Buddha. S: Why? Because of his great understanding. If one has metta without understanding one attaches importance to it. --------- Remark Nina: One takes metta for self. We read in the Questions of Milinda II, 410 that the Buddha had as much metta towards those who behaved as his ennemies as to his son Raahula: ---------- Kh S: There can be more understanding of different types of citta and cetasika. We name these a person but they are citta and cetasika.... Can there be Nina and Lodewijk in a next life? No more. Can you agree that even now there are no Nina and Lodewijk? --------- L: I cannot get that. -------- Kh S: But there is life after this life. No Nina again, no Lodewijk again. Last life there was no Nina yet, no Lodewijk yet. There was attachment in the previous life like there is attachment now in this life. ------- Nina. What is the meaning of the word ``Buddha''? The Illustrator of Ultimate Meaning (the ``Paramatthajotik'', a commentary to the ``Minor Readings'', Khuddaka Nikya) explains, in the commentary to the ``Three Refuges'', the meaning of the word ``Buddha'': <... and this is said, ``Buddha'': in what sense buddha? He is the discoverer (bujjhit) of the Truths, thus he is enlightened (buddha). He is the enlightener (bodhet) of the generation, thus he is enlightened. He is enlightened by omniscience, enlightened by seeing all, enlightened without being led by others... he is quite without defilement, thus he is enlightened; he has travelled by the Path that goes in only one way, thus he is enlightened; he alone discovered the peerless complete enlightenment, thus he is enlightened; ... Buddha: this is not a name made by a mother, made by a father... this (name) ``Buddha'', which signifies final liberation, is a realistic description of Enlightened Ones, Blessed Ones, together with their obtainment of omniscient knowledge at the root of an enlightenment (tree).> The Buddha is the discoverer of the truth. What is the truth the Buddha discovered all by himself? ``He is enlightened by omniscience, enlightened by seeing all...'' the commentary to the Paramatthajotik states. He had developed the wisdom to see and to experience the truth of all realities. Only if we develop understanding of all realities in accordance with the Buddha's teachings, we shall come to know who the Buddha was. This means that we can begin to investigate the realities of our daily life, such as visible object, seeing, sound, hearing, attachment, anger, genrosity. We shall learn that these are conditioned dhammas that are not created by a self; they are dhammas which are anattaa. ------- Nina. #114126 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:08 am Subject: What I heard, in Nalanda, 3. nilovg Dear friends, Nalanda 3. Acharn Sujin: It seems that there are right now many realities appearing at the same time. There are different people, there are the yard and the trees, but only one characteristic appears at a time, nothing else. For example, now only sound appears to hearing- consciousness and this means that there is no one there. Visible object does not appear, there is only sound appearing to hearing- consciousness. Is there any idea of self who hears? When realities appear to pa~n~naa only one characteristic of a reality appears at a time. Are we not inclined to take the mental reality that experiences objects for I, from head to toe? When something is touched, hardness or softness appears without any understanding. But when a reality appears to pa~n~naa that has been developed it can understand that characteristic as no one, no self at that moment. Then there is no clinging to a self who is soft or hard. There is at that moment nothing else but the hardness that appears. ------- Nina. #114127 From: "colette" Date: Sun Mar 20, 2011 4:09 pm Subject: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) ksheri3 Hi Nina, I'm not trying to argue with you here and I do not want to argue with you BUT you are clinging to a PRISON OF MIND Science and Technology most certainly can tell us a lot more about citta's, about clinging, and about dukkha, than most people could ever learn from the two dimensional reality from books. THE ENTIRE THOUGHT OF THE PROCESS OF MEDITATION is to focus (see VIPISSANA). And what do we focus on IF NOT REFLECTIONS of what we think, of what we believe, of what we perceive. The key word is REFLECTION since reflections are ILLUSIONS and illusions tend to be ILLUSIORY. By closing out the realities of SCIENCE and TECHNOLOGY you are imprisoning yourself, constraining yourself, and taking away any and all flexibity that the mind could have (see YOGACARA, see the philosophy of Jeet Kun Do or JKD) If you want to find the END then you at least have to cognize where you're at and where you're going IN RELATION(S) TO WHERE YOU'VE BEEN. Yea, the Buddha did teach "the way" but that means that you are consciousness of THE PAST DHARMA (where you've been), the PRESENT DHARMA (where you are at), and the FUTURE DHARMA (where you are going). REMEMBER, "there is no goer without going" (see Verses From the Centre). STOP BANTYING TRIFFLES WITH ME. I may just say that Nina is Dukkha. lol I am clearly working from the position of the YOGACARA/MIND-ONLY school of Buddhist philosophy. But, as long as one person remembers the Shurangama Sutra then it's power will never be lossed. toodles, colette #114128 From: "philip" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 4. philofillet Hi Nina and all > S: Why? Because of his great understanding. If one has metta without > understanding one attaches importance to it. Ph: Interesting and well said. I still feel it is better to attach importance to metta (though I don't seem to, in particular, these days, though I sign off with it) and be attached to the idea of being a good person than it is to be attached to harmful sensual pleasures, for example, but what A. Sujin says here is right. > Remark Nina: One takes metta for self. Ph: Or as belonging to self, I think, more likely. My metta. And, again, I don't think that is a terrible thing if it helps develop wholesome behaviour. But wholesome behaviour is not enough, and believing "my metta" is not helpful in the long run and has to be abandoned by understanding at some point. I think it will be. > ---------- > > Kh S: There can be more understanding of different types of citta and > cetasika. We name these a person but they are citta and cetasika.... > > Can there be Nina and Lodewijk in a next life? No more. Can you agree > that even now there are no Nina and Lodewijk? > L: I cannot get that. (paraphrase, I sipped by mistake) Ph: Well, good for Lodewijk, again, refusing to agree. Agreeing to this point seems premature, until our understanding develops to the point, or unless there are moments of understanding of the six worlds, there *is* belief in persons, so I don't see how helpful it is to agree to say "there is no Nina." Understanding has to develop, and for now the object that understanding is working with is "Nina", "Nina" will be seen through, or not, depending on how understanding develops. When A.Sujin says "is there seeing now?" I think it is helpful but "can you agree that even now there are no Nina and Lodewijk" is not so helpful to me because it is trying to impose a degree of understanding that is not there, or something like that. But really, I think it is only an important point when we come to the topic of how to share Dhamma with others. I think that is Lodewijk's concern, I don't think he has any doubt about how much he loves Nina and cares for her, and how much she loves him and cares for him, nor do I believe he has doubt about Dhamma. But he often menttions that "people will be turned away" and things like that. Because he is a career diplomat and has accumulations for wanting to help people, he wants to share Dhamma with all people, and he feels that saying things like "there is no Nina" will block an effective sharing of Dhamma, or something like that, though I apologize for putting words in his mouth. And I'd agree with that. My understanding of Dhamma (oops, "my" again, but you know what I mean) has in a way come to dispose the need to ponder this issue, but if I think about how to share Dhamma with others, it is important, and I would never, ever begin by telling people "there are not people, only nama and rupa", or, I would do it hesitatingly without confidence because I know that is not the way the Buddha taught to people who were first approaching Dhamma. But you know, it doesn't really matter, and I'm not longer interested in making that point at DSG, I just want to udnerstand present dhammas better and that is where A Sujin is a helpful friend. So back to "is there seeing now?" rather than "Do you agree that there is no NIna now?" Metta, Phil #114129 From: "philip" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:08 am Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) philofillet Hi Rob E > Very good to hear that things are a little more normal in Tokyo after such a great disaster. I know that other areas are still suffering a lot, but glad that you are okay. I am all in favor of the world community coming in and helping to the fullest extent. Yes, things have settled down. The earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown were entirely about *me*, I've come to see that now. Whether or not I lose my job was all that mattered to me, sounds terrible to say, but we have to understand the defilements. Yesterday I was talking about compassion. I was trying to explain that most of the emotions that we feel when we watch a news report on earthquake victims are not "compassion", technically speaking, compassion cannot be accompanied by unpleasant mental feeling, so it is rarer than we think. Since she is interested in Buddhism, she was interested in that idea, though she couldn't agree. I said that if there is an impulse to do something to help the person in the report, that is getting closer to true compassion. I realized in my case, compassion is easier to understand in a very momentary way, when I am teaching English to shy or weird people, and they are struggling, there are many moments of compassion mixed in with the irritation I feel or whatever, there is an accumulated tendenced for virya and other factors to leap forward to help that troubled person sitting in front of me, and those are the immediate moments of compassion of which the characteristics can be understood. I suppose such moments can also arise when watching TV coverage, in my case they don't seem to, mostly sadness or aversion or irritation at the reporters for exploting people's suffering etc. But everyone has different accumulations. But yes, if I'm honest this disaster was all about me, I'm afraid, and so far my company has weathered the storm, and things have calmed down so my beloved Tokyo (*my*) will not be haunted by paranoia about radiation. Maybe. Today it is raining and Naomi is worried about "black rain." Metta, Phil #114130 From: "philip" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:11 am Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) philofillet Hi again > Yesterday I was talking about compassion. This sounds weird, talking into the wind. I was talking to a Japanese friend, is what I meant to write. But technically speaking, it is correct to say "I was talking" without the listener mentionned, isn't it? We only can speak for ourselves. Metta, Phil #114131 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:11 am Subject: Decisive is Determination! bhikkhu.sama... Friends: Determination is the 8th Mental Perfection: Only determination can completely fulfill the other mental perfections! Its characteristic is an unwavering decision, its function is to overcome hesitation, and its manifestation is unfaltering persistence in this task...! The proximate cause of determination is strong willpower to succeed! Only the power of resolute determination lifts any praxis to perfection... When the Future Buddha placed his back against the trunk of The Bodhi Tree, he right there made this mighty decision: "Let just the blood and flesh of this body dry up and let the skin & sinews fall from the bones. I will not leave this seat before having attained that absolute supreme Enlightenment!" So determined did he invincibly seat himself, from which not even 100 earthquakes could make him waver. Jataka Nidna A female lay follower (Upsika) at the time of the Buddha kept pure the precepts, comprehended the nature of impermanence, the consequent fragility of the body and thereby won stream-entry (Sotpanna)... After passing away, she re-arose as the favourite attendant of Sakka, the king of Gods. Reviewing her own merit, she remembered her prior admonition to herself: "Let this body break up as it may, herein will not be any excuse or relaxation of the effort...!" Whose mind is like a rock, determined, unwavering, immovable, without a trace of lust of urging towards all the attractions, without a trace of aversion of pushing away all the repulsive, from what, can such a refined mind ever suffer? Udana IV - 4 Using the tools of Faith, Morality, Effort, Determination, Meditation and true Understanding of the Dhamma, one gradually perfects first knowing and then behaviour. So well equipped & always aware, one becomes capable of eliminating of this great heap of suffering once and for all ... Dhammapada 144 What is being determined by Right Motivation? The decision for always being motivated to withdrawal, The decision for always being motivated to good-will, The decision for always being motivated to harmlessness, This is being determined by Right Motivation... Samyutta Nikya XLV 8 My mind is firm like a rock, unattached to sensual things, no shaking in the midst of a world, where all is decaying and vanishing... My mind has been thus well developed, so how can suffering ever touch me? Theragatha 194 The four determinations: One should not neglect the Dhamma, One should guard well the Truth, One should be devoted to Withdrawal, and one should always train only for Peace. Majjhima Nikya 140 Fearing being predestined for Hell if he became a King, who had to punish criminals violently, the Bodhisatta determined not to show any intelligence, and played dumb, deaf and crippled for sixteen years, only showing his real abilities, when he was on the verge of being buried alive! This was his ultimate perfection of resolute determination... The Basket of Conduct: Cariyapitaka More of the 10 mental perfections (paramis): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/The_Ten_Perfections.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_10_mental_perfections_(parami)_in_thre e_levels.htm Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Decisive is Determination! #114132 From: "egberdina" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:28 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? egberdina Hi Phil, Thank you for your consideration, and sorry for the delay in replying. Vicki and I are travelling around Tasmania, so communication via the Internet is a bit of an hit/miss affair. I've inserted some comments at the bottom. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Herman > > > > No, this is not correct. The purpose of the teachings is unbinding. > > > > Nibbana, you know? > > > > The quest for understanding is for gluttons :-) > > > This is interesting, in the recent past I've accused Sarah and others of being greedy about having access to deep teachings and here I am now feeling much more comfortable about considering deep teachings so I like your reminder. > > Do you see the gluttony as the collecting pf cpncepts or rather as the desire for comfort from thinking about understanding , albeit disguised as understanding (appropriation of understanding) or both or something else? > > I continue to insist that there must surely be lobha at the root of almost all of our Dhamma thinking, but there might be moments of understanding without attachment, very rare but valuable moments. From MN24 Then in the evening, Ven. Sariputta arose from his seclusion and went to Ven. Punna. On arrival, he exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Punna, "My friend, is the holy life lived under the Blessed One?" "Yes, my friend." "And is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of virtue?" "No, my friend." "Then is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of mind [concentration]?" "No, my friend." "Then is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of view?" "No, my friend." "Then is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of the overcoming of perplexity?" "No, my friend." "Then is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of knowledge & vision of what is & is not the path?" "No, my friend." "Then is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of knowledge & vision of the way?" "No, my friend." "Then is the holy life lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of knowledge & vision?" "No, my friend." "When asked if the holy life is lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of virtue, you say, 'No, my friend.' When asked if the holy life is lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of mind... view... the overcoming of perplexity... knowledge & vision of what is & is not the path... knowledge & vision of the way... knowledge & vision, you say, 'No, my friend.' For the sake of what, then, my friend, is the holy life lived under the Blessed One?" "The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my friend, for the sake of total Unbinding through lack of clinging." In short, the Buddhist texts are very clear that Buddhism is not about sila, samadhi or panna. I well understand the reservations you express from time to time, Phil, about what motivates some of us here. If it is the ultimate wish of people here to exist understanding their universe, then they have not realised the basics of suffering. Cheers Herman #114133 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:00 am Subject: the Classification into five khandhas. nilovg Dear friends, The following quote shows the importance of the teaching of the five khandhas and it gives the reason why naama and ruupa should be distinguished from each other. I quote from the Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 213 and the tiika: Visuddhimagga Ch XIV, 213: Text Vis.: 'Order of teaching' is appropriate however; for there are those people who, while teachable, have fallen into assuming a self among the five aggregates owing to failure to analyze them. ------- N: As to the expression, by non-analysis (abhedena), the Tiika states that this means: by not analysing the khandhas, beginning with ruupa, by taking them together as a mass (pi.n.da). As to the expression, assuming a self (attagaaha), the Tiika states that they have fallen into the flood of wrong view (di.t.thogha)by the assuming of a self as mentioned. ---------- Text Vis.: and the Blessed One is desirous of releasing them from the assumption by getting them to see how the [seeming] compactness of mass [in the five aggregates] is resolved; --------- N: The Tiika explains that seeing the resolution of the mass or whole (of the five khandhas) is done by distinguishing (vivecento) ruupa from aruupa (naama). -------- N: The teaching of the five khandhas is the teaching of citta, cetasika and ruupa, dhammas that appear in daily life through the six doorways. **** In the preceding section it has been explained that five khandhas have been taught because all dhammas that resemble each other are classified as five different khandhas. In the following section, the second reason for there being five khandhas is explained. They are the field of the wrong view of self. ***** Vis. 218. Intro: in this section the second reason for there being five khandhas is explained. All the different dhammas included in them can be the basis of wrong view. ---------- Text Vis.: (b) And this is the extreme limit as the basis for the assumption of self and what pertains to self, that is to say, the five beginning with materiality. For this is said: 'Bhikkhus, when matter exists, it is through clinging to matter, through insisting upon (interpreting) matter, that such a view as this arises: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self". When feeling exists ... When formations exist ... When consciousness exists, it is through clinging to consciousness, through insisting upon (interpreting) consciousness, that such a view as this arises: "This is mine, this is I, this is my self" ' (S.iii,181-82). So they are stated as five because this is the widest limit as a basis for the assumption of the self and what pertains to self. ------ N: Ultimate realities are classified as khandhas, as elements, as aayatanas, with the purpose of showing that they are not self. ------- Nina. #114134 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:01 am Subject: What I heard. nilovg Dear friends, Kh S: < We remember people, stories and we do not know that there are only phenomena appearing for a very short moment. What arises does so because of conditions. If there were no conditions it could not arise. Very gradually phenomena can be understood as anattaa, as dhamma. They arise already and appear. They appear and can be understood. People and things we are thinking of are not real. We have to listen to the Dhamma. Now there must be a reality appearing that can be seen. We cannot manipulate it and it falls away very rapidly. We remember the appearance of a whole because we did not pay attention to the characteristic of what appeared. We think of people or flowers but did not pay attention to what appears through the eyesense and can be seen. Thinking of people and stories is not right understanding of the characteristic of the reality that appears through the eyes.