#120000 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Nov 7, 2011 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Scott Many thanks. Exactly the sutta I had in mind. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > JOn, > > J: I recall some textual references, including suttas, but I don't have them at my fingertips. There is for example the sutta where the Buddha gives the simile of the farmer who sows his most fertile field first and the least productive one last. Perhaps someone can help with a reference on this point (anyone?). > > Scott: SN 42:7 The Simile of the Field. (translated from the Pali by > Maurice O'Connell Walshe) > > "[At Naalandaa the village headman Asibandhakaputta asks the Buddha:] "Does not the Blessed One dwell in compassion for all living beings?" > > "Indeed, headman, the Tathaagata does dwell in compassion for all living beings." > > "Well then, Lord, does not the Blessed One teach Dhamma in full[1] to some, but not so fully to others?" ... #120001 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:09 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, S: "...perhaps we can say the meaning is that ***there must be sati at anytime***, stressing, as you point out repeatedly, that the development must be natural ('pokketi cerun sati'). It *must* be like this, otherwise there's self and wrong practice when there's an idea of sati on particular occasions or being aware of particular objects." Scott: Yeah. In other words, when sati arises naturally, and only then, there *must* be 'mindfulness.' Sati *must* be present now in order for it's function to be in effect. Scott. #120002 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving sarahprocter... Dear Scott, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: Yeah. In other words, when sati arises naturally, and only then, there *must* be 'mindfulness.' Sati *must* be present now in order for it's function to be in effect. .... Sarah: Or simply, 'sati must arise naturally - anytime at all, like now!' Metta Sarah ===== #120003 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, Sarah: Or simply, 'sati must arise naturally - anytime at all, like now!' Scott: Yeah! Scott. #120004 From: "philip" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 1:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving philofillet --- Hi Sarah and Scott > Sarah: Or simply, 'sati must arise naturally - anytime at all, like now!' > > Scott: Yeah! Ph: I don't think you have to go to interpret that "there should be sati all the time." It feels like you are spinning it. Fortunately the content of the post in question makes it clear A Sujin hasn't gone Mahasi on us: "We read texts in order to understand realities, and sati may arise while reading, or it may not arise, or it may arise later on. If we do not try to manipulate sati and it arises, it is sammaa- sati. We do not have to wonder whether there should be sati and when there should be sati, there should be sati all the time. However, we should beware not to fix on it, or try to have it or to wish for it while discussing Dhamma, reading texts or by being alone. Then there will be little result of all such efforts." That says it all, any idea of an imperative on sati is dismissed. Phil #120005 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 2:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving nilovg Dear Phil, Op 7-nov-2011, om 15:53 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > > That says it all, any idea of an imperative on sati is dismissed. ----- N: Nicely summarized, Nina. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] #120006 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 2:35 am Subject: Re: Anniversaries Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nilovg Hi Howard, you are always so kind, thank you for your good wishes. I hope you and Rita will have a good year. We just went to the urological (sorry spelling) surgeon, for the outcome of several tests. No bone cancer which is good. He wants to see Lodewijk in six months, the usual thing they say. Op 7-nov-2011, om 13:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > P. S. In August of 2012 Rita & I will celebrate our 45th anniversary, > conditions allowing of course. ;-) #120007 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 2:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nilovg Dear Sarah, thank you for the text I sent on to Lodewijk. To support mother and father, to cherish wife and children....A peaceful occupation: yes, the diplomatic service is sure a peaceful occupation. One learns so much. Nina. Op 7-nov-2011, om 11:00 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > I think that most of us on the list reflect on the Greatest > Blessings in the Mangala Sutta, Indeed we're all very fortunate > here to associate with the wise, to be able to hear and consider > the Teachings and so on. #120008 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 3:55 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Dear Nina (and Sarah), > My idea: to suggest (ladies first) fitting practical examples (or > similes , metaphors etc. ) for the 52 cetasikas, one by one , so > that we know/remember what is meant by any mental state. > Possibly Nina or others have done something like that already > ( which could be discussed ).. ------ N: Excellent idea. Good to discuss, it is about reality right now, not theory. Would you start? D: fine .. hopefully not with a disagreement ;-) As the idea is to get a plausible concept of the different types , it is only reality right now in so far that we need to use contemplation of a state which is mentioned by the 52 terms , but not present now. I base on the index /translation below .. please suggest changes or another simple overwiew. with Metta Dieter The 52 Cetasikas at a Glance Ethically variable factors - 13 Annasammana cetasikas Universals - 7 Sabbacitta sadharana 1. Contact - Phassa 2. Feeling - Vedana 3. Perception - Sanna 4. Volition - Cetana 5. One-pointedness - Ekaggata 6. Life faculty - Jivitindriya 7. Attention - Manasasikara Occasionals - 6 Pakinnaka 1. Initial application - Vitakka 2. Sustained application - Vicara 3. Decision - Adhimokkha 4. Effort - Viriya 5. Joy - Piti 6. Desire - Chanda Unwholesome mental factors - 14 Akusala cetasikas / Papajatti Unwholesome universals - 4 Akusala sabbacitta sadharana 1. Delusion - Moha 2. Shamelessness - Ahirika 3. Fearlessness of wrong - Anottappa 4. Restlessness - Uddhacca Unwholesome occasionals - 10 Akusala pakinnaka Greed group - Lobha tri 1. Greed - Lobha 2. Wrong view - Ditthi 3. Conceit - Mana Hatred group - Dosa catukka 4. Hatred - Dosa 5. Envy - Issa 6. Stinginess - Macchariya 7. Worry - Kukkucca Dullness group - End tri 8. Sloth - Thina 9. Torpor - Middha 10. Doubt - Vicikiccha Beautiful mental factors - 25 Sobhana cetasikas / Kalayanajatika Beautiful universals - 19 Sobhana sabbacitta sadharana 1. Faith - Saddha 2. Mindfulness - Sati 3. Moral shame - Hiri 4. Moral fear - Ottappa 5. Non-attachment - Alobha 6. Non-hatred - Adosa 7. Equanimity - Upekkha / Tatramajjhattata 8. Tranquillity of mental factors - Kayapassaddhi 9. Tranquillity of consciousness - Cittapassaddhi 10. Lightness of mental factors - Kayalahuta 11. Lightness of consciousness - Cittalahuta 12. Malleability of mental factors - Kayamuduta 13. Malleability of consciousness - Cittamuduta 14. Wieldiness of mental factors - Kayakammannata 15. Wieldiness of consciousness - Cittakammannata 16. Proficiency of mental factors - Kayapagunnata 17. Proficiency of consciousness - Cittapagunnata 18. Rectitude of mental factors - Kayujjukata 19. Rectitude of consciousness - Cittujjukata Abstinences - 3 Virati 1. Right speech - Samma vaca 2. Right action - Samma kammanta 3. Right livelihood - Samma ajiva Illimitables - 2 Appamanna 1. Compassion - Karuna 2. Sympathetic joy - Mudita Wisdom faculty - 1 Panna 1. Wisdom - Pannindriya / Amoha Unfixed adjuncts - 11 Aniyatayogi 1. Mana 7. Sama vaca 2. Issa 8. Sama kamanta 3. Macchariya 9. Sama ajiva 4. Kukkucca 10. Karuna 5. Thina 11. Mudita 6. Middha #120009 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 7:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view nilovg Dear Dieter, thank you for the whole list. Now this is not just for reading. They all can occur in daily life, and that is what interests you, I understood. We better discuss one by one or just a few at a time. You wanted examples, you said. Nina. Op 7-nov-2011, om 17:55 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > I base on the index /translation below .. please suggest changes or > another simple overwiew. > > with Metta Dieter > The 52 Cetasikas at a Glance > > Ethically variable factors - 13 > > Annasammana cetasikas #120010 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 7:44 am Subject: Cetasika in daily life moellerdieter Dear Nina, you wrote: thank you for the whole list. Now this is not just for reading. They all can occur in daily life, and that is what interests you, I understood. We better discuss one by one or just a few at a time. You wanted examples, you said.' yes, one by one .. and how they can occur in daily life. I just wanted to make sure that the list and the translation is in line with your expertise. I ll come back ,starting with 2 of the unwholesome universals (as I thought about it recently ): Shamelessness - Ahirika Fearlessness of wrong - Anottappa with Metta Dieter #120011 From: "philip" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 7:54 am Subject: On 'engaged Buddhism', transcript, 2004 Gangtok pt.5 philofillet Hi all I liked the following brief exchange. The notion of "engaged Buddhism" is quite prevalent, but does it have anything to do with the true Dhamma, the teaching of anatta? : Q: Sometimes I wonder, with anatta, what's the point of being involved in anything in the world, should we just let corrupt conditions occur? A.S : Can you manage the world situation? Q: A little bit, in my corner of the world, I can help a little bit. A.s Isn't that just thinking? And If you can conquer others you can do many things but you cannot understand the reality. And then it's still you. not only in this life, in many lives. So the others can talk of kusala in many ways, but not of understanding reality at all. (ph: "And then it's still you." If an inclination to get involved in such issues comes naturally due to conditions, great. But trying to whip it up in oneself or others under a Dhamma banner, not wise.) #120012 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:07 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 2-nov-2011, om 18:07 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > Your talking about the kaya, or aggregate of the body, only being > > apprehended through the mind-door, leads me to ask another question. > ------ > N: Ruupas of the body and outside ruupas can also be known through > the sense-doors. > ------ That is good to know, but is that also true of the kaya -- the aggregate...? -- Maybe I'm not too sure about the distinction between kaya and kalapas, and how they are known, as opposed to individual rupas. Since rupas do arise in sequential groups, I guess knowing them as a kalapa is normal, but would the knowledge of them as aggregate only be a mind-door process, while the individual rupas are first known through the sense-doors? And is there a difference between knowing the kalapa - a group of rupas - and the kaya - rupas in aggregate? Sorry for confusing questions, but this is where I am a little mixed up right now. > > R: The third stage of insight is the ability to experience and > > understand the "groups" of dhammas that arise, and how they arise > > in groupings. I wonder if that is the understanding of an > > aggregation of dhammas through the mind-door, or whether it is an > > insight that is of direct perception of the dhammas involved, and > > if so, how the "groupings" are understood in which those dhammas > > arise? > -------- > N: Looking at Vis. Ch XX, 6. Comprehension by Groups, sammasana > ~naa.na. This refers to the khandhas. It is difficult reading, it > seems that all this is theory, but insight is not thinking, it is > direct understanding. The khandhas are past, future, present. This > refers to their impermanence, their arising and falling away. There > comes to be more understanding of what the khandhas are. I think > Sarah mentioned a discussion about awareness of the groups, but I did > not quite understand. > As I understood from Kh Sujin's explanation, this is the third stage > of tender insight and the arising and falling away of dhammas is not > as precisely realized as at the following stage when the arising and > falling away of realities one by one is realized. I see. I am also trying to fix in my mind how the kandhas intersect with the division of experience by dhammas. I guess that the kandhas also encompass rupas and namas within their divisions, but it is just a more specific classification of rupas and the types of namas? > What I keep in mind, while talking and thinking about stages, this is > not as clear as when there is awareness now of realities, and when > these stages occur. Since the first stage is already difficult enough > for me, I would rather consider the first stage, knowing the > difference between naama and ruupa. > ------- I think that is a good point for anyone, to consider what is relevant in current experience. It seems to help me to understand a little more of the stages afterwards, just to see the direction that the stages are headed in, but then to focus back again on something that is relevant, as you say. > A quote from Kh Sujin in Bhutan: > > think that the four noble Truths, the Dependent Origination, the > aayatanas are in the book. But they are this moment.