> ------- Nina. #114135 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:08 am Subject: Beyond control. nilovg Dear friends, I quote from one of my Vipassana Letters I am reading to Lodewijk. Alan Weller wrote about beyond control and Lodewijk said that this passage is very good. Someone wrote that one should not say that realities are "beyond control" and that one should not say that it depends on one's accumulations whether kusala citta or akusala citta arises. He is inclined to stress volitional control. He said that, although one cannot have absolute control, there must be effort and a certain amount of control, otherwise one would be a victim of fate, one could not do anything. Alan Weller wrote about this subject: "I think that time and again we need to be reminded of the uncontrollability of realities in order to develop awareness of whatever reality appears naturally. Otherwise there will be the idea of self having effort, energy, etc. When we hear the word uncontrollable it does not mean we are the victims of fate, but we have to carefully consider how to develop the Path. The understanding of the Dhamma is the condition for wholesomeness at different levels, not control. Each moment of being awake we accumulate either kusala or akusala. Considering the Dhamma more is the condition for accumulating more kusala, but that also depends on previous accumulation. It is better not to mind or care what reality is there, but to just understand it. This is for me the subtlety of the teachings. It is so necessary to consider a lot in order not to be misled by desire or the idea of self. The understanding of uncontrollability can help us to develop understanding and not to accumulate more ignorance. It can help us to be natural in our development of kusala. No matter how busy we are, kusala at whatever level can arise any time by its own conditions. This understanding can help us to be detached from our practice. We do not try. We can become patient with lack of results, with our akusala. The practice can become a very natural part of our daily life. We do not limit it by thinking of a certain place or situation, or by making effort now and then. Confidence in the Dhamma, a sense of urgency, concentration, these are different realities which work by themselves. They grow as the understanding of the Dhamma develops. There is no one besides these realities. This moment is either kusala or akusala, a keener understanding will realize this more and more deeply and this will lead to turning away from akusala. If we do not understand this moment as akusala, we shall accumulate more akusala. Seeing or hearing without understanding is dangerous. We should find out whether this moment is akusala or kusala. I learn to be more considerate in speech and actions, also as regards seemingly unimportant things, which are often overlooked in daily life, for example, not leaving dirty washing or cups around, since this is unpleasant for others. There are many examples like this so close at hand. Dhamma is in front of us all the time." --------- Nina. #114136 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Pt, Thinking about our many pleasant discussions as I write and I wonder if you've started your new job? Busy as usual, I'm sure. --- On Sun, 6/3/11, ptaus1 wrote: >> 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. >pt: Interesting that sati translates as awareness and panna as understanding. So far, awareness often seemed like a synonym for both to me. If saying that sati is awareness, then it would be awareness of what exactly? Perhaps the answer relates to the other bit you mentioned: ... S: Different realities, different characteristics. When panna is stressed, it is because it is only panna that can know what exactly sati is, what exactly panna is, when they arise and are known. Sati is aware of a reality, when we're talking about sati in satipatthana. For example, when visible object appears, it is aware of that characteristic. When we are talking about sati in a wider context it is not forgetful, it is aware to be wholesome at such moments of generosity or sila, for example. The citta thinks in a wholesome way of a concept accompanied by awareness. .... >> 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. >pt: So if sati is awareness of what is experienced, what does that mean exactly? ... S: Awareness of the reality in this context - awareness of the seeing or visible object. ... >Awareness that I'm currently washing dishes? That seems like thinking, not sati. ... S: That's a conventional idea of awareness which has nothing to do with sati, as you say. It's just thinking, usually with attachment or ignorance. ... >Awareness of kusala vs. akusala - that seems like understanding, not sati. Etc. I guess I'm trying to figure out what's the difference between sati and panna. Thanks. .... S: When awareness arises and is aware of a reality, it doesn't know anything - it's just aware of what appears. At such a time, panna can know it and there's no doubt about its nature. If we try to know it or have it arise, for sure it's attachment. Even 'trying to work it out' tends to be attachment - trying to 'get it', rather than just understanding and being aware of what appears now, such as the doubt or thinking or confusion. Phil has raised a great discussion in Thailand with K.Sujin on this topic. Pls (and others) listen to the first two tracks of the first set of edited recordings at this link: http://www.dhammastudygroup.org/ (under audio discussions with A.Sujin) Let us know what you think. It's helpful to listen to the same tracks together, I think. I'll be glad to hear your further comments. Metta Sarah p.s learning to use my new macbook air - great for travel (and the tiny studio flat we now live in here in HK) AND IT PRINTS:-) ====== #114137 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? sarahprocter... Hi Herman, Good to see you following still also remembering our pleasant Dhamma get-together (yes, lots of lobha, Phil:-) --- On Sat, 19/3/11, egberdina wrote: > Yes, cittas think by conditions. Rupas conditioned by cittas arise and fall away in various groups. We think that we make a decision to stretch out our hand or take a walk, but actually, there are just various conditioned cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising, performing their functions and falling away. The purpose of the Teachings is just to understand dhammas appearing now as they are - inherently impermanent, dukkha and anatta. That's all! ... H:>No, this is not correct. The purpose of the teachings is unbinding. Nibbana, you know? .... S: And without the full understanding of d SN 35:27 'Full Understanding' (Bodhi transl): " 'Bhikkhus, without directly knowing and fully understanding the all, without developing dispassion towards it and abandoning it, one is incapable of destroying suffering. "And what, bhikkhus, is the all....? "The eye and forms and eye-consciousness [Cakkhu-vi~n~naa.na, i.e. citta]and things to be cognized by eye-consciousness.......etc." ... >H:The quest for understanding is for gluttons :-) ... S: Would that include the ariyan disciples who developed an understanding of "the all" and thereby developed dispassion through understanding dhammas as anicca, dukkha and anatta, leading to the abandoning and thereby the destruction of suffering? The quest for nibbana without understanding present dhammas is for ignorattons :-) Metta Sarah ===== #114138 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- On Sun, 6/3/11, Robert E wrote: >I would also like to get the distinction between: a)>correct awareness of concept and what panna that may include; b)>correct awareness of namas and rupas and its pannas; .... S: a) Let's say it is a concept of a person, such as when metta arises. At such a moment, if panna arises, it knows how to think wisely about the person. In between the moments of metta, it can understand the nature and value of the metta (still as concepts) through wise reflection. The awareness which arises with the panna and thinking about the person prevents unwholesome states arising. For example, someone may be telling us about their difficult circumstances or we may be reading about the catastrophe in Japan. When there is awareness at such times, there is no sorrow or grief or proliferation with attachment or wrong view. When there is patience and consideration, sati arises and is mindful of what is wholesome and unwholesome at such times. Panna understands how to reflect wisely. This is why the Teachings stress that it's not the topic, but the way of reflection that is important. b) Now, there are various realities appearing, one at a time. For example, seeing appears, hearing appears, thinking appears, visible object, sound, hardness appear. Awareness is aware of just the reality which appears and panna knows its characteristic at that moment. There may be doubt, there's bound to be thinking....all just dhammas which can be known - not belonging to anyone or anything. This is the Buddha's Teaching - the development of satipatthana. Even when there is wise reflection of one kind or another as in a), the purpose of the Teachings is to directly understand and be aware of such thinking, such metta, such attachment as just dhammas appearing now - all anatta. Are we brave enough to just "let go" and be aware of what appears now? (as K.Sujin always asks). > and c)>the distinction between sati with sampajanna, sati w/o sampajanna, and when it becomes satipatthana, and the role or type of panna in each of these. .... S: Great questions! Sampajanna (clear comprehension or wisdom) is panna. So sati is aware of a reality and panna/sampajanna knows that reality as it is. Satipatthana is the growth of such sati and panna which know dhammas/realities when they appear. This is the One Way. ... >Hope I'm not overly confusing the issue here... ... S: All very helpful. Perhaps Pt will join back in:-) Metta Sarah p.s From Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries, transl by Soma; "...And further this clear comprehension of non-delusion should be understood, by way of the reflection on the aggregates, bases, processes and conditions. To be sure, here, eye and visible object are materiality-aggregate; seeing is consciousness-aggregate; feeling that is associated with seeing is feeling-aggregate; perceiving is perception-aggregate, and those beginning with sense-impression are formation-aggregate. Thus looking-straight-on-and-looking-away-from-the-front is seen in the combination of these five aggregates. There, who, singly, looks straight on? Who looks away from the front? Seeing = Eye-consciousness [cakkhuviññanam]. By reason of knowing the acts of looking straight on and of looking away from the front in that way only as "eye-consciousness," adverting and the rest are left out, as bare seeing only is in "eye-consciousness" [tassa vaseneva alokana vilokana paññayananto avajjanadinam agahanam]. Separate from that fivefold aggregate, who, singly, looks straight on? Who, singly, looks away from the front? None, singly, only by oneself indeed, looks straight on, and none, singly, only by oneself, looks away from the front — this reply is intended to be given to the questions. In the same way, eye is eye-base; visible object is materiality-base; seeing is mind-base; feeling and so forth, the associated things, are thing-base. Thus looking-straight-on-and-looking-away-from-the-front is seen in the combination of these four bases. There, who, singly, looks straight on? Who looks away from the front? Likewise, eye is eye-process; visible object is materiality-process; seeing is eye-consciousness-process; and the things beginning with feeling associated with eye-consciousness are mind-process. Thus, looking-straight-on-and-looking-away-from-the-front is seen in the combination of these four processes. There, who, singly, looks straight on? Who looks away from the front? Exactly, in the manner already stated, eye is support-condition; visible object is object-condition; adverting is condition of proximity, contiguity, decisive-support, absence and disappearance; light is condition of decisive-support and those beginning with feeling are conascence-condition. Thus looking straight-on-and-looking-away-from-the-front is seen in the combination of these conditions. There, who, singly, looks straight on? Who looks away from the front?" ========= #114139 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:52 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E (& Howard), --- On Mon, 7/3/11, Robert E wrote: >...It then becomes hard to fight the new meaning, unless you have that history at hand. People can say "Well sabhava has *always* been around, it's an accepted Theravada term" - except that if we don't look into it we fail to notice that the word is the same but the meaning has evolved. So it's good to know that to the ancients the word had a specific, benign meaning that is descriptive; and that over time it was evolved by certain movements into another way of reintroducing a controlling factor or an objective essence back into the "interior" of dhammas. >Most fascinating! ... S: I think you expressed this well. Meanings change. Even the Buddha used common, daily words (many of which you'll be familiar with from the Sanskrit terms used in a yoga context) and imbued them with totally new meanings - such as vivekka (seclusion). So many, you can find all your own examples! Yogi, niyama, nama.... we hear lots from our yoga. metta Sarah ===== #114140 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:21 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Kaeng Krachan, no 4. nilovg Dear Philip, Op 21-mrt-2011, om 1:41 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I just want to udnerstand present dhammas better and that is where > A Sujin is a helpful friend. So back to "is there seeing now?" > rather than "Do you agree that there is no NIna now?" -------- N: But the next question could be: Is seeing Nina? Then we come to what a person is: citta, cetasika and ruupa that arise and then fall away. They do not stay! I quote from a vipassanaa letter I am reading to Lodewijk, and he did not object: ------- Nina. #114141 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:27 am Subject: Vipassanaa and mettaa. nilovg Dear Phil, another subject that was discussed: mettaa. ------------------------------------------- Phil: Remark Nina: One takes metta for self. Ph: Or as belonging to self, I think, more likely. My metta. And, again, I don't think that is a terrible thing if it helps develop wholesome behaviour. But wholesome behaviour is not enough, and believing "my metta" is not helpful in the long run and has to be abandoned by understanding at some point. I think it will be. -------- Kh Sujin: ------- Nina. #114142 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:38 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Sat, 19/3/11, han tun wrote: >Since you have not yet responded to me on this subject, you are giving me the opportunity to provide you with more of *my own thoughts* about the 29 cetanaas. ... S: A bit behind. Btw, would you kindly give me that link to the on-line Mahanidana Sutta and commentaries again? I just failed to find it. ... >It is the 29 unwholesome and wholesome cetanaa kammas (associated with the 12 akusala cittas, 8 mahaa-kusala cittas, 5 ruupaavacara-kusala cittas, and 4 aruupaavacara-kusala cittas) that assume different name at different time frames. (1) Looking from the present life, these 29 cetanaa kammas of *the past life* are called [sa"nkhaara] that conditions the arising of pa.tisandhi citta at the time of conception of the present life, and 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas throughout the present life. These 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas are called *vipaaka vi~n~naa.na*. .... S: Yes - clear and agreed. .... >(2) Looking from the present life, these same 29 cetanaa kammas, that condition the arising of the 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas throughout *the present life*, are called [kamma vi~n~naa.na]. They condition the arising of 35 cetasikas, and 18 kammaja ruupas of the present life. .... S: I'm hesitating here for two reasons: a) I'd like to read in the text that vinnana refers to "kamma vinnana" or kamma patha, bringing about vipaka cittas throughout *the present life* and that b) kamma in this life conditions kammaja rupas. Can you give me some examples of vipaka cittas and kammaja rupas now which may have been conditioned by kamma in *this life*? .... >(3) Looking from the present life, these same 29 cetanaa kammas, that condition the arising of pa.tisandhi citta at the time of conception of *the future life*, and 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas throughout *the future life* are called [kamma-bhava]. ... S: Yes, no problem. *the future life* or *future lives*. .... >(4) Looking back from the future life, these same 29 cetanaa kammas that are called [kamma-bhava] from the perspective of present life, becomes [sa"nkhaara] from the perspective of *the future life*. >This is how Kamma-vatta (round of kamma) goes round and round throughout the samsaara. ... S: Yes, agreed. .. >The above are *my own ideas*. If they do not make sense, kindly ignore my message. ... S: I might be slow, but I'd never ignore any of your messages, Partner:-) As I said, I want to check the text, but don't have a hard copy and have lost your link. Meanwhile you kindly copied (qu at end): 116. "'Naamaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na'nti iti kho paneta.m vutta.m, tadaananda,iminaapeta.m pariyaayena veditabba.m, yathaa naamaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na.m.Vi~n~naa.na~nca hi, aananda, naamaruupe pati.t.tha.m na labhissatha, api nu khoaayati.m jaatijaraamara.na.m dukkhasamudayasambhavo [jaatijaraamara.nadukkhasamudayasambhavo (sii. syaa. pii.)] pa~n~naayethaa"ti? "No heta.m, bhante". "Tasmaatihaananda, eseva hetu eta.m nidaana.m esa samudayo esa paccayo vi~n~naa.nassa yadida.m naamaruupa.m. Ettaavataa kho, aananda, jaayetha vaa jiiyetha [jiyyetha (ka.)] vaa miiyetha [miyyetha (ka.)] vaa cavetha vaa upapajjetha vaa. Ettaavataa adhivacanapatho, ettaavataa niruttipatho, ettaavataa pa~n~nattipatho, ettaavataa pa~n~naavacara.m, ettaavataa va.t.ta.m vattati itthatta.m pa~n~naapanaaya yadida.m naamaruupa.m saha vi~n~naa.nena a~n~nama~n~napaccayataa pavattati. --------------- The following is the translation by Ven Bhikkhu Bodhi of the above Pali passage. 