> > > N: This question will not be solved unless there is awareness of > realities at this moment. I just heard this morning that there should > be sati all the time, no matter in what situation. > > Also: there should be no clinging to specific objects or to realizing > stages of insight. That is good to understand. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #120013 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:10 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" epsteinrob Hi Connie. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "connie" wrote: > > ditto, Scott. > connie > > > > > > c: "Funny how little things change, eh? Read #95186 - now that's classic..." > > > > Scott: Hey, I enjoyed re-reading that. I still very much agree with that iteration of myself. I don't mean to be rude, but this seems like more evidence of your being "hot for Scott." :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #120014 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:13 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...what is your understanding of the praise and blame that the women of Kuru were given for practicing or not practicing one of the foundations of mindfulness?...So what do you think of those statements from the commentary? What do they mean in your view?" > > Scott: In case you haven't already digested my message to you, let me reiterate: I do not praise your view. I do not praise it in the same way in which the woman's view and behaviour was not praised; in the same way in which I chastise you for your view, which is wrong, these people chastised the woman's stance. That's it. I have made clear the reasons for my view. We have no record of how the chastisement effected the woman. We can derive no conclusions from this. We can see what happens to you next... Mainly I just think you're rude, and that your answer has the same basic impact as trying to sew something with a hammer, or eat your food with a single chopstick. In other words, it's not pertinent and doesn't add anything useful. But on well... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120015 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving sarahprocter... Hi Phil, >> Sarah: Or simply, 'sati must arise naturally - anytime at all, like now!' >> >> Scott: Yeah! > >Ph: I don't think you have to go to interpret that "there should be sati all the time." .... S: Well only because you've repeatedly mentioned "I have always had troubles with "should" for sati", so I was just putting it another way for people like yourself who object!! >"We read texts in order to understand realities, and sati may arise >while reading, or it may not arise, or it may arise later on. If we >do not try to manipulate sati and it arises, it is sammaa- sati. >We do not have to wonder whether there should be sati and when there >should be sati, there should be sati all the time. However, we should >beware not to fix on it, or try to have it or to wish for it while >discussing Dhamma, reading texts or by being alone. Then there will >be little result of all such efforts." > >That says it all, any idea of an imperative on sati is dismissed. .... S: Exactly! For anyone who has listened to any of the recordings, the message is very clear. A little on meditation practice from your visit to KK - hopefully we'll be uploading a little more soon - "...done by lobha and ignorance. Is it not harmful and wrong view? ....The development of understanding is the only way to decrease detachment to result, otherrwise there will always be wishing or hoping to have such experiences.....there must be hearing, considering so firmly and understanding of reality - not past or future, only the reality now can be the object of understanding...." My notes are too cryptic - I can't read them properly - will check and transcribe later. Metta Sarah ===== #120016 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:40 am Subject: RE: [dsg] On 'engaged Buddhism', transcript, 2004 Gangtok pt.5 dhammasaro Good friends all, In is my minority experiences, the Theravada purist, both Bhikkhu and layperson, do not believe in, "Engaged Buddhism." I once was at the Bangkok General Hospital when a man from Germany came up to me and wanted solace. I asked him to sit and we discussed his wife's condition. He wanted to know if Buddhism and Buddhist meditation would help his wife. I tried to help him. I explained I was a new monk and did not know enough to fully explain Buddhism. I followed up with a senior Thai, English speaking, monk to contact him. To one of my Wat Bowon senior ajahns I suggested we have a bhikkhu on call at BGH. It was denied... no "Engaged Buddhism." However, i understand there are bhikkhu's on call of the other major Thai Theravada Sect. I compare rather loosely the two major Thai Buddhist Sects as the the difference between the Roman Catholic Jesuit Order and the Franciscan Order. Such is real life... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ............ rest deleted .................... #120017 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:55 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "Mainly I just think you're rude, and that your answer has the same basic impact as trying to sew something with a hammer, or eat your food with a single chopstick. In other words, it's not pertinent and doesn't add anything useful. But on well..." Scott: So, you can see from experience that praise or blame might be one thing, and the reaction might be another. In fact, the reaction is entirely due to conditions. I might be entirely right about chastising you for your view (simply as a for instance, you understand) but your experience of this 'correct' chastisement is to find it 'rude.' You find yourself thinking of the description in the commentary and fold it in to thinking about the praiseworthiness of 'practice.' In fact, we just don't know enough about things to be able to justify such an hypothesis. You do know now, from 'experience,' the sort of dhammas that arise when 'chastised.' Did you control them? Did you make them arise? No, they just came up. Scott. #120018 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 9:38 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...What is your interpretation of the Buddha's rundown on the mindfulness of the body parts and internal organs. What is your understanding of the purpose of these passages? > > Scott: I told you, Rob. It's about ruupa as object of satipa.t.thaana,, not 'body parts' and 'internal organs.' That's what I said as well, but I said that the Buddha must have mentioned those body parts because rupas arise in specific groups and those groups must correspond to what we think of as this or that organ or area. That way the instruction to see the [rupas of] the skin or the [rupas of] the hair gives a way in which for someone to understand these groupings and understand the rupas accordingly. I don't know if this is correct or not, but if it is not, what's your explanation for referencing these body parts? If they are really just "whatever rupas arise" and don't correspond to anything, why give the systematic instruction to look at the [rupas of] area x, y or z, or the [rupas of] x, y or z organs? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #120019 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 9:42 am Subject: [dsg] Re: There should be sati all the time. epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E and Phil, > Op 6-nov-2011, om 21:41 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > N: Thinking about frequency is in the way. Anyway, I am just a > > > messenger, the Thai is quite strong: must. > > > > It seems that K. Sujin is comfortable mixing these two ideas and > > having them coexist -- that sati should be there all the time - in > > other words, it is the correct state of awareness to have; and at > > the same time to be perfectly clear that sati can only arise now > > without control, and may or may not arise, and that we should be > > content with how sati develops on its own. So it should be there, > > but we are not the ones to put it there. We can only understand it > > correctly and get out of the way. > ----- > N: Yes, this is quite true. Kh Sujin was also addressing a Thai > public, and, in general, their reactions are different from > Westerners I think. The Thais also have questions but there is less > arguing and debating over one word or term. Phil mentions other > levels of sati but in this context it is clearly sati of > satipa.t.thaana. Thank you, this is helpful to clarify. I like having these two ideas together as K. Sujin puts it - not to be afraid to say that satipatthana is in a sense the "natural state" once cittas are able to engage with it, and that there is no way to cause that state to arise through will. It seems like an interesting combination. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #120020 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:09 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...That way the instruction to see the [rupas of] the skin or the [rupas of] the hair...why give the systematic instruction to look at the [rupas of] area x, y or z, or the [rupas of] x, y or z organs?" Scott: You see an 'instruction' whereas I see a 'description' - in conventional language as well - of ruupas. The description is only a list of the dhammas which can be objects of satipa.t.thaana. There are no concepts that can so be objects and a description is by no means a 'systematic instruction.' This is your take on it. If this bothers you, consider that Jon is consistently saying the same thing to you. Get upset with him next time... (ha ha). Scott. #120021 From: A T Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:19 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Hi Scott, RobertE, all, > Scott: You see an 'instruction' whereas I see a 'description' - in > >conventional language as well - of ruupas. >=================== The Buddha does list 31 bodyparts, hopefully without intent of deluding people into misinterpreting what they are not supposed to be doing. >S:The description is only a list of the dhammas which can be objects >of >satipa.t.thaana. There are no concepts that can so be objects >and a >description is by no means a 'systematic instruction.' >======================================================== Then entire teaching of Tipitaka is conceptual and useless if concepts cannot be objects of contemplation. According to Abhidhamma Pitaka, Puggalapannatti page 1: 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties, and people, are concepts. paññatti . Cha paññattiyo – khandhapaññatti, āyatanapaññatti, dhātupaññatti, saccapaññatti, indriyapaññatti, puggalapaññattīti. http://tutor.ksana.tw/cgi-bin/accelon3.cgi/ksana?db=tipitaka.adb&tofind=Cha+pa%C\ 3%B1%C3%B1attiyo&act=text&dn=$90000A3&excerpt=0&t= According to Abhidhamma Pitaka they are as much conceptual, paññatti, as concepts of people. With best wishes, Alex #120022 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:33 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "Mainly I just think you're rude, and that your answer has the same basic impact as trying to sew something with a hammer, or eat your food with a single chopstick. In other words, it's not pertinent and doesn't add anything useful. But on well..." > > Scott: So, you can see from experience that praise or blame might be one thing, and the reaction might be another. In fact, the reaction is entirely due to conditions. > > I might be entirely right about chastising you for your view (simply as a for instance, you understand) but your experience of this 'correct' chastisement is to find it 'rude.' You find yourself thinking of the description in the commentary and fold it in to thinking about the praiseworthiness of 'practice.' In fact, we just don't know enough about things to be able to justify such an hypothesis. You do know now, from 'experience,' the sort of dhammas that arise when 'chastised.' Did you control them? Did you make them arise? No, they just came up. You mistake me repeatedly when you point out that dhammas arise without control. I already acknowledge that. Your conflation of this with the non-efficacy of practice is the further step that I do not agree with. The question is not how the women reacted, but the fact that all the women in the town who were so "advanced" were practicing specific arousings of mindfulness, a point that you keep bypassing in order to deal with easier straw men of your own invention. They were engaged in active purposeful regular practice of satipatthana, with a chosen "Arousing of Mindfulness," and were praised by the Buddha, and this is what I'm asking you to account for. They would ask each other "Which one of these are you practicing?" and those not practicing were chastised. The question isn't whether the chastising had this or that effect, but that those who did not *practice* were considered to be negligent. Please deal with the issue in question, and I will happily respond to your answer. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120024 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:10 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "...Then entire teaching of Tipitaka is conceptual and useless if concepts cannot be objects of contemplation...According to Abhidhamma Pitaka, Puggalapannatti page 1: 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties, and people, are concepts. pa~n~natti...According to Abhidhamma Pitaka they are as much conceptual, pa~n~natti, as concepts of people." Scott: I'll leave this nonsense to someone else. Man, do you ever have it wrong, Alex. Where are you getting this stuff from, anyway? Scott. #120025 From: "connie" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:19 am Subject: no subject? please delete! nichiconn sorry folks, seems it’s my turn for the “I’m not sending out this junk with no subject” irritant that’s been going around. Please just delete anything that seems to be from me but doesn’t have a subject. Sorry for the trouble. connie #120026 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:05 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., "...They were engaged in active purposeful regular practice of satipatthana, with a chosen 'Arousing of Mindfulness,'..." Scott: Your ongoing incorrect imputation is that 'practice' is something other than the natural strength of sati arising naturally. Your term 'active purposeful regular practice' is entirely a modern invention. Scott. #120027 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:31 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Scott, > A: "...Then entire teaching of Tipitaka is conceptual and useless >if concepts cannot be objects of contemplation...According to >Abhidhamma Pitaka, Puggalapannatti page 1: 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, >18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties, and people, are concepts. >pa~n~natti...According to Abhidhamma Pitaka they are as much >conceptual, pa~n~natti, as concepts of people." > >Scott: I'll leave this nonsense to someone else. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Talk on Abhidhamma Pitaka, a nonsense? >Scott: Man, do you ever have it wrong, Alex. Where? It is clearly said that they are pannatti. *5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties With best wishes, Alex #120028 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:38 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > "...They were engaged in active purposeful regular practice of satipatthana, with a chosen 'Arousing of Mindfulness,'..." > > Scott: Your ongoing incorrect imputation is that 'practice' is something other than the natural strength of sati arising naturally. Your term 'active purposeful regular practice' is entirely a modern invention. Unlike you, I feel a need to pay some deference to the actual story in the sutta. After all, it's an historical record in part, so I don't feel too good about making up my own story instead of reading what is there. When the women would meet each other, they would ask "What Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?," and the other would answer with this or that Arousing of Mindfulness. Then they would get the praise. If they said "None at all" they were called unworthy, not true followers of Dhamma. So this is a conversation about who was doing what practice, not something else that you are making up while closing your eyes and refusing to read. But never mind, it's like talking to someone who is hypnotized, who with eyes closed is accusing *you* of being hypnotized. With no respect for the evidence of the actual story, how can anyone hope to get anything but fantasy? Keep dreaming! If you choose to explain the above conversation between the women, asking what they were practicing, answering with a specific practice, and how that fits into the scheme of naturally unplanned arising dhammas, I'll be very pleased to listen. I have no doubt that such dhammas do arise when they do, and not when they don't and are not subject to control - but the story suggests that such can take place within the context of active practice. That's the point. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #120029 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:33 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...That way the instruction to see the [rupas of] the skin or the [rupas of] the hair...why give the systematic instruction to look at the [rupas of] area x, y or z, or the [rupas of] x, y or z organs?" > > Scott: You see an 'instruction' whereas I see a 'description' - in conventional language as well - of ruupas. The description is only a list of the dhammas which can be objects of satipa.t.thaana. Well at least we agree that there can be a "list of th dhammas which can be objecs of satipatthana." That's a start. > There are no concepts that can so be objects and a description is by no means a 'systematic instruction.' This is your take on it. If this bothers you, consider that Jon is consistently saying the same thing to you. Get upset with him next time... (ha ha). If I do, I will tell him that you were the condition for my getting upset with him, and then you will have to deal with the resultant vipaka when it comes. Get ready! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #120030 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:46 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...If I do, I will tell him that you were the condition for my getting upset with him, and then you will have to deal with the resultant vipaka when it comes. Get ready!" Scott: You just go ahead and do that, Rob. It'll even things out. Scott. #120031 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:48 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Talk on Abhidhamma Pitaka, a nonsense? Where? It is clearly said that they are pannatti. *5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties" Scott: That's funny, Alex. Good one. Paramattha dhammaa? Who needs 'em. Scott. #120032 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:44 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I have no doubt that such dhammas do arise when they do, and not when they don't and are not subject to control - but the story suggests that such can take place within the context of active practice. That's the point." Scott: I contend that you only give lip-service to the first part of the above statement. I do so because you persist in your belief in 'active practice' and therefore clearly do not understand anatta. Describe the 'practice' you think the commentary is suggesting and I guarantee that it will be entirely self-based and wrong. Scott. #120033 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:55 am Subject: Re: no subject? please delete! scottduncan2 connie, (Rob E.), "c: "sorry folks, seems it’s my turn for the 'I’m not sending out this junk with no subject' irritant that’s been going around. Please just delete anything that seems to be from me but doesn’t have a subject. Sorry for the trouble..." Scott: Ha. Did you see, 'lover,' it was for Viagra et al!!!? We don't need that. Ha ha. Scott. #120034 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:56 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Scott, >A: "Talk on Abhidhamma Pitaka, a nonsense? Where? It is clearly said >that they are pannatti. *5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 >truths, 22 faculties" > >Scott: That's funny, Alex. Good one. Paramattha dhammaa? Who needs >'em. >=========================================================== The Abhidhamma Pitaka says what it says. 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties are pannatti. With best wishes, Alex #120035 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:02 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "The Abhidhamma Pitaka says what it says. 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties are pannatti." Scott: You slay me, man. Good one. This is totally excellent. Scott. #120036 From: "philip" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:09 pm Subject: Re: no subject? please delete! philofillet Hi Scott and Connie > "c: "sorry folks, seems it’s my turn for the 'I’m not sending out this junk with no subject' irritant that’s been going around. Please just delete anything that seems to be from me but doesn’t have a subject. Sorry for the trouble..." > > Scott: Ha. Did you see, 'lover,' it was for Viagra et al!!!? We don't need that. Ha ha. Just what I thought. Connie and Scott Sitting in a tree K - I - S - S I - N - G First comes love then comes marriage Then comes the further gradual eradication of defilemnts in line with the adze handle simile. Actually, all joking aside, I find the affinity that you two have found through study of difficult Dhamma texts to be really cool. Phil #120037 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:10 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Alex, > > A: "The Abhidhamma Pitaka says what it says. 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties are pannatti." > > Scott: You slay me, man. Good one. This is totally excellent. > > Scott. > Dear Scott I imagine A. Has found one of the passages which explains concepts and elucidates that the NAMES of paramattha dhammas such as the aggregates are (of course) concepts- like when we think about feelings or consciouness. Why he would then decide that this means that actual paramattha dhammas are also concepts I am not sure. robert #120038 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:22 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Dear Robert K., R: "I imagine A. Has found one of the passages which explains concepts and elucidates that the NAMES of paramattha dhammas such as the aggregates are (of course) concepts- like when we think about feelings or consciousness. Why he would then decide that this means that actual paramattha dhammas are also concepts I am not sure." Scott: I surmised as much, but would you like to be the one who tells him? Scott. #120039 From: "philip" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Nama more subtle than rupa? philofillet Hi Sarah > > Ph: The reason I wrote that is because I heard today, in the same talk, A.S say re that loud sound and hardness that it shows how fast realities are, rising and falling away, but "sanna keeps on thinking in the sea of concepts." So maybe when the object is conepts, we can say sanna thinks, effectively, but when it is visible object, "sanna thinks" is wrong...? > .... > S: Because of sanna marking and remembering what is seen, heard and thought about, there is more and more thinking about concepts, a "sea of concepts". Ph: Thanks. Yes, of course sanna can't "keep on thinking", I guess she meant that all that sanna makes for more and more thinking. BTW, re the subtlety of nama and rupa, I think I heard that the object of the first vipassana-nana that knows nama from rupa is a nama. Did I hear right? Is it the nama that is the mind door? Talk about subtle, if that is the case.... Phil #120041 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 9:24 am Subject: Der Ancient Symbol From Antiquity:, was What is a "Cosmic Joke" dhammasaro Good friends all, In almost all the Thai Mahayana Temples and Shrines are displayed the most ancient and most revered symbol: the swastika. In addition, some Thai Theravada Buddhist Temples display the swastika as well!!! Unfortunately, too, too many of us Buddhist, in our utmost ignorance, condemn any current use!!! Question: What can we Buddhists do to re-educate our fellow ignorant Buddhist??? A sincere practical question to not continue alienating our Mahayana Buddhist brethren... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck .......... rest deleted ................... #120042 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 9:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] On 'engaged Buddhism', transcript, 2004 Gangtok pt.5 dhammasanna Hello Chuck, I would appreciate it if you would share as to whether you were ordained within the Dhammayut or in the Mahanikaya. I have my suspicion as to which one. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane ________________________________ From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro To: DGG Sent: Mon, November 7, 2011 3:40:56 PM Subject: RE: [dsg] On 'engaged Buddhism', transcript, 2004 Gangtok pt.5 Good friends all, In is my minority experiences, the Theravada purist, both Bhikkhu and layperson, do not believe in, "Engaged Buddhism." I once was at the Bangkok General Hospital when a man from Germany came up to me and wanted solace. I asked him to sit and we discussed his wife's condition. He wanted to know if Buddhism and Buddhist meditation would help his wife. I tried to help him. I explained I was a new monk and did not know enough to fully explain Buddhism. I followed up with a senior Thai, English speaking, monk to contact him. To one of my Wat Bowon senior ajahns I suggested we have a bhikkhu on call at BGH. It was denied... no "Engaged Buddhism." However, i understand there are bhikkhu's on call of the other major Thai Theravada Sect. I compare rather loosely the two major Thai Buddhist Sects as the the difference between the Roman Catholic Jesuit Order and the Franciscan Order. Such is real life... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ............ rest deleted .................... #120043 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:10 am Subject: Older Translations of der Tipitaka dhammasaro Good friends all, Please bear with me, okay? 1. I have a serious problem in studying the older translations of the Tipitaka. It is not just the skill of the translator; but, the date of the translation. The older the translation; the more archaic and stilted the paragraphs. The PTS translations of the four main Nikayas, or divisions of the oldest Buddhist scriptures, began in 1899 with TW Rhys Davids' translation of the Digha Nikaya. These works are a great service to us students around the world; but, I think they are now in need of replacement. The re-translation began in 1978 with Maurice Walshe's translation of the Digha Nikaya, entitled Thus Have I Heard, and published by Wisdom Publications. Wisdom has continued its excellent work with further translations of the Majjhima Nikaya, published in 1995, and the Samyutta Nikaya, published more recently. 2. We find a variety of definitions of mindfulness among contemporary translator: Nyanaponika Thera, for example, defines mindfulness as “a kind of attentiveness that … is good, skilful or right (kusala).” [1] Bhikkhu Bodhi defines it as “focused awareness applied to immediate experience in both its subjective and objective factors.” [2] Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu sees it as “the ability to keep something in mind.” [3] Ñāṇavīra Thera says it is “general recollectedness, not being scatterbrained,” [4] and he links it with “reflexion,” knowing what one knows or does as one knows or does it. [5] Notes: [1] Nyanaponika Thera. The heart of Buddhist meditation. London: Rider & Company, 1969. [2] Bhikkhu Bodhi. The connected discourses of the Buddha. A translation of the Saṃyutta Nikāya. Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2000. [3] Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu. The wings to awakening. An anthology from the Pāli canon. Barre, Massachusetts: Dhamma Dana Publications, 1998. [4] Ñāṇavīra Thera. Clearing the path. Writings of Ñāṇavīra Thera (1960-1965). Colombo: Path Press, 1987. [5] Ñāṇavīra Thera (1987). Finally, my copy of the Sutta Mahatanhasankaya adds: ,Just as a fire is reckoned only by the condition dependent on which it arises: when fire burns dependent on logs, it is reckoned only as a log fire; when fire burns dependent on faggots, it is reckoned only as a faggot fire;... On the word Faggot. It may refer to: faggot or fagot. Faggot or twig, or bundle of these Faces Faggot (unit), archaic unit of measurement for bundles of sticks Death by burning, metonymically referred to by the faggots which fuel the fire Ashen faggot (or ashton fagot), Christmas wassail tradition in the West Country of England Faggot (slang) pejorative, now usually for a gay man. Discussion? peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck Post script: A paraphrase of an earlier unknown wurk... #120044 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 12:45 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Dear Rob K., A: "...If they are 'NAMES of paramattha dhammas' then puggala would also be paramattha dhamma because it is mentioned alongside aggregates, bases, spheres, truths, faculties. The pali phrase does not talk about names of paramattha, it talks about paramattha." Scott: Good luck with this. Scott. #120045 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 1:26 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Dear RobertK, all, >RK:I imagine A. Has found one of the passages which explains >concepts >and elucidates that the NAMES of paramattha dhammas such >as the >aggregates are (of course) concepts- like when we think >about >feelings >or consciouness. Why he would then decide that this >means that actual paramattha >dhammas are also concepts I am not >sure. >============================================================ The Puggalapannatti book of Abhidhamma Pitaka does tell us that they are concepts said in the same sentence as concept of a person. If they are "NAMES of paramattha dhammas" (it is not said that) then puggala would also be paramattha dhamma because it is mentioned alongside aggregates, bases, spheres, truths, faculties, in the same sentence. The pali phrase does not talk about names of paramattha, it talks about concepts. (corrected) With best wishes, Alex #120046 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 1:32 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Dear Rob K., Try this one for Alex: Ka.tavatthuppakaara.na "Theravadin: 'Are soul and matter both known as a real thing?' Puggalavadin: 'Yes.' Theravadin: 'Is the soul one thing and matter another?' Puggalavadin: 'No, this cannot be defended.' Theravadin: 'Then [you have to] acknowledged defeat.' If both matter and soul are known as real things it has to be admitted that they are different [things]. You make a mistake when you accept the first statement but not the second one. If the second statement is impossible, the first is not possible either. It is erroneous to claim that both matter and soul are known as real things and that, at the same time, they do not differ from each other. Theravadin: 'You acknowledge that matter (ruupa) is a real thing. Feeling (vedanaa) is also such a thing. But matter is one thing and feeling is another, isn't it? Puggalavadin: 'Yes.' Theravadin: 'Is soul known in the same sense as a real thing as matter?' Puggalavadin: 'Yes.' Theravadin: 'Then matter would be one thing and soul another?' Puggalavadin: 'No this cannot be accepted.' Theravadin: 'Then [you have to acknowledge] defeat.' If matter and soul are known as real things but, at the same time, are different, then by analogy, they have to be different to the same extent. Your assertion is false if the first pair of statements is accepted and the second one is not. If you cannot accept the second pair of statements you should not accept the first one. Your situation is false. Scott. #120047 From: A T Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 1:50 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Scott, all, >Dear Rob K., >Try this one for Alex: >Ka.tavatthuppakaara.na >"Theravadin: 'Are soul and matter both known as a real thing?' >===================================== This was not my discussion. My discussion was about what was meant when it was said that: Cha paññattiyo – khandhapaññatti, āyatanapaññatti, dhātupaññatti, saccapaññatti, indriyapaññatti, puggalapaññattīti. "The six concepts are -The concept of the aggregates, the concept of the bases, the concept of the elements, the concept of the truths, the concept of the faculties, and the concept of person" http://tutor.ksana.tw/cgi-bin/accelon3.cgi/ksana?db=tipitaka.adb&tofind=Cha+pa%C\ 3%B1%C3%B1attiyo&act=text&dn=$90000A3&excerpt=0&t= According to Puggalapaññattipāḷi page 1: 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties, and people, are concepts -> paññatti . With best wishes, Alex #120048 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 1:51 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" rjkjp1 Ok, against my best judgement I will try. What you are confusing is Vijjama pannati and avijjama pannati. Yes both are pannati but one refers to paramattha dhamma and the otehr refers to unreal things such as people. In detail(I quote from realities and Concepts by Sujin Boriharnwanaket): The Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (Book 8) distinguishes between six kinds of concepts that are names, nama-pannatti (see Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11). 1. Vijjamana pannattis, concepts which make known what is real, for example the words rupa, nama, vedana (feeling), or sanna (perception) 10. 2. Avijjamana pannattis, concepts which make known what is not real, such as the words Thai or foreigner. These concepts do not represent absolute realities, citta and cetasika which are nama, and rupa. Thai or foreigner are not real in the absolute sense, they are conventional realities, sammutti dhammas. Could akusala citta11 (unwholesome consciousness) be Thai or foreign? Akusala citta is a paramattha dhamma (a reality), it is a dhamma which has its own characteristic, it is not Thai or foreign. 3. Vijjamanena avijjamana pannattis, concepts of the non-existent based on the existent. There is the expression "the person with the six abhinnas."12 The six abhinnas are real but person is not real. Thus this concept stands for what is real and for what is not real. 4. Avijjamanena vijjamana pannattis, concepts of the existent based on the non-existent. There is the expression "woman's voice". The sound is real, but the woman is not real. 5. Vijjamanena vijjamana pannattis, concepts of what is real based on what is real. There is the term cakkhu-vinnana (eye-consciousness). Cakkhu (eye) is a reality, namely the cakkhu-pasada-rupa (eyesense, a reality sensitive to colour or visible object), and vinnana (consciousness) is also a reality, namely the reality which experiences. 6. Avija amanena avijjamana pannattis, concepts of what is not real based on what is not real. There is the expression "the kings son". Both king and son are not real, they are sammutti dhammas, conventional realities. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear RobertK, all, > > >RK:I imagine A. Has found one of the passages which explains >concepts >and elucidates that the NAMES of paramattha dhammas such >as the >aggregates are (of course) concepts- like when we think >about >feelings >or consciouness. Why he would then decide that this >means that actual paramattha >dhammas are also concepts I am not >sure. > >============================================================ > > > The Puggalapannatti book of Abhidhamma Pitaka does tell us that they are concepts said in the same sentence as concept of a person. > > If they are "NAMES of paramattha dhammas" (it is not said that) then puggala would also be paramattha dhamma because it is mentioned alongside aggregates, bases, spheres, truths, faculties, in the same sentence. The pali phrase does not talk about names of paramattha, it talks about concepts. > > (corrected) > With best wishes, > > Alex > #120049 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 2:03 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Hello RobertK, >RK:What you are confusing is Vijjama pannati and avijjama pannati. But it does not say that one is Vijjama and other avijjama pannati. It simply states "pannatti". Where does it say in *Tipitaka* about a/vijjama pannatti? Why is concept of aggregates, bases, elements, truths, faculties is placed in the same sentence as concept of person? "The six concepts are -The concept of the aggregates, the concept of the bases, the concept of the elements, the concept of the truths, the concept of the faculties, and the concept of person" - Puggalapannatti With best wishes, Alex #120050 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 2:24 pm Subject: Anniversaries Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) glenjohnann Hello Sarah, Nina and Howard Yes, time does fly indeed - time, that concept we use to refer to the continual stream of citta processes ... Sarah, I remember well when you and J. married, as I seriously contemplated coming to Arundel for the occasion. For many years your wedding photo sat in my shelves. Just the other day I found myself wondering whether you and J. married before Glen and I did. We will be 30 years next Sept. Congratulations to you and J. on your many years of respect and consideration for one another and for you sharing your interest in Dhamma with so many others. Very appropriate for you to include the Maha Mangala sutta in your response. Nina and Lodewijk, my similar congratulations for 59 years (and counting) together. One is so fortunate in this life to have a life partner who is interested in the Dhamma and who encourages one's study and sharing. A blessing in itself. Ann > Op 7-nov-2011, om 9:59 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > > > p.s Nina, I was going to mention with regard to the Thai lunch, > > that today is our 30th wedding anniversary. It goes past in a flash > > as you always say.... > N: Our heartfelt congratulations. Next year is our diamond wedding > day, but we are never sure whether we are both alive by then. We keep > that in mind. Time flies. > #120051 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 2:26 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] On 'engaged Buddhism', transcript, 2004 Gangtok pt.5 dhammasaro Good friend Sarah Jane, et al At the time I was ordained at Wat Bovonieves (Wat Bowon) Vihara in Bangkok which is Dhammayut. Many years earlier, I was ordained at Wat Thai Washington DC which is Mahanikaya. I disrobed after only four months as my mother became ill and I returned to Texas. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ........... rest deleted .................. #120052 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 3:15 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertK, > > >RK:What you are confusing is Vijjama pannati and avijjama pannati. > > But it does not say that one is Vijjama and other avijjama pannati. It simply states "pannatti". > > > Where does it say in *Tipitaka* about a/vijjama pannatti? > > > Why is concept of aggregates, bases, elements, truths, faculties is placed in the same sentence as concept of person? > > "The six concepts are -The concept of the aggregates, the concept of the bases, the concept of the elements, the concept of the truths, the concept of the faculties, and the concept of person" - Puggalapannatti > > > With best wishes, > > Alex Really So in the atthakatha to this paragraph of the Tipitaka(the Puggalapabbatti-atthakatha) where it explains about vijjamanapannati and avijjamannapannati have no relevance? You are suggesting that one should ignore the Commenatary that elucidates the meaning. Could I ask why you think your opinion is superior to the Commentary? Palimuttakena (CS:pg.26) pana atthakathanayena aparapi cha pabbattiyo- vijjamanapabbatti, avijjamanapabbatti, vijjamanena avijjamanapabbatti, avijjamanena vijjamanapabbatti, vijjamanena vijjamanapabbatti, avijjamanena avijjamanapabbattiti. Tattha kusalakusalasseva saccikatthaparamatthavasena vijjamanassa sato sambhutassa dhammassa pabbapana vijjamanapabbatti nama. Tatha avijjamanassa lokaniruttimattasiddhassa itthipurisadikassa pabbapana avijjamanapabbatti nama. Sabbakarenapi anupalabbhaneyyassa vacavatthumattasseva pabcamasaccadikassa titthiyanam anupakatipurisadikassa va pabbapanapi avijjamanapabbattiyeva. Sa pana sasanavacara na hotiti idha na gahita. Iti imesam vijjamanavijjamananam vikappanavasena sesa veditabba. 'Tevijjo', 'chalabhibbo'ti-adisu hi tisso vijja cha abhibba ca vijjamana, puggalo avijjamano. Tasma tisso vijja assati tevijjo, cha abhibba assati chalabhibboti evam vijjamanena avijjamanassa pabbapanato evarupa vijjamanena > #120053 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 4:22 pm Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "According to Abhidhamma Pitaka, Puggalapannatti page 1: 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties, and people, are concepts. pa~n~natti..." Scott: The above is highly disingenuous, Alex. Highly disingenuous. I think you read just to refute, and you read haphazardly to boot. I quote from my own copy of Designation of Human Types: "THE TABLE OF CONTENTS The Six Designations - viz: 1) The notion of groups. 2) The notion of sense organs and their objects. 3) The notion of the elements of cognition. 4) The notion of truth. 5) The notion of sense organs. 6) The notion of human types. 1. In what ways is there a designation of groups? So far as the five groups are concerned - viz: (a) The group of material form, (b) The group of sensation, (c) The group of perception, (d) The group of confections [sa"nkhaarakkhandha], (e) The group of consciousness. In these ways is there a designation of groups. 2. In what ways is there a designation of sense-organs and their objects? So far as the twelve sense-organs and their objects are concerned - viz: (a) the eye, (b) visible shape, (c) the ear, (d) sound, (e) the nose, (f) the smell, (g) the tongue, (h) the taste, (i) the body, (j) tangible things, (k) the mind, (l) ideas. In these ways is there a designation of sense organs and their objects. 3. In what ways is there a designation of the elements of cognition? So far as the eighteen elements of cognition are concerned - viz: (a) the eye, (b) visible shape, (c) visual cognition, (d) the ear, (e) sound, (f) auditory cognition, (g) the nose, (h) odour, (i) olfactory cognition, (j) the tongue, (k) taste, (l) gustatory cognition, (m) the organ of touch, (n) tangible things, (o) tactile cognition, (p) mind, (q) idea, (r) mental cognition. In these ways is there a designation of the elements of cognition. 4. In what ways is there a designation of truths? So far as the four truths are concerned - viz: (a) the truth of suffering, (b) the truth of the genesis of suffering, (c) the truth of the cessation of suffering, (d) the truth of the path leading to the cessation of suffering. In these ways there is a designation of truth. 5. In what ways is there a designation of functions? So far as the twenty-two functions (or faculties) are concerned - viz: (a) the function of the eye,(b)... the ear,(c)... the nose,(d)... the tongue,(e)...the touch,(f)...the mind,(g)...life,(h)...womanhood,(i)...manhood,(j)...pleasure,(k)...pain,(l)...gl\ adness,(m)...grief,(n)...neutral feeling,(o)...faith,(p)...energy,(q)...mindfulness,(r)...concentration,(s)...ins\ ight,(t)...will-to-know-what-is-unknown,(u)...gnosis,(v)...having-come-to-know-t\ he-unknown. In these ways there is a designation of functions (or faculties). 6. In what ways is there a designation of human types?..." Scott: Comments? Scott. #120054 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 4:31 pm Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I have no doubt that such dhammas do arise when they do, and not when they don't and are not subject to control - but the story suggests that such can take place within the context of active practice. That's the point." > > Scott: I contend that you only give lip-service to the first part of the above statement. I do so because you persist in your belief in 'active practice' and therefore clearly do not understand anatta. Describe the 'practice' you think the commentary is suggesting and I guarantee that it will be entirely self-based and wrong. What's amazingly consistent here is that you don't dare give a direct interpretation of the story, because there's no way that it can accord with your view of practice. I have highlighted the aspect that is clearly regarding active practice and asked you for your explanation, and you ignore it and content yourself with saying that I am wrong. Well good for you! You can turn it into a mantra, you can come up with infinite straw men to say that I am doing x and y, but it won't supply you with the explanation you are avoiding. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #120055 From: "charlest" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 3:53 pm Subject: Re: Reply to Rob E was Do We All Agree... dhammasaro Well, in this ole bag of Texican bones territory; Buddhist are considered "beeg tyme pacifist!!!" Meditation? Whas dat??? "Beauty is in the eye of the perceiver... I'd love to have a set of "worry beads"!!! ............. rest deleted.................... #120056 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:51 am Subject: All-Embracing is Compassion :-) bhikkhu5 Friends: How to train endless Pity and Compassion! Sitting alone, in silence, each early morning, with closed eyes, one wishes: May I radiate and meet with only infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all the various beings on the 31 levels of existence develop & find only this genuine gentleness of infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings on the sense-desire, fine-material, & the formless plane develop & encounter this tender infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in the front, to the right, the back, the left & below as above develop & experience caring infinite pity, sympathy, & compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe always be fully aware and deeply mindful of this warm infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe examine all details & subtle aspects of this benevolent infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, & universe put enthusiastic effort in their praxis of this affectionate infinite pity, sympathy, & compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country and universe find enraptured joy & jubilant gladness in this fond infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, & universe cultivate the tranquillity of quiet, silent, stilled, & endlessly merciful pity, sympathy, & compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country and universe attain concentrated & absorbed one-pointedness by this infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion! May I & all beings in this city, country, and universe dwell in imperturbable equanimity joined with this loving infinite pity, sympathy, and compassion... Yeah! Print this out, dwell in each state until clear, use ~ 25-45 minutes. Comment: All-Embracing Pity is the 2nd infinitely divine state (Appamaññā) This gradually reduces all aggressiveness, cruelty, ferocity, viciousness, rage, inner & outer violence, and unhappiness related with these states. Joined with the 7 links to Awakening it will later cause formless jhānas... <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samāhita _/\_ * <...> #120057 From: "philip" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 7:53 pm Subject: Nice ones 1 philofillet Hi all A few things I heard from A. Sujin in the discussions over the past little while: "When hardness appears there are two kinds of realities - hardness and the experience of hardness" (I also heard 'hardness is different from the experience of hardness') "Without visible object, there can be no idea of people and things" (Elsewhere I heard that we won't really understand what concepts are until we understand realities) "avijja leads to the next moment" (I also heard "whatever takes us from the preaent monent is with lobha") "Everything is performing functions in darkness. Nobody knows." "Not thinking 'I have this inclination'. Understand the inclination as dhammas." (It's so easy to buy into the stories self writes about oneself, but only nama and rupa, rising and falling away, gone baby gone.) Phil #120058 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:08 pm Subject: Re: Anniversaries Re: [dsg] Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) nilovg Dear Ann, thank you for your good wishes. Yes, the Mahaamangalasutta is very appropriate. Nina. Op 8-nov-2011, om 4:24 heeft glenjohnann het volgende geschreven: > Nina and Lodewijk, my similar congratulations for 59 years (and > counting) together. One is so fortunate in this life to have a life > partner who is interested in the Dhamma and who encourages one's > study and sharing. A blessing in itself. #120059 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 8:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasika in daily life nilovg Dear Dieter, anything you select is good. I wrote about the cetasikas in my book on this subject, but I try to come up with a few additions relating to this moment. Nina. Op 7-nov-2011, om 21:44 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > I ll come back ,starting with 2 of the unwholesome universals (as I > thought about it recently ): > > Shamelessness - Ahirika > > Fearlessness of wrong - Anottappa #120060 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 9:30 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Aggregates, spheres, elements,...= concepts? nilovg Dear Alex, good question. Op 7-nov-2011, om 0:55 heeft A T het volgende geschreven: > > In Puggalapaññatti on the first first page it says that > Aggregates, spheres, elements, truths, faculties, and people are > concepts (paññatti). > > "Cha paññattiyo – khandhapaññatti, āyatanapaññatti, > dhātupaññatti, saccapaññatti, indriyapaññatti, > puggalapaññattīti." > ------- N: I took up the co. I have it in Thai, very interesting. It fits in very well with the definitions of pa~n~natti Connie recently referred to. It is very fitting that it deals with all the different meanings of pa~n~natti we also find elsewhere: about the existing based on the non-existing, vice versa, etc. Thus, many meanings of pa~n~natti, they can also represent reality. Co: vijjamana pa~n~natti: in truth and in reality. Whereas woman, man, is the language of the world. This is avijjamana pa~n~natti. The use of avijjamana pa~n~natti it not favored in Buddhism, therefore it is not taken here, the co states. After that vijjamana pa~n~natti and avijjamana pa~n~natti are explained here. Then as to the list: five khandhas, this is in short (sankhepo), and ruupakkhandha etc. : ruupakhandha is kaamaavacara ( pertaining to the sense sphere) and the four naamakkhandhas of the four planes (N: bhuumi: here planes of citta: sensuous plane, ruupa plane, aruupa plane, lokuttara plane). These are pa~n~natti of realities, of sabhaava dhammas. N: From his example we see that it is all about realities. Each of the khandhas is real, in other words, they arise at this very moment. There are sense objects, and citta and cetasikas that experience these. There is seeing now, that is khandha. It is the same with the other items of the list. Take the aayatanas: visible object, eyesense, seeing, are these not real. Dhaatus are realities. As to the last one, pa~n~natti of puggala, 'individuals' , here the Buddha showed the khandhas, aayatanas, elements, etc. together, as the co states. He classified persons as to one and so on until ten. N: Even though the title is Human Types, but it still deals with cittas and cetasikas. Such as different ways of emancipation (at times, samaya vimutta, and not at times, asamaya vimutta). And all these are khandhas, aayatanas, dhaatus, etc. ********* Nina #120061 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 10:00 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Aggregates, spheres, elements,...