22. "It was said: 'With mentality-materiality as condition there is consciousness.' How that is so, Aananda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness were not to gain a footing in mentality-materiality, would an origination of the mass of suffering, of future birth, aging, and death, be discerned?" "Certainly not, venerable sir." "Therefore, Aananda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for consciousness, namely mentality-materiality. "It is to this extent, Aananda, that one can be born, age, and die, pass awayand re-arise, to this extent that there is a pathway for designation, to this extent that there is a pathway for language, to this extent that there is a pathway for description, to this extent that there is a sphere for wisdom, to this extent that the round turns for describing this state of being, that is, when there is mentality-materiality together with consciousness." ... S: "mentality-materiality *together with* consciousness (naamaruupa.m saha vi~n~naa.nena). Why do you think it says *together with* if what is meant here is that that vi~n~naa.na referred to conditions namas and rupas later during that same life? Also, are you suggesting that the meaning of nama in "stage 3" changes from referring to cetasikas ("stage 2") to vipaka cittas ("stage 3")? None of it quite makes sense to me. Seeing, hearing and so on - the vipaka cittas of this life-time - are conditioned only by past kamma, i.e. not kamma of this life-time. Similarly, eye-sense, ear-sense, masculinity, femininity, kamma-ja rupas, are conditioned by past kamma only, surely? I'm wondering if this discussion also touches on your "dispute" with the Burmese you mentioned? Metta Sarah ===== #114143 From: "egberdina" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:56 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? egberdina Hello Sarah, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Herman, > > Good to see you following still also remembering our pleasant Dhamma get-together (yes, lots of lobha, Phil:-) > > > --- On Sat, 19/3/11, egberdina wrote: > > > Yes, cittas think by conditions. Rupas conditioned by cittas arise and fall away in various groups. We think that we make a decision to stretch out our hand or take a walk, but actually, there are just various conditioned cittas, cetasikas and rupas arising, performing their functions and falling away. The purpose of the Teachings is just to understand dhammas appearing now as they are - inherently impermanent, dukkha and anatta. That's all! > ... > > H:>No, this is not correct. The purpose of the teachings is unbinding. > > Nibbana, you know? > .... > S: And without the full understanding of d > > > SN 35:27 'Full Understanding' (Bodhi transl): > > " 'Bhikkhus, without directly knowing and fully understanding the all, > without developing dispassion towards it and abandoning it, one is > incapable of destroying suffering. > > "And what, bhikkhus, is the all....? > > "The eye and forms and eye-consciousness [Cakkhu-vi~n~naa.na, i.e. > citta]and things to be cognized by eye-consciousness.......etc." > ... > >H:The quest for understanding is for gluttons :-) > ... > S: Would that include the ariyan disciples who developed an understanding of "the all" and thereby developed dispassion through understanding dhammas as anicca, dukkha and anatta, leading to the abandoning and thereby the destruction of suffering? > > The quest for nibbana without understanding present dhammas is for ignorattons :-) I replied to a post of yours which insisted that the purpose of the Buddha's teachings was all about understanding. My answer consisted of quoting the Buddha's disciples to say that the Buddha's teachings were about Nibbana. If you have a problem with this, then you have a problem with the Buddhas teachings. Sila, samadhi, panna are stepping stones only. Why chose a favourite stepping stone? Cheers Herman #114144 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 10:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han & all, Now I found the link in #113889. (Pt, if you have time, perhaps you could put it in bookmarks for us for future). As you say, we can't copy from it. There is a lot of commentary detail which included the following: "For consciousness is a condition for mentality-materiality in the way a king, restraining his retinue, might say: 'Who was it that made you viceroy and you general?" etc. It goes on to talk about how consciousness was the forerunner and how without the patisandhi citta (birth consciousness) and other vipaka cittas, there couldn't be the arising of the (vipaka) cetasikas and kammaja rupas. It also refers to how "consciousness is a condition for mentality-materiality in many ways? How? Rebirth-linking or any other resultant consciousness is a condition in nine ways.....for resultant mentality, whether it be mixed with materiality or unmixed." In other words, as I understand, vinnana in this context is only referring to patisandhi and other vipaka cittas. Let me know if I've overlooked anything as I've only just had a very quick look at the on-line text before I go out. Metta Sarah===== #114145 From: han tun Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:35 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah, I do not know how to answer your questions. So I will start all over again. You can draw your own conclusions. You do not have to agree with me. And also what I am going to write now is not from the original Pali text. It will be from BB's Guides and Dr Mehm Tin Mon's book. They probably got these from the Commentaries. If you do not believe in the Commentaries, please stop at this point and please erase the rest of my current message. ==================== [Step 2. Sa"nkhaara-paccayaa Vi~n~naa.na.m.] [From BB's Guides on page 296 of the CMA] Step (2): Dependent on kammic formations arises consciousness: That is, the kammic formations (the 29 wholesome and unwholesome volitions) condition the arising of the 32 kinds of resultant consciousness. At the moment of conception one especially potent kammic formation accumulated in the mental continuum of the deceased being generates one of the 19 types of rebirth consciousness in the realm appropriate for that kamma to mature. Thereafter, during the course of existence, other accumulated kammas generate other resultant types of consciousness according to circumstances. [From Dr Mehm Tin Mon's book] Step (2): Here, sa"nkhaara means the 29 wholesome and unwholesome cetanaas (kammas) mentioned above. Vi~n~naa.na means rebirth-consciousness which is the initial resultant of kamma-formations. But sa"nkhaara goes on producing vipaaka-cittas throughout the whole new life. So all the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas are taken to represent vi~n~naa.na as the direct effect of sa"nkhaara. Thus the second causal relation should be interpreted as follows. At pa.tisandhi-kaala, 11 akusala cetanaas (excluding uddhacca cetanaa) and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanaas (excluding the 2 abhi~n~naa cetanaas) condition the arising of the *19 rebirth consciousness*. At pavatti-kaala all the 12 akusala cetanaas and the 17 lokiya kusala cetanaas (excluding the 2 abhi~n~naa cetanaas) continue to condition the arising of the *32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas*. These can be split up as follows. (i). Apu~n~naabhisa"nkhaara (12 akusala cetanaas) conditions the arising of 7 akusala-vipaaka cittas. (ii). Pu~n~naabhisa"nkhaara (8 mahaa-kusala cetanaas and 5 ruupaavacara kusala cetanaas) conditions the arising of 8 kusala-ahetukavipaaka cittas, 8 mahaa-vipaaka cittas and 5 ruupaavacara-vipaaka cittas. (iii). Anenjaabhisa"nkhaara (4 aruupaavacara cetanaas) conditions the arising of 4 aruupaavacara-vipaaka cittas. So it should be understood that from the very first moment of conception in the mother's womb the kamma-resultant consciousness of the embryonic being is functioning, and it goes on functioning as life-continuum and seeing consciousness, hearing consciousness, etc., throughout the whole new life. Of course, it terminates as death-consciousness finally. ==================== [Han]: My understanding from the above is that in step (2) vi~n~naa.na means pa.tisandhi citta at the moment of conception, and 32 lokiya vipaaka cittas during the course of existence. They are conditioned by sa"nkhaara of the past life. ==================== [Step 3. Vi~n~naa.na-paccayaa Naama-ruupa.m.] [From BB's Guides, on page 296 of the CMA] Step (3): Dependent on consciousness arises mind-and-matter: Whereas in step (2) vi~n~naa.na refers exclusively to resultant consciousness, here it signifies both *resultant consciousness* and *kammic consciousness* of previous lives. The term "mind" (naama) denotes the cetasikas associated with resultant consciousness, the term "matter" (ruupa) denotes material phenomena produced by kamma. [From Dr Mehm Tin Mon's book] Step (3): Here, Vi~n~naa.na represents *two entities*: *vipaaka-vi~n~naa.na* and *kamma-vi~n~naa.na*. (i). *Vipaaka-vi~n~naa.na* means the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas mentioned in the second causal relation. (ii). *Kamma-vi~n~naa.na* means cittas associated with cetanaa-kamma, and *it refers back* to the 29 wholesome and unwholesome kammas we have described as sa"nkhaara. *This back-reference* is required because only kusala and akusala kammas, and not the vipaaka cittas, can produce 18 types of kammaja-ruupa. In naama-ruupa.m, naama indicates the 35 cetasikas which associate with the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas. In terms of groups of existence, the 35 cetasikas represent three mental groups, viz., vedanakkhandhaa, sa~n~nakkhandhaa and sa"nkhaarakkhandhaa. The second part, ruupa.m, means the 18 kammaja ruupas. To summarise, 32 lokiya-*vipaaka-vi~n~naa.nas* condition the arising of 35 cetasikas or three naamakkhandhaas, whereas 29 *kamma-vi~n~naa.nas* condition the arising of 18 kammaja-ruupas. These phenomena constitute the third causal relation. ==================== [Han]: My understanding from the above is that in step (3) vi~n~naa.na denotes two entities. (i) 32 lokiya-*vipaaka-vi~n~naa.nas* which condition the arising of 35 cetasikas or three naamakkhandhaas in this life. (ii) 29 *kamma-vi~n~naa.nas* which condition the arising of 18 kammaja-ruupas in this life. ==================== [Han]: As regards the excerpt from DN Mahaanidaana Sutta, here is the Pali text and the translation by BB. [Pali text]: 116. "'Namaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na'nti iti kho paneta.m vutta.m, tadaananda, iminaapeta.m pariyaayena veditabba.m, yathaa naamaruupapaccayaa vi~n~naa.na.m. Vi~n~naa.na~nca hi, aananda, naamaruupe pati.t.tha.m na labhissatha, api nu kho aayati.m jaatijaraamara.na.m dukkhasamudayasambhavo pa~n~naayethaa"ti? "No heta.m, bhante". "Tasmaatihaananda, eseva hetu eta.m nidaana.m esa samudayo esa paccayo vi~n~naa.nassa yadida.m naamaruupa.m. "Ettaavataa kho, aananda, jaayetha vaa jiiyetha vaa miiyetha vaa cavetha vaa upapajjetha vaa, ettaavataa adhivacanapatho, ettaavataa niruttipatho, ettaavataa pa~n~nattipatho, ettaavataa pa~n~naavacara.m, ettaavataa va.t.ta.m vattati itthatta.m pa~n~naapanaaya yadida.m naamaruupa.m saha vi~n~naa.nena a~n~nama~n~napaccayataa pavattati". [Translation by Bhikkhu Bodhi]: 22. "It was said: 'With mentality-materiality as condition there is consciousness.' How that is so, Aananda, should be understood in this way: If consciousness were not to gain a footing in mentality-materiality, would an origination of the mass of suffering, of future birth, aging, and death, be discerned?" "Certainly not, venerable sir." "Therefore, Aananda, this is the cause, source, origin, and condition for consciousness, namely mentality-materiality. "It is to this extent, Aananda, that one can be born, age, and die, pass away and re-arise, to this extent that there is a pathway for designation, to this extent that there is a pathway for language, to this extent that there is a pathway for description, to this extent that there is a sphere for wisdom, to this extent that the round turns for describing this state of being, that is, when there is mentality-materiality together with consciousness." The book by BB which is on line but cannot be downloaded is at the following link. http://books.google.co.th/books?id=kMDd3dQgqXsC&printsec=frontcover&dq=bhikkhu+B\ odhi+the+great+discourse&source=bl&ots=h15p61XDHD&sig=iG3woHiIuf-lbx4-tV4Pw6ey7K\ Q&hl=en&ei=rOtzTf2CDIjqrAeUnbzSCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CC\ YQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false ==================== [Han]: I cannot give my personal opinion on the above texts. Kindly forget about *my own thoughts* about the 29 cetanaas, as none of it quite makes sense to you. Respectfully, Han #114146 From: "philip" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:02 pm Subject: Micca sati (wrong mindfulness) philofillet Hi all I heard a reference to micca sati.(wrong mindfulness.) Whay is micca sati? Does it mean trying to have awareness so the citta is rooted in lobha and moha? If so, can a moment (or many moments) of micca sati be followed by a moment of samma sati? Thanks Metta Phil p,s Thanks Nina and Herman for your posts, I am on i-phone only for a couplw of days so can't answer until a bit later, #114147 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 1:39 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Micca sati (wrong mindfulness) nilovg Dear Philip, Op 21-mrt-2011, om 14:02 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I heard a reference to micca sati.(wrong mindfulness.) Whay is > micca sati? Does it mean trying to have awareness so the citta is > rooted in lobha and moha? If so, can a moment (or many moments) of > micca sati be followed by a moment of samma sati? ------ N: Miccha sati is one factor of the wrong path, miccha magga. Actually it is not a cetasika, because sati is always sobhana. It is generally lobha. One takes it for the right sati, but it is actually clinging, one misleads oneself. Yes, and akusala can be followed by sati which is aware of that moment. Any reality can be the object of satipa.t.thaana. One can learn the difference between sati and the moments without sati. But this takes time. Nina. #114148 From: Ken O Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Bkk - with K.Sujin Mar 2011 (2) was: concepts can lead to awakening ashkenn2k Dear Sarah >>KO: It does not matter in the difference between samantha and samadhi because >>samantha is path, samadhi is concentration. >> >... >S: What do you mean when you say "samatha is path"? What cetasika is samatha? >What cetasika is samadhi? >... >>Samadhi is part of samantha. >... >S: what do you mean by this? KO: samantha is another path, not as what you mean as 8NP, there are two methods, samantha and vipassana, samantha is the method, path is not the correct word to use. samandhi is just part of samantha >... >>Samadhi is not all of samantha as samantha includes virtue, sati, panna >.... >S: Again, is there samadhi now? Is there samatha now? Can there be micha samadhi > >now? Can there be micha samatha now? KO: can you direclty see rupa now or just nimattas or just concepts of nama and rupa. Unless you have direct experience what we see is just inferential experience of dhamma. Which text said only dhamma can only be pratice only as nama and rupa. also which text said mundane panna is the understanding of nama and rupa, Are you saying mindfullness, virtue are not part of samantha? Isn't listening and reading full of concepts. So what is the difference between listening and samantha. Ken O #114149 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:42 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 Sun, 6/3/11, Robert E wrote: > >I would also like to get the distinction between: > > a)>correct awareness of concept and what panna that may include; > > b)>correct awareness of namas and rupas and its pannas; > .... > S: a) Let's say it is a concept of a person, such as when metta arises. At such a moment, if panna arises, it knows how to think wisely about the person. In between the moments of metta, it can understand the nature and value of the metta (still as concepts) through wise reflection. The awareness which arises with the panna and thinking about the person prevents unwholesome states arising. For example, someone may be telling us about their difficult circumstances or we may be reading about the catastrophe in Japan. When there is awareness at such times, there is no sorrow or grief or proliferation with attachment or wrong view. When there is patience and consideration, sati arises and is mindful of what is wholesome and unwholesome at such times. Panna understands how to reflect wisely. This is why the Teachings stress that it's not the topic, but the way of reflection that is important. Very helpful, thank you very much, Sarah. So there is wise reflection about the nature and status of the concept, as well as the metta that is directed towards the conventional identity of the people involved, and the sati and panna guards the mind against arising of akusala or proliferations that would lead the cittas astray. So there is panna arising with regard to concepts, but a question remains for me as to whether this panna is equal or lesser to the panna that attends direct experience of dhammas. So, continuing to read below. > b) Now, there are various realities appearing, one at a time. For example, seeing appears, hearing appears, thinking appears, visible object, sound, hardness appear. Awareness is aware of just the reality which appears and panna knows its characteristic at that moment. There may be doubt, there's bound to be thinking....all just dhammas which can be known - not belonging to anyone or anything. So would the awareness of these dhammas be of the same type that is seeing the status of the concepts and the metta? Are all these objects arising for the same "type" of sati and panna? Are they all just equal objects arising for citta in this sequence of metta and awareness? > This is the Buddha's Teaching - the development of satipatthana. Even when there is wise reflection of one kind or another as in a), the purpose of the Teachings is to directly understand and be aware of such thinking, such metta, such attachment as just dhammas appearing now - all anatta. Are we brave enough to just "let go" and be aware of what appears now? (as K.Sujin always asks). Okay. Just a question - what is the value of the metta that is directed towards "people" when it is done "correctly" with wise reflection and understanding of its status? Why is there kusala value, merit, etc. to projecting metta towards conventional idea of people? Why is that kusala, since it does not contain direct understanding? > > and > c)>the distinction between sati with sampajanna, sati w/o sampajanna, and when it becomes satipatthana, and the role or type of panna in each of these. > .... > S: Great questions! Sampajanna (clear comprehension or wisdom) is panna. So sati is aware of a reality and panna/sampajanna knows that reality as it is. Satipatthana is the growth of such sati and panna which know dhammas/realities when they appear. This is the One Way. > ... Okay, good - just a clarification; when you say that satipatthana is the growth of such sati and panna, that is a little unclear to me. What kind of growth converts or grows or develops sati w/panna into true or full-blown satipatthana? Is it when all realities are known fully and clearly, or is it the quality of the sati and the clear knowing at that point? Are there degrees "below" satipatthana, and are there degrees of satipatthana once we are in that category? > >Hope I'm not overly confusing the issue here... > ... > S: All very helpful. Perhaps Pt will join back in:-) That would be nice. > p.s From Satipatthana Sutta and commentaries, transl by Soma; ... Good to read that, and to get the general idea that all these conditions and interacting elements perform and experience the experiential event, rather than a person of any kind. By seeing the details of the process, one is able to see clearly that there is no room or need for a person in that process. In fact, a person is a generality, rather than understanding the specifics of any operation. It is just a conceptual gloss over what actually takes place. So thanks, good to read. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #114150 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:47 pm Subject: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Rob E (& Howard), > > --- On Mon, 7/3/11, Robert E wrote: > >...It then becomes hard to fight the new meaning, unless you have that history at hand.� People can say "Well sabhava has *always* been around, it's an accepted Theravada term" - except that if we don't look into it we fail to notice that the word is the same but the meaning has evolved.� So it's good to know that to the ancients the word had a specific, benign meaning that is descriptive; and that over time it was evolved by certain movements into another way of reintroducing a controlling factor or an objective essence back into the "interior" of dhammas. > > >Most fascinating! > ... > S: I think you expressed this well. Meanings change. Even the Buddha used common, daily words (many of which you'll be familiar with from the Sanskrit terms used in a yoga context) and imbued them with totally new meanings - such as vivekka (seclusion). So many, you can find all your own examples! Yogi, niyama, nama.... we hear lots from our yoga. I've always had the feeling that Buddha was very good at taking common meanings of the day and converting them into new understandings. For instance, his use of the term Brahmin, as I recall, starts pointing towards those who are following the Noble 8f path, rather than traditional Hinduism. I've thought that the kind of analysis that those such as Patanjali did in the yoga sutras, including the Ashtanga, or eight-fold path of yoga, was a template for the Budda's Noble 8f Path, which he also expanded upon to create his 8 fold path. I think it's pretty smart to take a familiar template and expand upon it to create a new level of meaning, and before you know it, some of the meanings are completely different, while some of them, such as jhana/samadhi, are still useful in a new context. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = #114151 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:53 pm Subject: Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > Hi Rob E > > > Very good to hear that things are a little more normal in Tokyo after such a great disaster. I know that other areas are still suffering a lot, but glad that you are okay. I am all in favor of the world community coming in and helping to the fullest extent. > > > Yes, things have settled down. The earthquake, tsunami and nuclear meltdown were entirely about *me*, I've come to see that now. Whether or not I lose my job was all that mattered to me, sounds terrible to say, but we have to understand the defilements. > > Yesterday I was talking about compassion. I was trying to explain that most of the emotions that we feel when we watch a news report on earthquake victims are not "compassion", technically speaking, compassion cannot be accompanied by unpleasant mental feeling, so it is rarer than we think. Since she is interested in Buddhism, she was interested in that idea, though she couldn't agree. I said that if there is an impulse to do something to help the person in the report, that is getting closer to true compassion. I realized in my case, compassion is easier to understand in a very momentary way, when I am teaching English to shy or weird people, and they are struggling, there are many moments of compassion mixed in with the irritation I feel or whatever, there is an accumulated tendenced for virya and other factors to leap forward to help that troubled person sitting in front of me, and those are the immediate moments of compassion of which the characteristics can be understood. I suppose such moments can also arise when watching TV coverage, in my case they don't seem to, mostly sadness or aversion or irritation at the reporters for exploting people's suffering etc. But everyone has different accumulations. > > But yes, if I'm honest this disaster was all about me, I'm afraid, and so far my company has weathered the storm, and things have calmed down so my beloved Tokyo (*my*) will not be haunted by paranoia about radiation. Maybe. Today it is raining and Naomi is worried about "black rain." Good to see the admixture of things that arise around this kind of tragedy. Seeing the defilements clearly, as you say, while acknowledging moments of real compassion and having some understanding of what constitutes those, seems like a good level of understanding to have. I think when we see a little more clearly there will be a long period of time where we will mostly see "junk" that is not very appealing, such as selfish desires for security, etc. I would think it was weird if you didn't see a lot of that. That is probably why for most of us and most of the time it is easier to rationalize and suppress the knowledge of all the akusala reactions we are experiencing "within." But it's good to open the eyes and see what is really there. I think when you can see the garbage you are in a more purified state than if you are feeling just fine and not seeing much of anything. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = #114152 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:59 pm Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? epsteinrob Hi Herman. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "egberdina" wrote: > "When asked if the holy life is lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of virtue, you say, 'No, my friend.' When asked if the holy life is lived under the Blessed One for the sake of purity in terms of mind... view... the overcoming of perplexity... knowledge & vision of what is & is not the path... knowledge & vision of the way... knowledge & vision, you say, 'No, my friend.' For the sake of what, then, my friend, is the holy life lived under the Blessed One?" > > "The holy life is lived under the Blessed One, my friend, for the sake of total Unbinding through lack of clinging." > > In short, the Buddhist texts are very clear that Buddhism is not about sila, samadhi or panna. I well understand the reservations you express from time to time, Phil, about what motivates some of us here. If it is the ultimate wish of people here to exist understanding their universe, then they have not realised the basics of suffering. Thanks, Herman, it is very helpful to have you pop in and get down to the bottom line of the path. That can actually have an effect on things, and for me, it was a good jolt. Hope you are having a really neat time in Tasmania. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #114153 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, > The quest for nibbana without understanding present dhammas is for >ignorattons :-) And I wonder about the nature of "understanding". Is understanding limited to having a lot of theoretic knowledge, and being able to answer 100s of very obscure questions of Abhidhamma and so on? Or is the understanding that is required of a different sort? Like an understanding that allows one to let go of clinging? In this sense, it seems that meditation masters who can detach, at least temporary from the sense world, have more real-life understanding than those who just read and think. There are plenty of suttas (I've given quotes before) that say that even a paragraph (or so) of Dhamma may be enough. Not much theory can be condensed in a paragraph... IMHO, it is the actual behaviour that indicates the level of understanding. Is there clinging or not? If there is clinging, then one has not understood the dangers of it. If one cannot let go of 5 senses even temporary, then what kind of real and useful understanding is there? If one can't let go of clinging temporary, then how can we even talk about permanent eradication of clinging? With metta, Alex #114154 From: "philip" Date: Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:15 pm Subject: Variegated citta philofillet Hi all Does variegated citta (vicitta) refer to the content of what we think about, which seems to be what is said on p52-53 of SPD or does it refer to all the different permutations of cittas according to accompanying cetasikas? Thanks, for now while I am on i-phone only there may be only questions from me and no ability to respond to posts, can't figure out yet how to cut and paste. and trim etc. A blessing in disguise, I'd say,in my case. A period for asking and listening. Please a ccept my thanks in advance on all my questions. Metta, Phil #114155 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:46 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Alex, ------------ <. . .> > A: And I wonder about the nature of "understanding". Is understanding limited to having a lot of theoretic knowledge, and being able to answer 100s of very obscure questions of Abhidhamma and so on? ------------ KH: I wonder how you can wonder that. You have heard people at DSG talking about pariyatti (right theoretical understanding) haven't you? Every one of those people has said it was just one of three levels of right understanding - pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha. Why do you think right understanding might be limited to pariyatti? -------------------------- > A: Or is the understanding that is required of a different sort? Like an understanding that allows one to let go of clinging? -------------------------- KH: Without right theoretical understanding, your phrase "let go of clinging" could mean anything. Sensible discussion would be impossible, until we all knew what we were talking about. What do you mean by those terms? What mechanisms are involved? --------------------------------------- > A: In this sense, it seems that meditation masters who can detach, at least temporary from the sense world, have more real-life understanding than those who just read and think. --------------------------------------- KH: People who have read and thought correctly will know what is meant by 'clinging' and 'cessation'. Therefore, they can begin to follow the path. The meditator, if he has *not* read and thought correctly about those things, cannot possibly follow the path. ----------------------- > A: There are plenty of suttas (I've given quotes before) that say that even a paragraph (or so) of Dhamma may be enough. Not much theory can be condensed in a paragraph... ----------------------- KH: If you read those suttas in the context of the entire Dhamma you will know that there is death and rebirth. Therefore, you will know how someone can appear to understand quickly in this life. It is because the hard work, and the gradual progress, has taken place in previous lives. -------------------------------- > A: IMHO, it is the actual behaviour that indicates the level of understanding. Is there clinging or not? If there is clinging, then one has not understood the dangers of it. -------------------------------- KH: What does that mean? Do you mean right behaviour comes first, followed by right understanding? ------------------------------------------ > A: If one cannot let go of 5 senses even temporary, then what kind of real and useful understanding is there? > If one can't let go of clinging temporary, then how can we even talk about permanent eradication of clinging? ------------------------- KH: Talk of 'letting go of senses' and 'letting go of clinging' will mean different things to different people. The only way is to sort out these things from the beginning. Get our theoretical understanding of the Dhamma right, and *then* have opinions! Ken H #114156 From: "egberdina" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 5:49 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? egberdina Hi Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, all, > > > The quest for nibbana without understanding present dhammas is for >ignorattons :-) > > And I wonder about the nature of "understanding". Is understanding limited to having a lot of theoretic knowledge, and being able to answer 100s of very obscure questions of Abhidhamma and so on? > > Or is the understanding that is required of a different sort? Like an understanding that allows one to let go of clinging? > > In this sense, it seems that meditation masters who can detach, at least temporary from the sense world, have more real-life understanding than those who just read and think. > > There are plenty of suttas (I've given quotes before) that say that even a paragraph (or so) of Dhamma may be enough. Not much theory can be condensed in a paragraph... IMHO, it is the actual behaviour that indicates the level of understanding. Is there clinging or not? > > If there is clinging, then one has not understood the dangers of it. > > If one cannot let go of 5 senses even temporary, then what kind of real and useful understanding is there? > > > If one can't let go of clinging temporary, then how can we even talk about permanent eradication of clinging? > > You ask very worthwhile questions, and make many good points. Wisdom / understanding can be known only by what it does. If there is no "cutting off", there is no wisdom / understanding. That is why the notion of needing a theoretical right understanding first is so absurd; for there is no such thing as a theoretical "cutting off". If there is understanding, there is "cutting off". That is the path and its practice, which are inseparable. Cheers Herman #114157 From: "philip" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:01 am Subject: Understanding? (Herman and Alex) philofillet Hi Alex and Herman Good questions about understanding, but I'm a bit confused about why you are defining as book knowledge. Don't you understand, for example, how the defilements take visible object and proliferate on it, and don't you agree that understanding, for example, the difference between a moment of vipaka (e.g visible object) and the fresh kamma that arises from it is valuable? That is just one way understanding can develop for all of us in daily life. Without a theoretical understanding of vipaka and kamma we couldn't have hoped to begin to understand such a topic. But if you are talking about accumulating theoretical knowledge that can't (as far as I can see) be applied by our understanding of experience through the sense doors (as an example of such teachings, I will choose the adverting cosciousness and other cittas in the 17 cittas process) I suppose I can see your point, but I feel such topucs are good food for the mind anyways even if not immediately helpful. So I'm wondering if you are confusing understanding with knowledge? Understanding is certainle developed through our wise or unwise response to sense door objects, surely no turning away let alone cutting off without understanding the object and our response to it, is there? Metta, Phil #114158 From: "philip" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:23 am Subject: Papanca dhammas. - Sarah philofillet Hi Sarah I'm going to be having a lot of questions and don't want to overload Nina. Also as I said at breakfast that day I think your understanding and/or knowlwdge of Dhamma combined with your generosity and friendliness and patience give you the necessary accumulations to be a really great Dhamma twacher so I would like to tap your tree a bit more often I think. My first quwstion is about papanca dhammas, the Pali is something like nimitta nupuccanaya, I heard you mention them, that we are engrossed in them. My questions are 1) is it these papanca dhammas that comprise the dream worlds we live in and 2) doesn't papanca always refer to concepts? Papanca dhammas sounds oxymoronic. Thanks, no hurry, only when you have time. Metta, Phil #114159 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Variegated citta nilovg Dear Phil, Do not worry about not answering. Op 22-mrt-2011, om 0:15 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Does variegated citta (vicitta) refer to the content of what we > think about, which seems to be what is said on p52-53 of SPD or > does it refer to all the different permutations of cittas according > to accompanying cetasikas? ------ N: I quote from Kh Sujin's Survey of Paramattha Dhammas: Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] the nature of anatta (was: Re: wisdom and doing) nilovg Dear Colette, Op 20-mrt-2011, om 17:09 heeft colette het volgende geschreven: > STOP BANTYING TRIFFLES WITH ME. I may just say that Nina is Dukkha. > lol I am clearly working from the position of the YOGACARA/MIND- > ONLY school of Buddhist philosophy. But, as long as one person > remembers the Shurangama Sutra then it's power will never be lossed. ------- N: That is all right, no problem. We could let the matter rest for the time being. ----- Nina. #114161 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:19 am Subject: What I heard, Dhamma in Cambodia. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Sujin: < (Camb ): When hardness is experienced through touch, everybody can say that this is hard. When people experience heat, taste something hot or sweet, or when they hear a sound, they know it and they can say what it is. The reason is that citta is the reality which can experience an object through each of the doorways. Seeing- consciousness sees what appears through the eyes and hearing- consciousness hears sound. When odour appears, smelling-consciousness experiences odour. When flavour is experienced, tasting-consciousness experiences flavour. If something is experienced through body- contact, body-consciousness is the reality that experiences hardness naturally, and everybody knows this. However, when samm-sati, right mindfulness, arises and is aware, there is understanding based on listening, which realizes that there is no self. It realizes that there are elements or dhammas, each with their own characteristic, that can appear through the doorways of the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue, the bodysense and the mind- door. The realities that appear through the bodysense are the characteristics of softness, hardness, cold, heat, motion or pressure appearing at this moment. However, when they have appeared, they pass away extremely rapidly. Mind-door process cittas arising afterwards know that there is a table or a chair, but whenever sati arises and is aware, the mind-door process cittas do not know concepts, but they know realities. Understanding, although it is still very slight, can begin to realize that there are dhammas, each with their own characteristic, and at such moments there is no need to think of them or to speak about them. There can be understanding of the characteristic of hardness that appears at such a moment, it can be realized as a kind of dhamma that has the characteristic of hardness. When hardness appears, there are two kinds of realities: hardness and the experience of hardness. The moment of sati and of pa that gradually begins to understand realities, is very short, because such a moment arises and then falls away extremely rapidly. It is impossible that there is immediately clear understanding of realities. There can gradually be awareness and more understanding of the characteristic which experiences, of the reality which experiences hardness; there will be more understanding of that characteristic as it really is. This is satipahna, but not yet of the level of paivedha, the direct realization of the truth. One only begins to develop correct understanding of the characteristics of realities we used to take for people, for beings, for this or that thing. When sati arises and is aware of what appears, one begins to understand that there are only different dhammas, each with their own characteristic, and that this is reality. When sati arises people will know when they are forgetful of realities and when there is sati. Knowing the difference between the moment of sati and the moment of forgetfulness is the beginning level of its development, and people can only know this themselves. Other people cannot know with regard to someone else what sati is aware of, whether sati arises or not. Each person can only know this for himself. > ---------- Nina. #114162 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 10:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Papanca dhammas. - Sarah sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Just home and just printing out messages to read later with Jon. Your helpful qus have just caught my eye, so in brief for now - --- On Tue, 22/3/11, philip wrote: >My first quwstion is about papanca dhammas, the Pali is something like nimitta nupuccanaya, I heard you mention them, that we are engrossed in them. .... S: Papa~nca, sometimes translated as proliferation, refers to the kind of thinking that goes on most of the day with lobha, mana (conceit) or wrong view (all rooted in lobha, of course). All those pleasant dreams and fantasies we have throughout the day are papa~nca - not understanding anything about present realities. The nimitta anupya~njana, often translated as "signs and details" usually refer to what is grasped by such thinking with papa~nca. Hearing just hears sound, seeing just sees visible object, but immediately there is the grasping at the signs and details and there are long stories about Japan, earthquakes and so on. In reality, there is just one world appearing at a time - no people, no country, no earthquakes - just the world of sound, just the world of visible object appearing and so on. If there were no sounds or visible objects, there would be no papa~nca, no proliferating on account of what is heard and seen. Gradually by understanding what appears, the world as it is at this moment, the proliferation, the thinking with lobha and moha is understood for what it is - the grasping after phantoms of our imagination only. From the Sama~nnapaala Sutta: "And how, great king, does the bhikkhu guard the doors of his sense faculties? Herein, great king, having seen a form with the eye, the bhikkhu does not grasp at the sign or the details. Since, if he were to dwell without restraint over the faculty of the eye, evil unwholesome states such as covetousness and grief might assail him, he practises restraint, guards the faculty of the eye, and achieves restraint over the faculty of the eye." This is the restraint, the guarding which can only be developed through the understanding of realities. If there is no understanding now that what is seen is just visible object, what is heard is just sound, there will always be the idea of people and things and events which are experienced through the senses and there will never be detachment from the idea of atta (person or thing or substance) which experiences and is experienced. ... Oh, I haven't even got to your questions! >My questions are 1) is it these papanca dhammas that comprise the dream worlds we live in .... S: I'd turn it round a little and say that we live in dream worlds because of these