= concepts? sarahprocter... Dear Alex & all, >> In Puggalapaatti on the first first page it says that >> Aggregates, spheres, elements, truths, faculties, and people are >> concepts (paatti). .... S: When you have time, also look in 'Useful Posts' under 'Puggalapa~n~natti' - you'll find a very informative set of posts there imo. You might like to re-post some of them too. I'm glad you're persevering with your questions. Metta Sarah ===== #120062 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Nina & Sarah & all) - In a message dated 11/7/2011 11:55:37 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Dear Nina (and Sarah), > My idea: to suggest (ladies first) fitting practical examples (or > similes , metaphors etc. ) for the 52 cetasikas, one by one , so > that we know/remember what is meant by any mental state. > Possibly Nina or others have done something like that already > ( which could be discussed ).. ------ N: Excellent idea. Good to discuss, it is about reality right now, not theory. Would you start? D: fine .. hopefully not with a disagreement ;-) As the idea is to get a plausible concept of the different types , it is only reality right now in so far that we need to use contemplation of a state which is mentioned by the 52 terms , but not present now. I base on the index /translation below .. please suggest changes or another simple overwiew. with Metta Dieter The 52 Cetasikas at a Glance ====================================== Dieter, thank you for starting this off! Nina, Sarah, and all -" I'm afraid that as regards the Abhidhamma, due, with little doubt, to "deficiencies of accumulation" on my part, my learning in this area needs to proceed by spoon feeding, and especially by means of a practical, "right now," introspective-experiential ("look-see") approach. I really look forward to this, and I also hope that as the teaching-questioning-answering-discussing process proceeds, the 24 conditions will be brought in, in the same practical way. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120063 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 8, 2011 11:42 pm Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I have highlighted the aspect that is clearly regarding active practice..." Scott: I disagree with your notion of 'active practice.' Scott. #120064 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:22 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Rob E and all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > This was of course incorrect on my part. The presence of any body part (concepts) on a list of what are said to be ultimate realities that can be directly known rather than thought about is puzzling, irregardless of internal or external. .... S: As Scott has said, just concepts pointing to realities, rupas, to be directly known by the wise, some by the very, very wise! It's like in the discussion of the Puggala Pannatti, the Abhidhamma text - sometimes concepts of realities are used, sometimes, concepts about concepts of realities. When we know the Buddha is just pointing to the paramattha dhammas themselves to be known, there's no confusion, no matter what words are used. That's why I had pointed to this text at the beginning of Ptsm with regard to kasinas too. it's easy to overlook the pointing to realities here. Another good example is in the description of visible objects in the Dhammasangani, the first text of the Abhidhamma. We read: "What is the corperality which is a visible object that causes the arising of eye-consciousness? Dependent on the 4 primary elements, there is the corporality which is visible, which arises with impingement and is of various colours: dark blue, pale yellow, red, white, black, reddish brown, deep yellow, green, light green; long, short, small, large, spherical, circular, four-sided, six-sided, eight-sided, sixteen-sided; low, high; shade, sunshine;light; star light, light from a looking glass, colour of a precious stone (such as ruby), a conch, a pearl, an emerald; colour of gold and silver. Apart and different from the above visible objects and dependent on the 4 primary elements, there are also other visible objects which are visible and which arise with impingment." (Dhammasangani 619) S: Lots of different concepts used just to point to visible objects. Throughout the texts, different concepts are used to point to realities. ... >P:I will leave my participation in this thead there, it already has a2d (agree to disagree) written all over it. ... S: No problem, a2d anytime...... we've all stumbled over these texts before. Metta Sarah ===== #120065 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:41 am Subject: Why contemplation of body parts? What I heard. nilovg Dear friends, Question: why is the contemplation of the body parts included in the Mahaa-satipa.t.thaanasutta? Kh S: < Those people who, before the Buddhas enlightenment, cultivated samatha could attain jhaana with the meditation subject of the Parts of the Body. They contemplated asubha, foulness. When they listened to the Dhamma and developed vipassanaa they could contemplate asubha, but they learnt that contemplation is naama. They could be thinking of hair of the head but they learnt that this is not ours. Sammaa-sati could arise even when they were contemplating the foulness of the body, they knew that this contemplation is not self. Nothing is excluded from the Mahaa-satipa.t.thaanasutta. Mahaa means great. The heart of the teachings is knowing that this is naama and this is ruupa. If one does not know this one thinks of my hair. The elements, dhaatus, arise and fall away, how could they be ours? Everything that arises and falls away is not ours. We read in the Mahaa-satipa.t.thaanasutta about the Parts of the Body, breath, postures. All this is included so that the characteristics of naama and ruupa can be known. Otherwise it is not satipa.t.thaana. We read about paramattha dhammas so that can be discerned what we did not know before and took for self and we read about concepts, conventional truth, which we know by remembrance. When we remember that something is ours, this is not knowing a paramattha dhamma. Paramattha dhammas and pa~n~nattis should be distinguished. Only what is reality arises and falls away. > ****** Nina. #120066 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view nilovg Hi Howard, appreciating your interest. I applaud the right now approach. I hope others will contribute, I cannot tackle it alone, such a load of work awaiting me. Nina. Op 8-nov-2011, om 13:13 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > I'm afraid that as regards the Abhidhamma, > due, with little doubt, to "deficiencies of accumulation" on my > part, my > learning in this area needs to proceed by spoon feeding, and > especially by means > of a practical, "right now," introspective-experiential ("look-see") > approach. I really look forward to this, and I also hope that as the > teaching-questioning-answering-discussing process proceeds, the 24 > conditions will be > brought in, in the same practical way. #120067 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:08 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" nilovg Dear Sarah, It is becoming clearer, I will use it for the Sangiitisutta. Thanks for the text. Nina. Op 8-nov-2011, om 14:22 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > "What is the corperality which is a visible object that causes the > arising of eye-consciousness? #120068 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:36 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" philofillet Hi Sarah > > This was of course incorrect on my part. The presence of any body part (concepts) on a list of what are said to be ultimate realities that can be directly known rather than thought about is puzzling, irregardless of internal or external. > .... > S: As Scott has said, just concepts pointing to realities, rupas, to be directly known by the wise, some by the very, very wise! > > It's like in the discussion of the Puggala Pannatti, the Abhidhamma text - sometimes concepts of realities are used, sometimes, concepts about concepts of realities. When we know the Buddha is just pointing to the paramattha dhammas themselves to be known, there's no confusion, no matter what words are used. That's why I had pointed to this text at the beginning of Ptsm with regard to kasinas too. it's easy to overlook the pointing to realities here. Ph: In the satipatthana sutta, and elsewhere, the modes of deportment, same thing? Walking, standing, etc, but actually pointing to the rupas involved. If concepts of body parts are included in this list of 201, I wonder why not concepts of modes of deportment. Is "hair" any more or less real than "walking?" > Another good example is in the description of visible objects in the Dhammasangani, the first text of the Abhidhamma. We read: > > "What is the corperality which is a visible object that causes the > arising of eye-consciousness? > > Dependent on the 4 primary elements, there is the corporality which > is visible, which arises with impingement and is of various colours: > dark blue, pale yellow (etc, snip) Ph: I see, interesting! I see sunshine is in there, and light. I heard that light is said to be one of the conditions for seeing to arise, A.S said it is just an aspect of visible object. But what if it is so bright it hurts our eyes? In that case, as difficult as it is to understand, there is hardness impinging on the eye sense, at a different moment. Right? Phil #120069 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 11/7/2011 7:56:23 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Scott, >A: "Talk on Abhidhamma Pitaka, a nonsense? Where? It is clearly said >that they are pannatti. *5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 >truths, 22 faculties" > >Scott: That's funny, Alex. Good one. Paramattha dhammaa? Who needs >'em. >=========================================================== The Abhidhamma Pitaka says what it says. 5 aggregate, 12 spheres, 18 elements, 4 truths, 22 faculties are pannatti. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm confused, Alex: Aggregates (khandhas) are collections, hence concepts, and truths are concepts, I would think. However, ayatana, dhatu, and indriya are considered paramattha dhammas, are they not? ------------------------------------------------- With best wishes, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120070 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:22 am Subject: Knowing kusala from akusala, not yet (transcript, Bodghaya 2005, pt.1) philofillet Hi all Another question was asked on my behalf, I couldn't understand why A.Sujin had said "what good is it to know kusala from akusala if it is not known that all dhammas are not-self." I'd had a lot of aversion to that. When I first heard the following answer, it just flowed by, but recently it has come to make more sense: A.S: "Theoretically, one can tell what is kusala and what is akusala, but actually can we tell the moment that is kusala from akusala? So it is only thinking theoretcially about what is kusala and akusala. And for the first vipassana-nana it is the namarupa paricheddanana, the knowledge which understands the demarcation of nama from rupa. Because now at this moment the nama arises and falls away very fast, continuously, and when there is awareness of a nama, at that moment the panna attends to the characteristic of nama, no matter (whether) it is kusala or akusala, it cannot attend to the characteristic of kusala or akusala while there is no understanding of the nama of that reality yet, so instead of trying to find out whether that is kusala or akusala...it is the self who is trying, but the panna that arises with right awareness attends to the characteristic of nama as just a reality. It goes away so fast, it doesn't wait until one can tell whether that reality is kusala or akusala, because it is only the development of understanding the characteristic of nama as not self, just that, which can experience an object, and it is kusala or akusala (by) its nature, but in the beginning can we know it without understanding or attending to the characteristic which is different from rupa? #120071 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" nilovg Dear Phil, Op 8-nov-2011, om 15:36 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > But what if it is so bright it hurts our eyes? In that case, as > difficult as it is to understand, there is hardness impinging on > the eye sense, at a different moment. Right? -------- N: Hardness impinging on the bodysense, but at a different moment. Bodysense is all over the body, also in the eye. Nina. #120072 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Knowing kusala from akusala, not yet (transcript, Bodghaya 2005, pt.1) nilovg Dear Phil, excellent, I put it in my file. Nina. Op 8-nov-2011, om 16:22 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > S: "Theoretically, one can tell what is kusala and what is akusala, > but actually can we tell the moment that is kusala from akusala? So > it is only thinking theoretcially about what is kusala and akusala. #120073 From: A T Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Hello Howard, Scott, RobertK, >-------------------------------------------------- >HCW: I'm confused, Alex: Aggregates (khandhas) are collections, hence >concepts, and truths are concepts, I would think. However, ayatana, >dhatu, and indriya are considered paramattha dhammas, are they not? >------------------------------------------------- In the Puggalapannati Abh. Pitaka, those terms are put into singular when they are listed as concepts. "khandhapaññatti, āyatanapaññatti, dhātupaññatti, saccapaññatti, indriyapaññatti, puggalapaññattīti" Lets say we take, "khandhapaññatti" khandha singular, khandhā is nominative plural. The text uses aggregate in singular. So it is "concept of aggregate", not concept of groups of aggregates. Same with other concepts. āyatanapaññatti is concept of sphere (āyatana). āyatana = singular āyatanāni is nominative plural. When it talks about 5 aggregates: 2. Kittāvatā khandhānaṃ khandhapaññatti? Yāvatā pañcakkhandhā – rūpakkhandho, vedanākkhandho, saññākkhandho, saṅkhārakkhandho, viññāṇakkhandho; ettāvatā khandhānaṃ khandhapaññatti. "How far does concept of aggregate (singular) [go]? As far as 5 aggregates - aggregate of form, aggregate of feeling, aggregate of perception, aggregate of formation, aggregate of consciousness; so far of aggregates does concept of aggregate [is put]. My translation with a dictionary. The book that I have says this: 2. In what ways is there a designation of the aggregates? So far as there are five aggregates viz.