papanca dhammas - i.e thinking with lobha during the day and night. ... >and 2) doesn't papanca always refer to concepts? Papanca dhammas sounds oxymoronic. ... S: The dhammas refer to the lobha, mana and ditthi which, as you suggest, think with lobha-rooted cittas about various concepts and fantasies. Like now, what are we dreaming about? Kaeng Krajan? Nibbana? Our next meal? Is there any understanding of the world - the dhamma appearing - right now? ... >Thanks, no hurry, only when you have time. ... S: :-) Appreciated. Metta Sarah ======= #114163 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? sarahprocter... Hi Herman, --- On Mon, 21/3/11, egberdina wrote: >I replied to a post of yours which insisted that the purpose of the Buddha's teachings was all about understanding. My answer consisted of quoting the Buddha's disciples to say that the Buddha's teachings were about Nibbana. If you have a problem with this, then you have a problem with the Buddhas teachings. >Sila, samadhi, panna are stepping stones only. Why chose a favourite stepping stone? .... S: I'm happy to agree that the final goal is the full realization of nibbana, the eradication of all defilements and the end of the cycle of becoming. Would you agree that the Buddha taught 4 Noble Truths? Can Nibbana ever be realised without a direct understanding of the other Noble Truths? As Ven Samahita recently quoted: >The entire world is in flames, all the entire world is blazing up in smoke! The entire world is burning. The entire world is decaying and vanishing... But, that which does not vanish or burn, which is experienced by the Nobles, where Death has no entry, in that stilled silence mind finds sweet delight. Samyutta Nikya 1.168 What is the world that is in flames at this moment? The khandhas, the namas and rupas appearing one at a time - dukkha on account of being inherently impermanent and unsatisfactory. It's not a matter of choosing "a favourite stepping stone", but of understanding what the Buddha was talking about when he said "the entire world is blazing up in smoke". The unconditioned can only be realized when the conditioned is fully known. Metta Sarah ===== #114164 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah & Herman - (Herman, nice to see you here! :-) I think the two of you are making valid points. In a message dated 3/22/2011 7:16:52 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Herman, --- On Mon, 21/3/11, egberdina wrote: >I replied to a post of yours which insisted that the purpose of the Buddha's teachings was all about understanding. My answer consisted of quoting the Buddha's disciples to say that the Buddha's teachings were about Nibbana. If you have a problem with this, then you have a problem with the Buddhas teachings. --------------------------------------------- Ultimately about nibbana and its realization, certainly. But the stepping stones you mention next must be stepped upon to reach the destination. The Buddha did say that his teaching is about suffering and the end of suffering. We can't leave our jail cell unless we are aware of the fact that we are imprisoned, the nature of that imprisonment, and the steps needed to "break out". ------------------------------------------- >Sila, samadhi, panna are stepping stones only. Why chose a favourite stepping stone? ------------------------------------------- A mistake to pursue only a favorite, of course. ----------------------------------------- .... S: I'm happy to agree that the final goal is the full realization of nibbana, the eradication of all defilements and the end of the cycle of becoming. Would you agree that the Buddha taught 4 Noble Truths? Can Nibbana ever be realised without a direct understanding of the other Noble Truths? As Ven Samahita recently quoted: >The entire world is in flames, all the entire world is blazing up in smoke! The entire world is burning. The entire world is decaying and vanishing... But, that which does not vanish or burn, which is experienced by the Nobles, where Death has no entry, in that stilled silence mind finds sweet delight. Samyutta Nikya 1.168 -------------------------------------------------- That is such a wonderful quote!! Such a graphic word picture of samsara & nibbana! Sarah, I own a copy of SN, but I'd like an online version of this sutta. Do you have a link for it? --------------------------------------------- What is the world that is in flames at this moment? The khandhas, the namas and rupas appearing one at a time - dukkha on account of being inherently impermanent and unsatisfactory. ----------------------------------------------- And - importantly - craved, hated, and misconstrued. --------------------------------------------- It's not a matter of choosing "a favourite stepping stone", but of understanding what the Buddha was talking about when he said "the entire world is blazing up in smoke". The unconditioned can only be realized when the conditioned is fully known. ----------------------------------------------- And seen through! Also, as for "fully known," that should not mean encyclopedically. It should mean in terms of the tilakkhana. To know that a desert mirage is illusory is sufficient to prevent one from trying to drink sand, there being no need to know of the physics of heat and vision. The simsapa-leaf metaphor applies here as well. ----------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah ================================ With metta, Howard Illusion and Reality ... /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) ____________________________ ... Are Each Right Here /What's the need for a well if water is everywhere? Having cut craving by the root, One would go about searching for what?/ (From the Udapana Sutta) #114165 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? truth_aerator Hello Sarah, all, >S:Would you agree that the Buddha taught 4 Noble Truths? Can Nibbana >ever be realised without a direct understanding of the other Noble >Truths? But the crucial question is about the nature of this understanding. Is understanding merely involves the right theoretical knowledge, or does it means having such a vision that it translates into mental and physical action? How can one person theoretically know very little, but be Awakened - vs someone who knows 1000x as much and isn't on the path? Clearly it is not the amount of information that matters... BTW, very often in the suttas the realization of 4NT comes after 4 Jhanas.... With metta, Alex #114166 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:49 pm Subject: Re: Understanding? (Herman and Alex) truth_aerator Hello Phil, all, >P: Don't you understand, for example, how the defilements take >visible object and proliferate on it, I do understand it theoretically. But when it comes to real life, I still react negatively to events, even though I "know better". So I question that type of "understanding" that remains in theory only, especially considering that in Buddhism understanding was not merely for the sake of understanding - but for results ... So if there are no results to show for it, then no cause was fulfilled (or it was a wrong cause). Furthermore, we can use a lot of technical jargon, but do we really understand these words we talk about with all seriousness? Or are we talking about things we yet don't perceive and understand (even if that) only in words? Yes, learning (pariyatti) is a prerequisite for practice (patipatti). But what kind of cause is it? Necessary or sufficient? One can learn about swimming, but that doesn't mean that one will jump into the pool and actually swim. Learning to swim in theory, does not necessarily implies physical action of swimming to occur later on, but it is prerequisite for swimming. Also when it comes to asking advice, what is better: To ask those who have "first hand experience" or only book knowledge? If one has a question about survival on the street, for example, it is one thing to ask some smart person who was not in that situation vs asking someone who has been there. The latter advice may be more real and useful and have specifics that cannot be known through mere theoretical means. We may read many times about "citta rooted in lobha/dosa/moha" etc. But are we able to recognize such states when they arise? More importantly, can we recognize the drawbacks of such state and counter act it? Or do we just passively submit to the onslaught of kilesas? Can these things be *accurately* and completely written in the book? Or are the words in the book are merely pointers which show where and how to look? Obviously in real life one type of citta can manifest itself in many many different and subtle ways - more than one could describe in a book. I am not against learning, I am all for it. But once one learns the ABC's, what then? It may take a year or two of daily reading to finish Suttas and additional books. What then? Some thoughts. With metta, Alex #114167 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 8:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > > Hi Alex, > > ------------ > <. . .> > > A: And I wonder about the nature of "understanding". Is understanding limited to having a lot of theoretic knowledge, and being able to answer 100s of very obscure questions of Abhidhamma and so on? > ------------ > > KH: I wonder how you can wonder that. You have heard people at DSG talking about pariyatti (right theoretical understanding) haven't you? Every one of those people has said it was just one of three levels of right understanding - pariyatti, patipatti and pativedha. > > Why do you think right understanding might be limited to pariyatti? Ken, you have also said that the understanding that is more direct, beyond pariyatti, is for those with "but a little dust in their eyes," and not for you or for us, and we have also heard many times that it will take many lifetimes for pariyatti to give forth to more direct understanding, so it is an issue. It means that we are to be content with indirect, theoretical understanding for our entire lifetime, according to this view. No one denies that understanding Dhamma is important and that Right View is a most important component of the path. The problem is that in dismissing any form of direct practice, and insisting on pariyatti only as the path for most people, you really intellectualize the path. And it becomes a serious possibility that many people following such an approach will wind up spinning wheels in their head and going further away from direct seeing, rather than closer, and deeper and deeper into conceptualization and mental proliferation. If a balance were admitted between right intellectual understanding and direct seeing as a practice, ie, meditation and discernment in everyday life, rather than seeing all such practice as self-based effort, one could have a much greater assurance that the theoretical understanding was being applied to something more than its own mental fine-tuning and further elucidation of even more erudite concepts and constructs. That is my view in any case, that if you want to see if your theoretical understanding is correct, you have to apply it and see if it works or not, not wait for many lifetimes to see if it all works out without ever testing it along the way. > -------------------------- > > A: Or is the understanding that is required of a different sort? Like an understanding that allows one to let go of clinging? > -------------------------- > > KH: Without right theoretical understanding, your phrase "let go of clinging" could mean anything. Sensible discussion would be impossible, until we all knew what we were talking about. And how well do you have to understand the concept before you see if it allows for actual letting go or not? There's got to be a balance there, and there's got to be a way of testing and developing your understanding correctly in this lifetime, not wait for another in the distant future. > What do you mean by those terms? What mechanisms are involved? > > --------------------------------------- > > A: In this sense, it seems that meditation masters who can detach, at least temporary from the sense world, have more real-life understanding than those who just read and think. > --------------------------------------- > > KH: People who have read and thought correctly will know what is meant by 'clinging' and 'cessation'. Therefore, they can begin to follow the path. And will non-clinging, detachment and release actually take place because they now know "what is meant" by clinging and cessation? Will their knowing what is referred to by Buddhist terms lead to letting go and actual development of the path? Under what conditions:? What else is needed to actualize the path? > The meditator, if he has *not* read and thought correctly about those things, cannot possibly follow the path. Well you've given two delightfully well-contrived straw man alternatives here, Ken: The reader/thinker who "knows" what is what, and the non-reading/non-thinking meditator who does "not know." How about the actual third correct alternative, which is the meditator who reads, thinks and understands and whose understanding is further developed, tested and refined through meditation? That is the true alternative to both of your straw men, and is also the correct way of balancing the factors necessary to follow the path. > ----------------------- > > A: There are plenty of suttas (I've given quotes before) that say that even a paragraph (or so) of Dhamma may be enough. Not much theory can be condensed in a paragraph... > ----------------------- > > KH: If you read those suttas in the context of the entire Dhamma you will know that there is death and rebirth. Therefore, you will know how someone can appear to understand quickly in this life. It is because the hard work, and the gradual progress, has taken place in previous lives. And what if such a person is now present in this life? What if someone here already understands the Dhamma easily and quickly and has moved on to direct insight or jhana. Are you saying this is impossible? When do all these developmental lifetimes take place, all in the future? Surely they may have happened previous to this lifetime, and such a person may be naturally ripe for meditation now. > -------------------------------- > > A: IMHO, it is the actual behaviour that indicates the level of > understanding. Is there clinging or not? If there is clinging, then one has not understood the dangers of it. > -------------------------------- > > KH: What does that mean? Do you mean right behaviour comes first, followed by right understanding? No, it means the proof is in the pudding, that's all; that you will see whether someone is actually acting in a non-clinging manner. If someone is mired in self-concept and reactivity, they may not have actually achieved detachment or let go of self-view. > ------------------------------------------ > > A: If one cannot let go of 5 senses even temporary, then what kind of real and useful understanding is there? > > > If one can't let go of clinging temporary, then how can we even talk about permanent eradication of clinging? > ------------------------- > > KH: Talk of 'letting go of senses' and 'letting go of clinging' will mean different things to different people. The only way is to sort out these things from the beginning. Get our theoretical understanding of the Dhamma right, and *then* have opinions! Who says that Alex doesn't already have a good theoretical understanding of Dhamma? Why do you always put this off for the future? It is not a mystery that "letting go of senses" refers to jhana, but since you have not found this topic of interest, you have not engaged in a thorough enough theoretical study of this area, so you don't see what it means. As for letting go of clinging, it means that when an experience arises, whether it is an object-experience or an experience of a thought-form or feeling or perceptual construct, that clinging or attachment does not arise, or if it does arise, one immediately sees that with mindfulness and understanding and lets it go. One would eventually see immediately that whatever arises is anatta and dukkha and would not attach to it. Buddha has spelled out these alternatives in sutta, and that would be evidence of an advanced stage of development. Best, Robert E. = = = = = = = = = = #114168 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:38 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Robert E (and Alex), ---- <. . .> > RE: Ken, you have also said that the understanding that is more direct, beyond pariyatti, is for those with "but a little dust in their eyes," and not for you or for us, and we have also heard many times that it will take many lifetimes for pariyatti to give forth to more direct understanding, so it is an issue. It means that we are to be content with indirect, theoretical understanding for our entire lifetime, according to this view. ----- KH: Maybe so, but I have also argued there is only the present moment - no permanent being that lives again and again. If there is only the present moment, what difference would it make if enlightenment was going to happen next week, or not until another trillion trillion lifetimes down the track? ----------------------- > RE: No one denies that understanding Dhamma is important and that Right View is a most important component of the path. ----------------------- KH: Actually, a lot of people do deny that. ------------- > RE: The problem is that in dismissing any form of direct practice, and insisting on pariyatti only as the path for most people, you really intellectualize the path. ------------- KH: The "problem" is that I can't make myself understood. I am trying to say there is only the present moment - only the presently arisen conditioned dhammas. Apart from those dhammas there is no practice of *any* kind. ------------------------ > RE: And it becomes a serious possibility that many people following such an approach will wind up spinning wheels in their head and going further away from direct seeing, rather than closer, and deeper and deeper into conceptualization and mental proliferation. ------------------------ KH: 'Moving closer' and 'moving further away' are the functions of right understanding and wrong understanding respectively. They take place in a single moment, or not at all. ------------------------------- > RE: If a balance were admitted between right intellectual understanding and direct seeing as a practice, ie, meditation and discernment in everyday life, rather than seeing all such practice as self-based effort, one could have a much greater assurance that the theoretical understanding was being applied to something more than its own mental fine-tuning and further elucidation of even more erudite concepts and constructs. -------------------------------- KH: You can't have it both ways; either the real world exists in a single moment, or it doesn't exist at all. ------------------ > RE: That is my view in any case, that if you want to see if your theoretical understanding is correct, you have to apply it and see if it works or not, not wait for many lifetimes to see if it all works out without ever testing it along the way. ----------------- KH: I think I can see now that the theory holds up. There is nothing that can't be explained in terms of conditioned dhammas. I am not saying I have all the explanations. You would have to ask other DSG people for that. :-) ------------------------- <. . .> > > KH: Without right theoretical understanding, your phrase "let go of clinging" could mean anything. <. . .> > RE: And how well do you have to understand the concept before you see if it allows for actual letting go or not? ------------------------ KH: How do you understand Alex's concept of "letting go of clinging"? How does he understand it? Does he mean alobha (non-clinging) which is a reality that arises purely by conditions? Or does he mean something else? Surely only one understanding of the term be in accordance with the Dhamma. Only one can lead to direct right-understanding. -------------------------- > RE: There's got to be a balance there, and there's got to be a way of testing and developing your understanding correctly in this lifetime, not wait for another in the distant future. --------------------------- KH: I agree there can be a kind of balance between conventional existence and ultimate existence. There doesn't have to be a complete contrast. And so a student of the Dhamma lives a balanced, natural, lifestyle - neither striving for enlightenment nor doing nothing towards it. --------------------------- <. . .> >> KH: People who have read and thought correctly will know what is meant by 'clinging' and 'cessation'. Therefore, they can begin to follow the path. > RE: And will non-clinging, detachment and release actually take place because they now know "what is meant" by clinging and cessation? Will their knowing what is referred to by Buddhist terms lead to letting go and actual development of the path? --------------------------------------------- KH: Yes, in a way. Any moment of right intellectual understanding is kusala, and therefore free of ignorance and clinging. Admittedly, it is a poor cousin of direct, supramundane right-understanding, but the difference is only a matter of degree. ------------------- RE: Under what conditions:? What else is needed to actualize the path? ------------------- KH: Nothing apart from conditions is needed. ------------------------------- >> KH: The meditator, if he has *not* read and thought correctly about those things, cannot possibly follow the path. > RE: Well you've given two delightfully well-contrived straw man alternatives here, Ken: The reader/thinker who "knows" what is what, and the non-reading/non-thinking meditator who does "not know." ------------------------------- KH: I think neither Alex nor I was engaged in straw-man tactics *on this occasion.* :-) I think Alex was giving an example of a jhana master (someone who had temporarily suppressed defilements) *as distinct from* a Dhamma-student (someone who had listened to the Dhamma, considered it, and understood how it applied to the present moment). --------------------------- > RE: How about the actual third correct alternative, which is the meditator who reads, thinks and understands and whose understanding is further developed, tested and refined through meditation? That is the true alternative to both of your straw men, and is also the correct way of balancing the factors necessary to follow the path. -------------------------- KH: Is there such a further-development? As I understand the factors leading to enlightenment there is no mention of anything apart from good friendship, listening, considering and understanding. --------------- <. . .> >>> A: IMHO, it is the actual behaviour that indicates the level of understanding. Is there clinging or not? If there is clinging, then one has not understood the dangers of it. > >> KH: <. . .> Do you mean right behaviour comes first, followed by right understanding? >> > RE: No, it means the proof is in the pudding, that's all; that you will see whether someone is actually acting in a non-clinging manner. -------------- KH: I think the example Alex gave was of a jhana master who had suppressed detachment without having theoretical knowledge of the Dhamma, as compared to a someone who was still vulnerable to attachment, but who had theoretical knowledge. -------------------------- <. . .> > RE: Who says that Alex doesn't already have a good theoretical understanding of Dhamma? Why do you always put this off for the future? It is not a mystery that "letting go of senses" refers to jhana, --------------------------- KH: Yes, "letting go of senses" was a reference to jhana, but does Alex, or any of us, know what jhana is? ------------------------------------ > RE: but since you have not found this topic of interest, you have not engaged in a thorough enough theoretical study of this area, so you don't see what it means. ------------------------------------- KH: Any student of conditionality will know more about jhana than most meditators will ever know. --------------------------------------------- > RE: As for letting go of clinging, it means that when an experience arises, whether it is an object-experience or an experience of a thought-form or feeling or perceptual construct, that clinging or attachment does not arise, or if it does arise, one immediately sees that with mindfulness and understanding and lets it go. --------------------------------------------- KH: I can basically agree with that. Even though the terminology needs tweaking! :-) Ken H #114169 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Mar 22, 2011 11:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 3/22/2011 8:38:09 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: KH: Maybe so, but I have also argued there is only the present moment - no permanent being that lives again and again. If there is only the present moment, what difference would it make if enlightenment was going to happen next week, or not until another trillion trillion lifetimes down the track? =============================== I never quite get what you mean by this. Were there any (then) present moments yesterday? Sure, at any tIme there is just "the present moment," for that is what we call it. Certainly right now, there is not what was five minutes ago! All it *seems* to me that you are saying is that at any time, it is that time and no other. But that is obvious and without any depth to it. Could you please explain what it is that you are talking about? Perhaps - seriously - it is something far from obvious that many of us could benefit greatly from, and that would be really wonderful. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #114170 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:37 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Howard, Thanks for the question, I'll give it a go. :-) ------------- <. . .> > H: I never quite get what you mean by this. Were there any (then) present moments yesterday? Sure, at any tIme there is just "the present moment," for that is what we call it. ------------- KH: The presently arisen dhammas have had no past and will have no future. They last for only one moment, and so an entirely new world is created and destroyed every moment. ------------------------ > H: Certainly right now, there is not what was five minutes ago! All it *seems* to me that you are saying is that at any time, it is that time and no other. But that is obvious and without any depth to it. ------------------------- KH: I am only giving my understanding of the Dhamma, and the Dhamma is described as being profoundly deep with nothing obvious about it. Anyone can say there is obviously only the present moment and there is obviously no permanent soul etc, but almost no one can truly believe that. If we did truly believe it we would have no fear of death and no craving for future existence. ------------------------------------- > H: Could you please explain what it is that you are talking about? Perhaps - seriously - it is something far from obvious that many of us could benefit greatly from, and that would be really wonderful. ------------------------------------- KH: The only way to know anatta is to know dhammas. That is because only dhammas are anatta (concepts are not). Therefore, when we say there is only the present moment we have to be talking about conditioned namas and rupas (as described by the Buddha). No other understanding of the present moment will do. Furthermore, there has to be complete, direct, verification of the Dhamma. No matter how well we know it in theory, we still have to know from direct experience that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that all dhammas are anatta. Ken H #114171 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 6:46 am Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > ----- > > KH: Ma > > If there is only the present moment, what difference would it make if enlightenment was going to happen next week, or not until another trillion trillion lifetimes down the track? > > _________ Dear Ken presumably it does matter somewhat as each "present moment" conditions the succeeding one. The Book of The Gradual Sayings I, "Long time have you been caught as dacoits or highwaymen or adulterers, and through your being beheaded, verily more blood has flowed upon this long way than there is water in the four oceans. "And thus have you for long time undergone sufferings, undergone torment, undergone misfortune, and filled the graveyards full, verily long enough to be dissatisfied with every form of existence, long enough to turn away and free yourself from them all." and this sutta doesn't even mention the times when one is born into hell realms and stays there for up to an aeon enduring unremiting pain. robert #114172 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 9:07 am Subject: What I heard, Dhamma in Cambodia 2. nilovg Dear friends, Kh Sujin: (from Cambodia 2): One will really understand that everything is dhamma when sati is aware of the characteristics of realities as they appear one at a time, so that pa can develop and realities appear as just dhammas, not self. Pa should be developed continuously so that it is understood that everything is dhamma and there is no doubt about the characteristics of naama and ruupa, no matter through which doorway realities appear, through the sense-doors or through the mind-door. When we are seeing and satipa.t.thna does not arise, there is no way of knowing that seeing is an element or reality that experiences something; this characteristic is real, and it does not have shape or form. We should consider the reality that is the element which experiences something: there is no ruupa that is blended or mixed with it. Then it will be clear that the characteristic of the element that experiences is penetrated through the mind-door. Such a moment is different from the moments that everything seems to appear together, such as visible object that seems to appear together with seeing. Pa of the level of satipa.t.thna that investigates the characteristics of realities should develop to the degree of pa.tivedha, the realization of the truth, when realities appear as they are through the mind-door. If pa has not been developed to that degree it is impossible to penetrate the characteristics of realities. Soun: Just a moment ago we spoke about thinking, which is of the level of pariyatti. Would you please explain the difference between pa.tipatti and pa.tivedha? Sujin: I just explained about dosa that everyone knows, but people think that it is self who is angry. However, when sati arises the characteristic of dosa appears and they will begin to gradually understand that that characteristic is just a reality, a dhamma. We should consider whether the idea of self who is angry is different from knowing that it is just a reality with that characteristic. We believe that it is self who is angry, but we should know that it is a reality with its own characteristic. We should thoroughly know everything that appears now, be it colour, sound or thinking. Satipa.t.thna should be aware of all realities so that it can be understood that everything is truly dhamma. The study of the Dhamma should be in conformity with the pa that is to be developed stage by stage. The first stage is knowing that everything is dhamma, and this is the stage of pariyatti. The stage of pa.tipatti, practice, is satipa.t.thna which knows the true characteristics of the realities that are appearing and which begins to realize that they are just dhammas. There is a considerable difference between the idea of self who is angry and the understanding that that characteristic is only a kind of dhamma. Everything that appears through the sense-doors and the mind-door are different kinds of dhamma. When sati arises, it is known through which doorway the reality sati is aware of appears. ********* Nina. #114173 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:07 am Subject: Re: Understanding? (Herman and Alex) (p.s to Sarah and Nina) philofillet Hi Alex > >P: Don't you understand, for example, how the defilements take >visible object and proliferate on it, > > I do understand it theoretically. But when it comes to real life, I still react negatively to events, even though I "know better". So I question that type of "understanding" that remains in theory only, especially considering that in Buddhism understanding was not merely for the sake of understanding - but for results ... So if there are no results to show for it, then no cause was fulfilled (or it was a wrong cause). Ph: Well, I hear you. I think people are right when they say that our desire for results can often be akusala, rooted in lobha (all about lobha, if you don't like the technical feel of "rooted") but I suppose there can be kusala chanda for results as well. And I also know what you mean about real life and negative reaction to events, and I would say that the kind of samattha meditation I do which may or may not have anything to do with samattha conditions more@reslilience and patience re events, I don't know why it does, but it does, I know that. So I can appreciate your insistence on the importance of jhanas, if even this yoga like samattha I do conditions more patience response to objects, what could jhanas do for stepping away from sensual objects? And I do not know how people can be so forthright in saying it is not possible to develop jhanas in this day and age, that seems untruthful. But I know my lifestyle, and my hindrances, and I know that jhanas seem far-fetched to me. But that could change if my lifestyle changes and the hindrances lift somehow... As for so-called "vipassana meditation" I have been completely turned off it by the whole cult-like build up around modern masters, especially Goenka. The other day was a good example, at Dhammawheel, when a newcomer to Buddhism or meditation asked about awareness of the breath and he was told that he should immediately go to a "residential retreat" for hands on teaching. From a Goenka teacher? I mean, come on, how on earth did the Buddha's teaching come to be mainly dispensed in this day and age by so-called masters within modern traditions such as Goenka and Mahasi and for that matter Ajahn Lee (the sort-of-samattha style I use, which I enjoy but consider very suspect) which take such liberties with the Buddha's word, I find it all kind of weird and unfortunate. I use meditation as a kind of yoga, and make sure I keep in mind that the techniques I have learned do not appear anywhere in the tipitika. But I must say that it is effective in conditioning resilience to objects, that is true, so I should keep an open mind. I know you agree that it is by understanding the four noble truths that liberation happens. I can't really debate any further about whether intellectual understanding and consideration of deep teachings in daily life conditions useful understanding or not, I've offered some examples of how I think it does, but I really can't say, I want to step away from the debate. (As usual!) I always admire your energetic endeavour re Dhamma, keep it up! Now I will return to asking questions and listening, I do have faith that intellectual understanding of the Buddha's teaching (and Abhidhamma, whether it came later or not, I don't care anymore, it is at the very least a direct extension of the Buddha's teaching elucidated with deep understanding, I am confident of that.) I'll leave it there. Metta, Phil #114174 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:18 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Papanca dhammas. - Sarah philofillet Hi Sarah and Nina Thanks so much Sarah! Glad I asked. And thank you Nina for your explanation of variegated cittas. Metta, Phil #114175 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 8:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 3/23/2011 1:37:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Howard, Thanks for the question, I'll give it a go. :-) ------------- <. . .> > H: I never quite get what you mean by this. Were there any (then) present moments yesterday? Sure, at any tIme there is just "the present moment," for that is what we call it. ------------- KH: The presently arisen dhammas have had no past and will have no future. They last for only one moment, and so an entirely new world is created and destroyed every moment. ------------------------------------------------------------ Okay. I agree with that, viewing, in fact, there to no remaining at all - but just leave it that I agree with that. Whatever "is" right now never was before and never will be again. Change is relentless. -------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------ > H: Certainly right now, there is not what was five minutes ago! All it *seems* to me that you are saying is that at any time, it is that time and no other. But that is obvious and without any depth to it. ------------------------- KH: I am only giving my understanding of the Dhamma, and the Dhamma is described as being profoundly deep with nothing obvious about it. ------------------------------------------------------------- The Dhamma and "our understanding of the Dhamma" are typically not at all the same. So, far, what you are saying would come as a surprise to very few folks, it seems to me. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Anyone can say there is obviously only the present moment and there is obviously no permanent soul etc, but almost no one can truly believe that. --------------------------------------------------------- Now, here again you are saying "only the present moment." You have not yet explained the "depth in that. The past WAS but is not, and the future WILL BE but is not. What more are you asserting? You seem to be amazed by the fact that at any instant, that is all there is. Now, it is *good* to be amazed at what is real. That I will definitely assert. I think of all-that-is as amazing and even miraculous. But is it the fact of there being "only now" at any time that you are pointing to as deep or your amazed understanding of that? I agree with you when you say "almost no one can truly believe that," with "belief" including depth of understanding and appreciation. Almost everyone sees superficially. Of course, there are degrees of superficiality and of depth, and we should not readily exaggerate the relative lack of superficiality or the relative possession of depth in ourselves. ----------------------------------------------------------- If we did truly believe it we would have no fear of death and no craving for future existence. ---------------------------------------------------------- Do you also think that there is no change, that there will be no future - no NEW moments that will then be "now"? Were that so, bodhi becomes an impossibility. I think that at this point you are making a jump in reasoning that does not follow or make sense. ---------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------- > H: Could you please explain what it is that you are talking about? Perhaps - seriously - it is something far from obvious that many of us could benefit greatly from, and that would be really wonderful. ------------------------------------- KH: The only way to know anatta is to know dhammas. That is because only dhammas are anatta (concepts are not). --------------------------------------------------------- Certainly is there were no anicca there would be no anatta. Do you deny anicca? And do you do so because of the assertion "There is only now"? Anicca is impermanence. It precludes reality being static. Every moment is "now," but the content of that "now" changes constantly. That is paradoxical and amazing and even miraculous, but it is so. ------------------------------------------------------- Therefore, when we say there is only the present moment we have to be talking about conditioned namas and rupas (as described by the Buddha). No other understanding of the present moment will do. ------------------------------------------------------- There is no conditionality without there having been prior moments (that were , then, "now"). ------------------------------------------------------ Furthermore, there has to be complete, direct, verification of the Dhamma. No matter how well we know it in theory, we still have to know from direct experience that all conditioned dhammas are anicca dukkha and anatta, and that all dhammas are anatta. ----------------------------------------------------------- Complete agreement here. ---------------------------------------------------------- Ken H ================================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #114176 From: philip Coristine Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 12:55 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Understanding? (Herman and Alex) (p.s to Sarah and Nina) philofillet Hi again, As usual I made a lot of blanket statements, this time about onsight meditation. I've developed a negative view based on observations at a different internet forum, a silly way of coming to a conclusion. The fact is my lifestyle doesn't suit intensive meditation practice and retreats, perhaps there is envy of those whp apply themselves dilgently to meditation and make the necessary sacrifices to go on retreats. The Burmese sayadaws in particular are very stirring on Dhamma, slow motion walking and other peculiarities aside, they have surely helped to keep Abhidhamma alive and I have learned a lot from them, how foolish of me to dis them. Metta, Phil #114177 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:00 pm Subject: Re: Understanding & Amount of theory in pages truth_aerator Hello Phil, KenH, all, >Ph: As for so-called "vipassana meditation" I have been >completely >turned off it by the whole cult-like build up around modern masters, >especially Goenka. That is why it is good to see what the suttas have to say, rather than rely on modern teacher's interpretation. As for relying on interpretation, one doesn't (and perhaps shouldn't) go outside of, lets say, Patisambhidamagga and Visuddhimagga. There is a big potential problem with reading modern commentary of sub-commentary of commentary on a sutta. The Buddha was the best, Ven. Sariputta was the 2nd best, and the rest are below. IMHO there is a danger of learning wrong views by reading/hearing some modern works, unless they don't offer their own interpretation and stick to authoritative sources. So more reading (of them) may add incorrect theory little by little, and that may be counterproductive. I am all for learning. If one trusts Classical Mahavihara Theravada, then the best book is probably the Visuddhimagga. There is approximately 700 main pages + notes for the rest ~250 pages. If one reads 10 pages per day, then one will read basically all main stuff in <3 month. Some books that more or less organize Buddha's message in the the suttas may take few hundred pages (such as Life of the Buddha). Eventually, a year of intense theoretical study may be much more than enough. Then what? Putting it into practice. I am sure that it is possible to cram all the necessary amount of theory for Arhatship in under 100 pages. I am sure that if the Buddha was here to instruct a person, the personal material could probably be fit in 10 pages. Those 10 pages would be considered explanation in detail. Brief explanations necessary for Arhatship could be as little as paragraph long. So even 10 pages could be an overkill. The rest of theory may be good for scholarly purposes, and or for study after Arhatship. Ex: Ven. Sariputta learned most (99%) of the material after Arhatship. Same with some other great Bhikkhus as well. And until one is on the path, there is danger of misinterpreting what one has read. Entire Essence of Dhamma could be summed up in one sentence as "nothing is worth clinging to" . So this phrase should be a guiding principle in interpretation of the meaning of Dhamma. Here is the catch. We can cling not only to material things, but to "ideas" and "teachings" as well. So by studying more than enough for Arhatship, one could actually be cultivating craving for mind/objects and or craving for becoming [someone who knows a lot]. Also the more interpretation we read, the more possibility of subtle mistranslations or misunderstandings to accumulate. So little by little some corruptions, and cumulative errors could gather through a "broken-telephone" sort of thing, and resulting in accumulation of cumulative errors to form wrong views. IMHO, With best wishes, Alex #114178 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:29 pm Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ---- <. . .