- Material aggregate, sensation aggregate, perception aggregate, mental formation aggregate, consciousness aggregate. In these ways is there a designation of the aggregates." pg2 What do you think this quote says? As for what I believe: Whenever a person says anything from "Person" to "Citta, cetasika, rūpa, Nibbāna" all these words, as words, are concepts. One cannot take a citta like a brick and show it to someone else for examination. Since citta arises and passes very quickly, it can never take itself for observation, the much later and different citta does. When we investigate citta, we investigate concept, or sign of that citta. Citta is correlated with consciousness aggregate cetasika = sensation/perception/mental formation aggregates rūpa = aggregate of form So if aggregate (khandha) is a concept (paññatti), then khandhapaññatti means that aggregate which we *talk* about is conceptual, and this includes Citta, cetasika, rūpa. I am after the truth. I do not want to have sacred cows, even my own. If there is proof and reasonable justification, I believe it. My agenda is after the truth and Nibbāna. Asking questions is one of the ways I learn theory. With best wishes, Alex #120074 From: A T Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Aggregates, spheres, elements,...= concepts? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, >S: When you have time, also look in 'Useful Posts' under >'Puggalapa~n~natti' - you'll find a very informative set of posts >there >imo. You might like to re-post some of them too. >====================================================== I've started to look at them. If you have any specific point, please tell me where. "'the individual has no real existence. The term 'puggala' does not mean anything real." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/72336 I agree that puggala is not anything ultimately real. However, the same must be said about "aggregate, sphere, element, truth, faculty" because they are listed as paññatti alongside puggalapaññatti. "1. Cha paññattiyo – khandhapaññatti, āyatanapaññatti, dhātupaññatti, saccapaññatti, indriyapaññatti, puggalapaññattīti." Six concepts in the same line include "aggregate, sphere, element, truth, faculty" and person, without distinguishing them as different types of concepts. My understanding is that whenever one says anything from "Person" to "Citta," all these words, no matter how precise and technical, as words, are all concepts. Some more precise, some less. But still paññatti. Don't cling to any of them. With best wishes, Alex #120075 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti truth_aerator Dear Sarah, Nina, all, >Sarah wrote: We can then read the entire text of >"Puggala->pa~n~nati" >with >a)an understanding that all the references to people are >designations >or sammutisacca, pointing to various combinations of >cittas, cetasikas >and rupas, or >b) with an understanding, like the Puggalavaadins, that in each >example, 'the person is known in the sense of a real and ultimate >fact.... >------ >N: I prefer option a. >============================================================ Why no 3rd option? Puggala as a concept exists in the same conceptional way as collection of citta, cetasikas and rupa? Collection is a concept. Citta always arise as collection of citta + 7 cetasikas (usually much more). Rupa always arises as a collection of at least 8 rupas... With best wishes, Alex #120076 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:43 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I have highlighted the aspect that is clearly regarding active practice..." > > Scott: I disagree with your notion of 'active practice.' Great, you disagree. Thanks for shedding light on that. Can you say anything intelligible about what you think the conversations between the women were about, other than disagreeing with me? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #120077 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 5:27 am Subject: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa moellerdieter Dear Nina , all, I am afraid the message (introduction) will be bit longer .. Nyanatiloka Buddhist Dictionary: ahirika -anottappa: 'lack of moral shame and dread', are two of the 4 unwholesome factors associated with all kammically unwholesome states of consciousness, the two others being restlessness (uddhacca) and delusion (moha). Cf. Tab. II."There are two sinister things, namely, lack of moral shame and dread, etc." (A. II, 6). "Not to be ashamed of what one should be ashamed of; not to be ashamed of evil, unwholesome things: this is called lack of moral shame" (Pug. 59). "Not to dread what one should dread ... this is called lack of moral dread (Pug. 60). PTS provides 9 sources for ahirika :(see http://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/philologic/search3advanced?dbname=pali&query=ah\ irika&matchtype=exact&display=simple ) here only 2 of them : Hirika :modest in heart, conscientious D ii.78; M i.43; S ii.159. Hirika (& hirīka) (adj.) [fr. hiri] having shame, only as -- ˚ in neg. ahirika shameless, unscrupulous A i.51, 85; ii.219; Pug 19; It 27 (˚īka); J i.258 (chinna˚ id.); nt. ˚ŋ unscrupulousness Pug 19. Ottappa : v.123 sq.; Pug 71; Dhs 147, 277; Nett 39. -- anottappa (nt.) lack of conscience, unscrupulousness, disregard of morality A i.50, 83, 95; iii.421; v.146, 214; Vbh 341, 359, 370, 391; as adj. It 34 (ahirika +). -- gāravatā respect for conscience, A iii.331; iv.29. -- dhana the treasure of (moral) self-- control D iii.163, 251, 282; VvA 113. -- bala the power of a (good) conscience D unquote Lack of shame and dread seems to me a proper translation of the terms , which are related ( a shameless act /kamma nurtured by lack of fear ..) and probably mostly found as a pair in the suttas. Why Abhidhamma (e.g. Puggala Pannatti and as 2 Cetasikas) separated them , isn't yet clear to me. To know what is lacking respectively absent , we need to recall the concept of the terms , generating associations suitable for contemplation. Some ideas (from English - German dictionary http://www.dict.cc/?s=gen%C3%A4hrt , sorry I could not delete the German) asking for translation of 'veil and shame' . I added 'veil', because having the wellknown event , the Bible simile of Eve 's fall , in mind . The lack of dread initiated by the snake (and kama tanha) , lead to shame after the unwholesome act was discovered . The nakedness which needed to be veiled a highly fitting metaphor for the state of mind. Similar Wiki :'Shame is, variously, an affect, emotion, cognition, state, or condition. The roots of the word shame are thought to derive from an older word meaning to cover; as such, covering oneself, literally or figuratively, is a natural expression of shame ' however is not confirmed by etymology -at least acc. to my source - claiming a later meaning) to bring shame Schande bringen to shame oneself sich blamieren to shame oneself sich ein Armutszeugnis ausstellen to drop the veil den Schleier fallen lassen to raise the veil den Schleier lüften relig. to take the veil den Schleier nehmen to veil one's face sein Gesicht hinter einem Schleier verbergen to veil one's motives seine (wahren) Motive verbergen to cast off the veil den Schleier ablegen idiom to draw a veil over sth. den Schleier des Vergessens über etw. breiten to draw a veil over sth. etw. verbergen to draw a veil over sth. etw. zudecken to be a shame ein Skandal sein to blush for shame vor Scham erröten to blush with shame schamhaft erröten to blush with shame schamrot werden to blush with shame vor Scham erröten to bring shame on sb. jdn. beschämen to bring shame to kompromittieren to die with shame vor Schande sterben to feel intense shame sich sehr schämen to have no shame sich nicht schämen idiom to name and shame mit Schimpf und Schande belegen to name and shame sth./sb. etw./jdn. an den Pranger stellen to name and shame sth./sb. etw./jdn. anprangern to put sb. to shame jdm. Schande machen to put to shame beschämen to remember with shame sich voll Scham erinnern to shame sb. into doing sth. jdn. durch Beschämung zu etw. treiben to cause sb. shame or guilt Scham / Schuldgefühle bei jdm. hervorrufen to exhibit feelings of shame Schamgefühle zeigen to go red with shame schamrot werden to bow one's head in shame beschämt den Kopf (zu Boden) senken idiom to cast / draw a veil (of silence) over sth. [Br.] den Mantel des Schweigens über etw. legen to go bright red with shame [coll.] sich in Grund und Boden schämen [ugs.] to hang one's head in shame beschämt den Kopf hängen lassen Shame has to do with disgrace and the tabloid press makes it's money with to name and shame VIPs . The lack of shame and dread may concern in particular those who got used to shameful acts . In German the idiom is used: "ist der Ruf erst ruiniert, lebt man gaenzlich ungeniert ' meaning :you live freely if you haven't a reputation to lose (anymore). Which of course is valid only concerning the respect others may have for you but in fact adds to your negative kamma history. The 'candle' used to 'make out oneself a light' (and Dhamma) ' bare ' of guiding one's action.. But those haven't yet lost the sense of shame and dread , it 'weighs on anyone who feels the burning gaze of onlookers (be it real or imagined). Shame may be one of the more potent emotions, says Margaret Kemeny, a psychologist at University of California at San Francisco. "People think that all stresses have the same effect on the body, but stress caused by how others view you is extremely powerful, as much or more so than those caused from losing a job or working too hard' Bhikkhu Bodhi writes in The Guardians of the World http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_23.html extract: The Buddha points to two mental qualities as the underlying safeguards of morality, thus as the protectors of both the individual and society as a whole. These two qualities are called in Pali hiri and ottappa. Hiri is an innate sense of shame over moral transgression; ottappa is moral dread, fear of the results of wrongdoing. The Buddha calls these two states the bright guardians of the world (sukka lokapala). He gives them this designation because as long as these two states prevail in people's hearts the moral standards of the world remain intact, while when their influence wanes the human world falls into unabashed promiscuity and violence, becoming almost indistinguishable from the animal realm (Itiv. 42). While moral shame and fear of wrongdoing are united in the common task of protecting the mind from moral defilement, they differ in their individual characteristics and modes of operation. Hiri, the sense of shame, has an internal reference; it is rooted in self-respect and induces us to shrink from wrongdoing out of a feeling of personal honor. Ottappa, fear of wrongdoing, has an external orientation. It is the voice of conscience that warns us of the dire consequences of moral transgression: blame and punishment by others, the painful kammic results of evil deeds, the impediment to our desire for liberation from suffering. Acariya Buddhaghosa illustrates the difference between the two with the simile of an iron rod smeared with excrement at one end and heated to a glow at the other end: hiri is like one's disgust at grabbing the rod in the place where it is smeared with excrement, ottappa is like one's fear of grabbing it in the place where it is red hot. In the present-day world, with its secularization of all values, such notions as shame and fear of wrong are bound to appear antiquated, relics from a puritanical past when superstition and dogma manacled our rights to uninhibited self-expression. Yet the Buddha's stress on the importance of hiri and ottappa was based on a deep insight into the different potentialities of human nature. He saw that the path to deliverance is a struggle against the current, and that if we are to unfold the mind's capacities for wisdom, purity and peace, then we need to keep the powderkeg of the defilements under the watchful eyes of diligent sentinels. The project of self-cultivation, which the Buddha proclaims as the means to liberation from suffering, requires that we keep a critical watch over the movements of our minds, both on occasions when they motivate bodily and verbal deeds and when they remain inwardly absorbed with their own preoccupations. To exercise such self-scrutiny is an aspect of heedfulness (appamada), which the Buddha states is the path to the Deathless. In the practice of self-examination, the sense of shame and fear of wrongdoing play a crucial role. The sense of shame spurs us to overcome unwholesome mental states because we recognize that such states are blemishes on our character. They detract from the inward loftiness of character to be fashioned by the practice of the Dhamma, the stature of the ariyans or noble ones, who shine resplendent like lotus flowers upon the lake of the world. Fear of wrongdoing bids us to retreat from morally risky thoughts and actions because we recognize that such deeds are seeds with the potency to yield fruits, fruits that inevitably will be bitter. The Buddha asserts that whatever evil arises springs from a lack of shame and fear of wrong, while all virtuous deeds spring from the sense of shame and fear of wrong. By cultivating within ourselves the qualities of moral shame and fear of wrongdoing we not only accelerate our own progress along the path to deliverance, but also contribute our share toward the protection of the world. Given the intricate interconnections that hold between all living forms, to make the sense of shame and fear of wrong the guardians of our own minds is to make ourselves guardians of the world. As the roots of morality, these two qualities sustain the entire efficacy of the Buddha's liberating path; as the safeguards of personal decency, they at the same time preserve the dignity of the human race.' unquote Nice following Mahayana texts after some contemplation of the topics' : For all the evil deeds I have done in the past, Created by my body, speech and mind, From beginningless greed, hatred and delusion, I now know shame and repent them all. Traditional Repentance Verse from "The Practices & Vows of Samantabadra Bodhisattva" (Avatamsaka Sutra, Chapter 40 to be continued .. assumed a positive reaction ;-) with Metta Dieter #120078 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "...The book that I have says this: '2. In what ways is there a designation of the aggregates? So far as there are five aggregates viz.