> > RK: presumably it does matter somewhat as each "present moment" conditions the succeeding one. ---- Why should that make us care about the future? There are still just dhammas "rolling on." Ken H #114179 From: "philip" Date: Wed Mar 23, 2011 10:35 pm Subject: Characteristics of cittas? philofillet Hi Nina and all Often we are encouraged to notice or be aware or consider or investgate the characteristics of cittas. 1) Can characteristics of cittas be understood easily? I feel I have no understanding of "characteristics of cittas." 2) Do those verbs such as "notice" or "consider" or "investigate" or "be aware of" have different meanings that indicate different degrees of sati or panna or othrer factors such as samadhi or do you use them synonymously? As always, thanks in advance. #114180 From: philip Coristine Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 3:37 am Subject: Vipaka not accumulated (Sarah) philofillet Hi Sarah, I heard that akusala and kusala are accumulated, but vipaka not because it falls away, is completely gone. That seems like an important topic. What if there is painful body sense as vipaka, it is not accumulated but mental feeling accompanying akysala response is accumulated? To understand this better, which of the paccayas should I understand better? (I heard something about "it is just self wanting to understand better" and that is certainly true in my case, still don't understand why that is so terrible, any motivation to developing intellectual understanding of Dhamma is better than no motivation, in my opinion.) Only when you have time, Sarah, thanks. Metta, Phil #114181 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics sarahprocter... Dear Han, --- On Mon, 21/3/11, han tun wrote: >It will be from BB's Guides and Dr Mehm Tin Mon's book. >They probably got these from the Commentaries. >If you do not believe in the Commentaries, please stop at this point and please erase the rest of my current message. .... S: As you know, I "believe" the commentaries, but like the Tipitaka itself, I believe we have to read and consider very carefully. As BB has admitted before, there are errors in the Guide notes and some have been amended accordingly, so I prefer not to just accept them without checking. .... H:>[Step 3. Vi~n~naa.na-paccayaa Naama-ruupa.m.] [From BB's Guides, on page 296 of the CMA] Step (3): Dependent on consciousness arises mind-and-matter: Whereas in step (2) vi~n~naa.na refers exclusively to resultant consciousness, here it signifies both *resultant consciousness* and *kammic consciousness* of previous lives. The term "mind" (naama) denotes the cetasikas associated with resultant consciousness, the term "matter" (ruupa) denotes material phenomena produced by kamma. .... S: As mentioned, I've always understood that vi~n~naa.na refers to resultant consciousness, patisandhi (birth) and subsequent vipaka cittas here as well and the commentary to the Mahaanidaana Suta suggests the same to me. I don't have other commentaries to check, but will check again when I'm next back in Australia. It may be that what BB's Guide notes and Dr Mehm Tin Mon's good book are indicating is that the accumulation or 'force' of kamma (sankhaara from past lives) is accumulated in each citta so in this sense is included in vi~n~naa.na, along with all asaya-anusaya, ready to bring its result at the appropriate time. As you know, with a couple of exceptions, kamma always brings its result later and the vipaka cittas, such as seeing and hearing arising now and the kammaja rupas, such as eye-sense and ear-sense, arising now are the result of kamma from past lives. I don't understand Dependent Origination so much as "steps" as a description of dhammas conditioning other dhammas in a number of very complex ways. Therefore, although avijja is only specified in "step one" its conditioning power manifests throughout the cycle. The same applies to tan.ha and kamma. As you have pointed out, the 3 vatta (rounds) of kilesa, kamma and vipaka ensure that there is no escape from sa.msaara unless the defilements are completely eradicated. ... >[From Dr Mehm Tin Mon's book] >Step (3): Here, Vi~n~naa.na represents *two entities*: *vipaaka-vi~n~naa.na* and *kamma-vi~n~naa.na*. >(i). *Vipaaka-vi~n~naa.na* means the 32 lokiya-vipaaka cittas mentioned in the second causal relation. >(ii). *Kamma-vi~n~naa.na* means cittas associated with cetanaa-kamma, and *it refers back* to the 29 wholesome and unwholesome kammas we have described as sa"nkhaara. *This back-reference* is required because only kusala and akusala kammas, and not the vipaaka cittas, can produce 18 types of kammaja-ruupa. .... S: I think the commentary explained, that like the king and his retinue, the patisandhi citta (conditioned by sa"nkhaara) is given as conditioning (directly or indirectly) the 18 kammaja-ruupa. Of course, these are all conditioned and produced by the past sankhaara as pointed out here. We can say that the sa"nkhaara conditions the vi~n~naa.na and the naama-ruupa too. In any case, I don't think we have any significant disagreement here. We both agree that at this moment there are various vipaka cittas arising and kammaja-ruupas, all conditioned by past kamma due to ignorance about the Four Noble Truths. On account of these moments of seeing, hearing and other "results" of kamma, akusala and kusala cittas arise leading to further akusala and kusala kamma and so the cycle goes on. Only the development of insight and the stages of enlightenment lead to the removal of the bricks of sa.msaara. I thank you for helping me to reflect further on the Cycle, for your helpful references and apologise for any offence unintentionally caused. Metta Sarah ====== #114182 From: "c7carl" Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? c7carl --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Ken - > > In a message dated 3/23/2011 1:37:46 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > kenhowardau@... writes: > > > Hi Howard, > > Thanks for the question, I'll give it a go. :-) > > ------------- > <. . .> > > H: I never quite get what you mean by this. Were there any (then) > present moments yesterday? Sure, at any tIme there is just "the present moment," > for that is what we call it. > ------------- > > KH: The presently arisen dhammas have had no past and will have no future. > They last for only one moment, and so an entirely new world is created and > destroyed every moment. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Okay. I agree with that, viewing, in fact, there to no remaining at > all - but just leave it that I agree with that. Whatever "is" right now never > was before and never will be again. Change is relentless. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Just curios. Is there any synchronicity of "present moments"? Is Ken's "present moment" coincidental with Howard's "present moment"? Thanks, Carl #114183 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipaka not accumulated (Sarah) sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, You're getting my attention with your headings! --- On Thu, 24/3/11, philip Coristine wrote: > I heard that akusala and kusala are accumulated, but vipaka not because it falls away, is completely gone. .... S: As you know, all conditioned dhammas arise and fall away and are "gone completely" then. I think that what you heard is that vipaka cittas, such as seeing and hearing, are the results of past kamma and don't accumulate at all. This moment of seeing doesn't condition another moment of seeing - all moments are the result of past kamma. On the other hand, the attachment to what is seen now does accumulate. Preferences for particular visible objects and sounds accumulate because of the tendencies of ignorance, attachment, memory, thinking and so on. The signs are marked and thought about, the "nimitta anubya~njana" are grasped, on and on. The real problems in life are never what is experienced through the sense doors, but the "reactions", the kilesa (defilements) on account of them. .... >That seems like an important topic. What if there is painful body sense as vipaka, it is not accumulated but mental feeling accompanying akysala response is accumulated? To understand this better, which of the paccayas should I understand better? .... S: Yes, the painful bodily experience (which experiences a tangible object through the body-sense) is vipaka - the result of past kamma. (Remember that vipaka only refer to cittas, moments of consciousness). At the moment of painful bodily experience, there is painful bodily feeling (dukkha) and this is also vipaka***. This was even so for the Buddha and the arahats who also experienced "the first dart". As you point out, it is the "akusala response", the 'second dart" which is accumulated - the dosa (aversion) and domanassa (unpleasant mental feeling)- on account of what was experienced through the body-sense and recalled again and again. The moment of unpleasant bodily experience is so brief, but it seems to last because of the many, many mind-door processes which follow with aversion. Just like it seems that we live in a "light world", so it seems at such times as though we live in a "painful world". The abhidhamma helps a lot to bring us closer and closer to the Truth at this moment as you've been pointing out to others. [*** although we refer to "painful bodily experience, painful bodily feeling", we need to understand that these are cittas and cetasikas too - "mental" namas. They are referred to as "bodily" because they are experiencing the tangible objects through the body-door and the base or "vatthu" is body-sense.] ... > (I heard something about "it is just self wanting to understand better" and that is certainly true in my case, still don't understand why that is so terrible, any motivation to developing intellectual understanding of Dhamma is better than no motivation, in my opinion.) .... S: I find it's helpful to always be reminded that it's the citta now, the dhammas arising now, that are the entire world at this moment. For example, are we agitated when we don't understand a point or by what someone has written, thinking that it's not true Dhamma? We think it's the "issue" that's important, but actually, the reality is the dosa or attachment to one's own view at such a moment. Again and again we forget that there is seeing now or other dhammas that can be directly known. Understanding Dhamma in order to understand the Truth, rather than yet again trying to get something for "Me" is a helpful reminder, I find. The Dhamma always comes back to this very moment - only ever the "now" as Ken H always stresses so well. ... >Only when you have time, Sarah, thanks. .... S: Thx for the helpful qus and consideration. Metta Sarah p.s. Did you see the 4 pics Jon loaded? Naomi may wish to see them too, since she encouraged you to take the trip. I was chatting yesterday to a Japanese friend at my yoga studio. We talked a little about how the thinking and the fear were the present problem. As Nina wrote and quoted to Tadao so helpfully, understanding more about kamma and vipaka is a condition for equanimity now. ======= #114184 From: Rajesh Patil Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:41 am Subject: Re: WILL YOU Forward this? rajpat_00 Thanks 4 reminding. Definitely .... we will fwd it and implement it. Karuna (compassion) is love for human beings only. The Buddha went beyond and taught maitri (metta). Maitri is love for living beings. (The Buddha and His Dhamma - Book III, part V Section III-3) with metta Rajesh Make India Buddhist --- On Thu, 24/3/11, ANUP wrote: From: ANUP Subject: [The Buddhist Circle] FW: WILL YOU Forward this? To: BuddhistCircle@yahoogroups.com, Apana_HR@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, 24 March, 2011, 10:59 AM Subject: WILL YOU Forward this? Hi Friends, Plz. forward this message to maximum people because they need you. Summer is here and its going to be equally harsh to the animals around us. Kindly do your tiny bit by keeping a bowl of fresh water out side your balcony or garden. "Until one has loved an animal, part of their soul remains unawakened." 95% WON'T FORWARD THIS, WILL YOU? rajiev@ +91-9977883600 #114185 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 1:12 am Subject: Energy is The Chief Root Hero! bhikkhu5 Friends: Energy is The Chief Root Hero of all Success! Arahat Nāgasena once told King Milinda : Your majesty, like a man might reinforce a house that was falling down with an extra piece of wood, & being thus strengthened that house would not collapse. Even so, your majesty, has energy (viriya) the characteristic of reinforcing support & consolidating strength. By energy are no advantageous states lost. The Questions of King Milinda: Milinda-Pañha 36 http://www.budsas.org/ebud/ebsut045.htm Energy is the prime state of a chief hero, a champion, a conqueror! Its characteristic is enthusiastic and forceful thrust of exertion. Its function is the supporting foundation of associated states. Its manifestation is a state of non-collapse of whatever is good. The proximate cause of energy is a sense of urgency that stirs up. Alternatively: Any source that stimulates and instigates energy. It is said by the Blessed One that one who is stirred and aroused by energy exerts and struggles properly. That leads to all success! Rightly instigated it should be seen as the root of all attainments! Visuddhimagga XVI 137 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=771100 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <....> #114186 From: han tun Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:50 am Subject: Re: Bkk - with Han & Phil, Mar 2011 (4): Breakfast Topics hantun1 Dear Sarah, [Sarah]: It may be that what BB's Guide notes and Dr Mehm Tin Mon's good book are indicating is that the accumulation or 'force' of kamma (sankhaara from past lives) is accumulated in each citta so in this sense is included in vi~n~naa.na, along with all asaya-anusaya, ready to bring its result at the appropriate time. As you know, with a couple of exceptions, kamma always brings its result later and the vipaka cittas, such as seeing and hearing arising now and the kammaja rupas, such as eye-sense and ear-sense, arising now are the result of kamma from past lives. [Han]: I strongly believe that they are arising now not only as the result of kamma from past lives, but also from the kamma of present life. This is my main contention. As you rightly pointed out, this indeed touches on my "dispute" with the Burmese friends. My point is if the present causes do not result in the present effects, what is the point of learning Di.t.thadhamma-vedaniya kamma (immediately effective kamma). But since then, I do not dispute with my friends any more. I take the Buddha's advice that kamma and its effects are in the field of the Buddha, and we cannot know the precise working out of the results of kamma, as per AN 4.77 Acintita Sutta: Unconjecturable. Only the Buddha can know all these things. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.077.than.html ================ [Sarah]: I don't understand Dependent Origination so much as "steps" as a description of dhammas conditioning other dhammas in a number of very complex ways. Therefore, although avijja is only specified in "step one" its conditioning power manifests throughout the cycle. The same applies to tan.ha and kamma. As you have pointed out, the 3 vatta (rounds) of kilesa, kamma and vipaka ensure that there is no escape from sa.msaara unless the defilements are completely eradicated. [Han]: Yes, avijjaa, ta,nhaa, and kamma are involved throughout the cycle of Dependent Origination. Please see below, the Twenty Modes of Dependent Origination. ================ [Sarah]: I think the commentary explained, that like the king and his retinue, the patisandhi citta (conditioned by sa"nkhaara) is given as conditioning (directly or indirectly) the 18 kammaja-ruupa. Of course, these are all conditioned and produced by the past sankhaara as pointed out here. We can say that the sa"nkhaara conditions the vi~n~naa.na and the naama-ruupa too. In any case, I don't think we have any significant disagreement here. We both agree that at this moment there are various vipaka cittas arising and kammaja-ruupas, all conditioned by past kamma due to ignorance about the Four Noble Truths. On account of these moments of seeing, hearing and other "results" of kamma, akusala and kusala cittas arise leading to further akusala and kusala kamma and so the cycle goes on. Only the development of insight and the stages of enlightenment lead to the removal of the bricks of sa.msaara. ------ [Han]: Here, I would first like to refer to the Twenty Modes (Aakaara) of Dependent Origination taken from Dr Mehm Tin Mons book. (1) Past Causes (Atiita Hetu) = avijjaa, sankhaara, ta.nhaa, upaadaana, kamma-bhava. (2) Present Effects (Va.t.tamana Phala) = vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa, vedanaa. (3) Present Causes (Va.t.tamana Hetu) = ta.nhaa, upaadaana, kamma-bhava. (4) Future Effects (Anaagata Phala) = vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa, vedanaa. When we look at the past period, we see only avijjaa and sa"nkhaara to be taken as the past causes. But avijjaa; is kilesa-va.t.ta dhamma; so also are ta.nhaa and upaadaana. Since these va.t.ta-dhammas occur together in the same citta, ta.nhaa and upaadaana must also be included in the *past causes*. Again sa"nkhaara is a kamma-va.t.ta-dhamma, and so also is kammabhava. Thus when sa"nkhaara is taken into account, kamma-bhava is also implicitly accounted for. So we have five dhammas viz., avijjaa, sa"nkhaara, ta.nhaa, upaadaana and kamma-bhava as the *past causes*. Vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa and vedanaa in the present period are the *present effects* of the *past causes*. Again in the *present period*, ta.nhaa, upaadaana and kamma-bhava can act as the *present causes* for *future rebirth*. As reasoned above, when ta.nhaa and upaadaana are taken into account, avijjaa is also implicitly accounted for. Furthermore, sa"nkhaara must also be grouped together with kamma-bhava. So we get ta.nhaa, upaadaana; kamma-bhava, avijjaa and sa"nkhaara as the *present causes* which will condition the rebirth-process in the *subsequent life*. In the *future period*, only jaati and jaraa-mara.na are present. They represent becoming, decay and death, respectively. The question arises here as to which entities come into being, decay and die. The answer is: Vi~n~naa.na, naama-ruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa and vedanaa come into being, decay and die. The arising, the existing and the dissolving phenomena of these entities are taken as jaati, jaraa and mara.na, respectively. So we get vi~n~naa.na, naamaruupa, sa.laayatana, phassa and vedanaa as the *future effects*. Thus it is stated in Visuddhi Magga (Path of Purification) that: Five causes were there in the past; Five fruits we find in present life; Five causes do we now produce; Five fruits we reap in future life. We should note that, although Pa.ticcasamuppaada states one cause for one effect, and the effect becomes the cause to give rise to another effect, actually many causes take part at the same time to give rise to many effects in real life. ----- [Han]: Here also, the present causes produce results only as future effects, and not as present effects. This shows that my strong belief in Di.t.thadhamma-vedaniya kamma is wrong. Resigning myself to this fact, I must say that we do not have any more significant disagreement. ================= [Sarah]: I thank you for helping me to reflect further on the Cycle, for your helpful references and apologise for any offence unintentionally caused. [Han]: No apologies needed, Sarah. I always consider that you are more learned than me. Respectfully, Han #114187 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 12:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Vipaka not accumulated (Sarah) nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 24-mrt-2011, om 8:56 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > Did you see the 4 pics Jon loaded? ------ N: Lovely photos. Han with the UN medal, he looks very well, has not changed much. At KK I can imagine the setting outside so well. Nina. #114188 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Howard, -------- <. . .> KH: and so an entirely new world is created and destroyed every moment. > H: Okay. I agree with that, viewing, in fact, there to no remaining at all - but just leave it that I agree with that. --------- KH: OK, although I think there was some hesitation there. :-) --------------- > H: Whatever "is" right now never was before and never will be again. --------------- KH: Yes. -------------------- > H: Change is relentless. -------------------- KH: Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. If the universe is entirely new, where is the relentless change? -------------------------- <. . .> > H: Now, here again you are saying "only the present moment." You have not yet explained the "depth in that. -------------------------- I am saying, if our understanding of it is superficial then it won't have much impact on our lives. The impact increases with understanding. At the point where our understanding is complete (pativedha) the impact will be so great as to turn consciousness away from the world, towards nibbana. Ken H #114189 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:16 pm Subject: Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Carl, Thanks for joining in. --- > C: Is there any synchronicity of "present moments"? Is Ken's "present moment" coincidental with Howard's "present moment"? --- According to my understanding there is no such synchronicity. I recall previous DSG discussions where it has been explained that citta is "alone in the world". Utterly, completely, profoundly, alone! Ken H #114190 From: philip Coristine Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:02 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? philofillet Hi Robert and all Was waiting to see if there would be a follow up to this, but will now thank you for this reminder of the the Hell realms (modern people like to change them into psychological states and other easy dodgings.) When we were discussing recently A. Sujin laughed at my aspiration to try to avoid rebirth in the Hell realms, perhaps because there is no telling. In any case I am very grateful to be remunded to understand the present monent because development of understanding and the liberations it can help lead to is the only way to cut off the door to rebirth in the Hell realms, but I am also grateful that I still aspire to try to avoid behaviour that the Buddha defones as involving akusala kamma patha that can be of the degree to condition rebirth in the Hell realms. Ken, I will say this just once, but I think your unwillingness to be concerned about the results of your deeds (perhaps you are playacting) makes you "unafraid of wrongdoing" as defined by the Buddha. But you can say the only meaningful fear of wrongdoing is hiri/otappa that accompany kusala abstention and that is a deeply attractive understanding, that's for sure! Metta, Phil #114191 From: philip Coristine Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:18 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? philofillet Hi again Ken H, Robert and all I'll just add that Phil's concern about Phil's rebirth seems to me to be part of the baggage (raft?)that will be abandoned as understanding develops so it is possible that understanding has already abandoned such concerns for Ken H (I am not being facetious) so that is cool! Metta, Phil > #114192 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? upasaka_howard Hi, Carl - In a message dated 3/24/2011 3:33:34 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, c7carl@... writes: Just curios. Is there any synchronicity of "present moments"? Is Ken's "present moment" coincidental with Howard's "present moment"? Thanks, Carl ==================================== I'm sure I don't know! ;-) I hope so, else his & my conversations are meaningless!! LOL! With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #114193 From: "philip" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 1:31 am Subject: Re: Characteristics of cittas? philofillet Hi Nina Following up to this question, I just heard an interesting thing. We can find definitions of characteristics in books, but panna must understand the characteristic through experience, and it always diffetent, for example hardness is always different, coarse or fine etc...so perhaps there is no way for you to tell me how to understand what "charactetistics of cittas" means...but on the other hand they are defined in detail in Vism for example fir sone good reason , surely... But I have more confidence niw that panna can develop in a natural way to better understand the characteristics of cittas. When I wad in Thailand A. Sujin spoke about confidence for understanding and inspired me, fostered confidence. Metta, Phil --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Often we are encouraged to notice or be aware or consider or investgate the characteristics of cittas. > 1) Can characteristics of cittas be understood easily? I feel I have no understanding of "characteristics of cittas.., #114194 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:08 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Anatta, no contro vs meditation . Why is there a problem? kenhowardau Hi Phil, ------- > Ph: Ken, I will say this just once, but I think your unwillingness to be concerned about the results of your deeds (perhaps you are playacting) makes you "unafraid of wrongdoing" as defined by the Buddha. -------- KH: Yes, as an uninstructed worldling I am bound to have akusala motives most of the time. But I was just expressing my theoretical understanding of the Dhamma, I was not claiming to have any particular right motives or wrong motives. ----------------- > PH: But you can say the only meaningful fear of wrongdoing is hiri/otappa that accompany kusala abstention and that is a deeply attractive understanding, that's for sure! -------------- KH: That's the sort of thing I am talking about - Dhamma study as opposed to KenH study. I can understand the difference between hiri/otappa and dosa without claiming to have one more than the other. ------ > Ph: I'll just add that Phil's concern about Phil's rebirth seems to me to be part of the baggage (raft?)that will be abandoned as understanding develops so it is possible that understanding has already abandoned such concerns for Ken H (I am not being facetious) so that is cool! ----- KH: Let me put it this way, Phil. Do you remember your previous lives? Will the being that is born in your next life remember you? I think the same questions could be asked about this lifetime. Sure, there seems to be a memory of our selves from yesterday and last year etc, but that is a false memory. In reality there never was a self. Ken H #114195 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 7:23 am Subject: Re: Discussions in Bangkok with K.Sujin, Jan 2011(7) ptaus1 Dear Sarah and RobE, Thanks for your replies and discussion. > S: I wonder if you've started your new job? pt: Yes, a month ago, and still trying to do my old one at the same time. Same with old and new studies. So not much time at all (I am trying to sort out the yahoo return mail issue though - lot of back and forth but nothing definite atm). > S: When awareness arises and is aware of a reality, it doesn't know anything - it's just aware of what appears. pt: Ok, that makes sense, in that the function of sati is to be aware rather than to know, which is for panna to do. I'm still wondering though, in the cases when metta arises without understanding - that lack of understanding would relate only to the lack of right understanding of the satipatthana kind? Or would it also lack understanding of the samatha kind which recognises the value of metta? It seems strange to me that sati would arise without at least some sort of understanding, if even just on an intellectual level, which recognises the experience of metta as something other than pain for example. > S: p.s learning to use my new macbook air - great for travel (and the tiny studio flat we now live in here in HK) AND IT PRINTS:-) pt: Good news:) I'll miss fiddling with your old laptop though. Looks like its karma wasn't that bad after all, considering it got reincarnated as macbook air :) Best wishes pt #114196 From: "Christine" Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 7:57 am Subject: Dhammakaya replaces "anatta" with "atta" in their Tipitaka! christine_fo... Hello all, This matter was brought to my notice by Bhante Gavesako over at DW. `'It is all over the Thai web, another big scandal. It is Ven. Anil Dhammasakiyo who announced it to the reporters (he is the Nepalese Dhammayut monk who is a good scholar and kind of secretary to the old Sangharaja). Apparently they hired the foreign scholars and gave them salary of 15 thousand baht per month to replace e.g. "anicca dukkha anatta" with "anicca dukkha atta". I have come across some variant readings like that before, obviously errors, and if they discovered more in the Northern Thai manuscripts they might use it as a pretext for claiming their weird teachings as being orthodox. The article also mentions their cooperation with Richard Gombrich and the Buddhist studies centre in Oxford (it was not wise of him and the PTS to get involved with Dhammakaya in the first place). This seems to be a clever way of using 'critical scholarship' to promote their teachings about Nibbana as the real 'self': http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=7831 with metta Chris #114197 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:34 am Subject: Re: Q. [dsg] Re: Latent Tendencies, Ch 4, no 6. sarahprocter... Dear Han & Nina & all, I appreciate your studies and discussion. >Then, we have to read paragraphs 83 to 88. The most important points are in para 88 as follows: >"So too the clansman who feels revulsion (dispassion) for the occurrence of aggregates, undertakes to develop the four paths in his own continuity which is like the man's application of poison to the tree on all four sides." ... S: This is like the point Howard has made in my discussion with Herman - if one doesn't see and understand the poison through a comprehension and dispassion towards the khandhas arising and falling away now, enlightenment will never occur. ... >Han: Here, I like the way "the man's application of poison to the tree on all four sides" is compared to "the development of the four paths" or the four magga ~naa.nas, namely, sotaapatti magga ~naa.na, sakadaagaami magga ~naa.na, anaagaami magga ~naa.na, and arahatt magga ~naa.na. ... S: I see you liked this quote as well:-) .... --------------- >As regards the statement, < "But the four kinds of ‘arisen’, namely, (iv) by having soil [to grow in], (vi) with apprehension of an object, (vii) through non-suppression, and (viii) through non-abolition, can all be abandoned because a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, when it arises, nullifies a given one of these modes of being arisen." > >I think mundane knowledge refers to jhaanas or the mahaggata cittas, and supramundane knowledge refers to magga ~naa.nas. ... S: I read your further helpful note: >Here, the word "nullifies" is translated from "pahaatabba.m". Pahaatabba.m is a term which can be vikkhambhana-pahaana or samuccheda pahaana. So, I think the abandoning of all that can be abandoned by a given mundane or supramundane knowledge, is included in the word "nullifies". .... S: I would have thought that in the context of the quotes regarding the development of the path, that the mundane knowledge would refer to insight, vipassana, but I may have missed something. Metta Sarah ===== #114198 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 9:56 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhammas are bad (especially nama) sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & Phil, --- On Fri, 18/3/11, Robert E wrote: > > I vote for namas, which actually produce proliferations and delusions. Without akusala namas, rupa would be no problem at all. >I guess I'm saying that rupas are neutral. They are magnets for attachment, but only for akusala namas. The clinging, like the liberation, is always in the nama, not the rupa. .... S: Rob, your answers are just like the one K.Sujin gave:-) Phil, you asked about where it says that rupa is "bad" - you may be thinking of the references to rupa as "molested" and also how all conditioned dhammas are dukkha. Then as you say, there have been discussions and quotes about how we adorn and care for this body all day and find it so very precious. This is why, I understand, the Satipatthana Sutta begins with the rupas taken for the body as dhammas to be understood as just rupas, just dhammas. Here's a quote given before by Alex: "Venerable sir, just as a woman, man or child fond of adornment, when had bathed the head, was to be wrapped round the neck with the carcase of a snake dog or a human would loathe it and be disgusted of it. In the same manner, I abide disgusted and loathing this putrid body." http://metta.lk/tipitaka/2Sutta-Pitaka/4Anguttara-Nikaya/Anguttara6/09-navakanip\ \ata/002-sihanadavaggo-p.html 2) given by Ven Samahita (#100628) The body's nature: 300 bones, jointed by 180 joints, sewn into a chain by 900 sinews, plastered over with pieces of flesh, enveloped by inner membrane, fat and outer skin, with 9 openings constantly dribbling and trickling with tears, snot, saliva, slime, urine and excrement. Its bowels are inhabited by many fold bacteria, parasites and worms, the home of disease, the source of painful states, perpetually oozing from the nine orifices like a chronic open boil, and from thousands skin pores the stale sweat seeps, with bluebottles and their like buzzing round it, which when untended with tooth brush, washing, shaving, bathing, underclothing and dressing up looks just like a living corpse! In its natural wild then a body is a stinking nauseating repulsiveness, but by concealing its private parts under several cloths, by daubing it with various perfumes and salves, by pranking it with jewellery, it is faked up into a state being mistaken as 'I' & 'mine'! So men delight in women, and women in men, without perceiving the true nature of this body's characteristic foulness, now masked by this adventitious adornment. But in the ultimate sense, there is no place on any body even the size of an atom fit to lust after! Comically we loove the whole of this 'our precious temple, but when any such bits of it as head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, spittle, snot, excrement or urine have dropped off the body, then beings will not touch them! Though somewhat absurd, they are now ashamed, humiliated & disgusted with exactly the same matter as they adored before! But as long as any one of these disgusting things remains inside the body, though it is just as repulsive when inside, they take this body as agreeable, desirable, permanent, pleasant, & 'my beautiful self', since they are wrapped in the murk of ignorance and dyed with unseen and unrecognised affective greed for a physical self... Vism I 196" .... S: Is this the sort of thing? If there's no ignorance, no attachment, there's no problem. Metta Sarah ===== #114199 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Mar 25, 2011 10:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: notes from KK sarahprocter... Hi Phil (Azita & all), --- On Wed, 16/3/11, philip wrote: >Az :whatever the Buddha taught was about realities. >Ph: I don't agree with this yet, but I guess yes for sure at the very least indirectly about realities. .... S: I think that you agree that only realities actually exist and that the Buddha taught about the Truth? .... >Ph: I think I will stop there and see if I can add any of my own. :citta viveka(? means seclusion) and kaya viveka. I asked about why the Buddha taught kaya viveka, and I think I still don't understand that and still believe in some degree of physical seclusion that is *not* only about akusala clinging to "quiet place"... ... S: Before the Buddha, people also just taught about seclusion, viveka, in terms of physical seclusion. Rob E and I have been touching on how common concepts and terms were used by the Buddha with new meanings concerned with the liberation of the mind. So the Buddha taught that the only kind of seclusion that is of any value is the mental seclusion that is skilful and leads to the eradication of defilements. We may be physically alone now as we read and write, but unless there is any growth in understanding now, it's not sappaya (suitable) in any sense. .... >:killing. I am always confused about how there can be killing if there are actually no beings .... S: (interrupting) - I think there is killing, because there is an illusion of beings. If namas and rupas were truly understood as mere dhammas and kamma-vipaka were understood, there'd be no thought of killing... ... >but I was happy to hear an explanation of "citta stream of person A" and "citta stream of person B" (this was from someone else, not A.S) and how killing is ending of life factulty within a citta stream, and it is the vipaka of person B to receive the killing, so to speak, but of course caused by that person's own kamma, not the kamma that is the kiling done by person A which will have its own vipaka results for person B. If I have misinterpreted that, please clarify someone, I think it will have Ken H in a bit of a fit. :) ... S: You got the part about the kamma and vipaka right. The death consciousness (cuti citta) ultimately comes about because of past kamma. The deed, the new kamma will bring its own vipaka by way of unhappy birth and so on. Conventionally we may refer to "citta streams', but of course, in actuality, just one citta at a time, just the citta arising now. I don't think Ken will have a fit now:-) ... >Oh, I think I will stop there. No need to dredge up details now, I will be able to listen to the talks later. I think the main thing I will hold from this is be confident of understanding and "not enough" re such things as conventional kusala. If A Sujin denied that the Buddha taught conventional morality I would have to reject her teaching, but when she says "not enough", that is something I can completely agree with, it is only deeper understanding that can cut the ties that bind us. ... S: "Not enough", because dhammas, including those involved in "conventional morality" have to be understood as anatta. Metta Sarah p.s Azita - thx for sharing your notes....keep adding if inclined to do so! ======