- Material aggregate, sensation aggregate, perception aggregate, mental formation aggregate, consciousness aggregate. In these ways is there a designation of the aggregates.' pg2 What do you think this quote says?" Scott: 'Designation' refers to naama as 'name,' as pa~n~nati that 'bends' towards the realities - the paramattha dhammaa - so designated. A: "...Whenever a person says anything from 'Person' to 'Citta, cetasika, ruupa, Nibbaana' all these words, as words, are concepts..." Scott: Yes, Alex, words are concepts. A: "...One cannot take a citta like a brick and show it to someone else for examination. Since citta arises and passes very quickly, it can never take itself for observation, the much later and different citta does. When we investigate citta, we investigate concept, or sign of that citta..." Scott: Nimitta and pa~n~natti are two very different things. A: "...if aggregate (khandha) is a concept (pa~n~natti), then khandhapa~n~natti means that aggregate which we *talk* about is conceptual, and this includes Citta, cetasika, ruupa..." Scott: Yes, Alex, when we 'talk' about it, this is pa~n~natti - words are concepts. Now, do us a favour, won't you? Do you mean to infer by all this perseveration that there is, therefore, no such thing as paramattha dhammaa? Scott. #120079 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:07 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "Great, you disagree. Thanks for shedding light on that. Can you say anything intelligible about what you think the conversations between the women were about, other than disagreeing with me?" Scott: Tch. Tch. Getting a wee bit petulant, are we Rob? Well, no matter, have a cup of tea or something. As noted much, much earlier, these were - to use a phrase that Nina used (but that I'm not so thrilled about) - 'pep talks.' Nothing more. What might you imagine them to be - I mean beyond a 'pep talk' which, when push comes to shove, is nothing at all whatsoever. Scott. #120080 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Why no 3rd option? Puggala as a concept exists in the same conceptional way as collection of citta, cetasikas and rupa? Collection is a concept. Citta always arise as collection of citta + 7 cetasikas (usually much more). Rupa always arises as a collection of at least 8 rupas..." Scott: What is the difference between a concept and a reality, Alex? (And again, who are you reading these days to have put you on such a very, very wrong footing with all this?) Scott. #120081 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 6:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 11/8/2011 12:04:08 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, Scott, RobertK, >-------------------------------------------------- >HCW: I'm confused, Alex: Aggregates (khandhas) are collections, hence >concepts, and truths are concepts, I would think. However, ayatana, >dhatu, and indriya are considered paramattha dhammas, are they not? >------------------------------------------------- In the Puggalapannati Abh. Pitaka, those terms are put into singular when they are listed as concepts. "khandhapaññatti, āyatanapaññatti, dhātupaññatti, saccapaññatti, indriyapaññatti, puggalapaññattīti" Lets say we take, "khandhapaññatti" khandha singular, khandhā is nominative plural. The text uses aggregate in singular. ------------------------------------------- HCW: 'khandha' SHOULD be singular, just as 'collection' (as opposed to 'collections') is singular in English. --------------------------------------------- So it is "concept of aggregate", not concept of groups of aggregates. --------------------------------------------- HCW: So what? The term 'dhātupaññatti' refers not to a dhatu, but to the-concept-of-element. That doesn't make dhatus concepts! Any experienced instance of, say, solidity, is an actual physical sensation, a body-door rupa, and is not a concept. I consider conceptualization/convention to enter in only when we, through thinking, "encapsulate" the sensation, superimposing upon the object of consciousness, the idea of a separate, packet-like entity. But when feeling hardness/solidity/earth element, we are actually and directly experiencing a physical phenomenon, not a concept, for we are not then engaged in thinking. ---------------------------------------------------------- Same with other concepts. āyatanapaññatti is concept of sphere (āyatana). āyatana = singular āyatanāni is nominative plural. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: Again, so what? I don't get the point. ---------------------------------------------------- When it talks about 5 aggregates: 2. Kittāvatā khandhānaṃ khandhapaññatti? Yāvatā pañcakkhandhā – rū pakkhandho, vedanākkhandho, saññākkhandho, saṅkhārakkhandho, viññāṇ akkhandho; ettāvatā khandhānaṃ khandhapaññatti. "How far does concept of aggregate (singular) [go]? As far as 5 aggregates - aggregate of form, aggregate of feeling, aggregate of perception, aggregate of formation, aggregate of consciousness; so far of aggregates does concept of aggregate [is put]. My translation with a dictionary. The book that I have says this: 2. In what ways is there a designation of the aggregates? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Designation pertains to distinguishing by thought and speech. ------------------------------------------------- So far as there are five aggregates viz.- Material aggregate, sensation aggregate, perception aggregate, mental formation aggregate, consciousness aggregate. In these ways is there a designation of the aggregates." pg2 What do you think this quote says? ------------------------------------------------ HCW: I don't see what is so mysterious about it. Each of these five aggregates is a collection of dhammas. So? ------------------------------------------------- As for what I believe: Whenever a person says anything from "Person" to "Citta, cetasika, rūpa, Nibbāna" all these words, as words, are concepts. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: Every word is a concept (in the verbal sense). And it reflects an internal concept, which is imagined (or projected) in the process of thinking. But when someone feels, say, warmth, they are not feeling a concept. They are feeling a body-door sensation. ----------------------------------------------------- One cannot take a citta like a brick and show it to someone else for examination. Since citta arises and passes very quickly, it can never take itself for observation, the much later and different citta does. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: Okay. There is only one object of consciousness at a time, and there is never any case of consciousness taking itself as object. -------------------------------------------------------- When we investigate citta, we investigate concept, or sign of that citta. -------------------------------------------------------- HCW: When there is the examining of a mind state, the present object is a near-perfect "photo-copy" (or "clone" or "fresh memory") of a just-passed state. As regards consciousness of namas as objects, i.e., as regards introspection, yes, it is slightly indirect. -------------------------------------------------------- Citta is correlated with consciousness aggregate ------------------------------------------------------- HCW: What do you mean by citta being "correlated" with that aggregate? Any citta is a member of that aggregate. As a mass noun, of course, 'citta' is the name of the consciousness aggregate. ------------------------------------------------------- cetasika = sensation/perception/mental formation aggregates rūpa = aggregate of form So if aggregate (khandha) is a concept (paññatti), then khandhapaññatti means that aggregate which we *talk* about is conceptual, and this includes Citta, cetasika, rūpa. -------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Sorry, Alex. Khandhas by themselves, being literally collections, are concepts. But 'khandhapaññatti' means "concept of khandha," which is a concept of a kind of concept. In any case, I don't get your basic point, The rupakkhandha is the collection of all possible 5-sense-door dhammas, and being a collection, it is a concept. Rupapaññatti is the concept of "rupa," and while it is slightly different from the concept that is the collection of all rupas, it is clearly related, But any particular rupas, any instances of sights, sounds, tastes, smells, bodily sensations, and any particular namas for that matter - these are not concepts. -------------------------------------------------------------------- I am after the truth. I do not want to have sacred cows, even my own. If there is proof and reasonable justification, I believe it. My agenda is after the truth and Nibbāna. Asking questions is one of the ways I learn theory. ------------------------------------------------------- HCW: That's very good, I believe. But I am somehow missing exactly what your thesis is here. ----------------------------------------------------- With best wishes, Alex =================================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120082 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:09 am Subject: concepts truth_aerator Scott, all, >A: "...The book that I have says this: >'2. In what ways is there a designation of the aggregates? So far >as there are five aggregates viz.- Material aggregate, sensation >aggregate, perception aggregate, mental formation aggregate, >consciousness aggregate. In these ways is there a designation of the >aggregates.' pg2 What do you think this quote says?" > >Scott: 'Designation' refers to naama as 'name,' as pa~n~nati that >'bends' towards the realities - the paramattha dhammaa - so >designated. >======================================== Designation in that refers to pannatti. Which is why I prefer to quote pali. > : "...Whenever a person says anything from 'Person' to 'Citta, >cetasika, ruupa, Nibbaana' all these words, as words, are >concepts..." > > Scott: Yes, Alex, words are concepts. >====================================== Including words and concepts about "paramattha dhamma". >Scott: Yes, Alex, when we 'talk' about it, this is pa~n~natti - >words are concepts. >======================================== And it is ONLY concepts that we can talk about, no matter how precise they can be. The citta does not last long enough to be investigated by that same citta, or by other citta. Any citta also comes with 7 cetasikas, so it is a group... And group is called a concept by some... With best wishes, Alex #120083 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti truth_aerator Hello Scott, Howard, all, >Scott: What is the difference between a concept and a reality, >=========================================== Concept is using words to describe something. At best it is like showing a menu. Reality is what one experiences right now without having to think about it or to put it in words. Present experience such as seeing color, hearing sound, cognizing, etc is. But when it is put into words (which at best merely point to something), then it becomes a concept that can be communicated. With best wishes, Alex #120084 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:51 am Subject: Useless cittas [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" philofillet Hi Nina > Bodysense is all over the body, also in the eye. I think only hair and the fingernails are excluded. This point of very bright lights and very loud sounds being experienced as hardness at different moments than the sounds are heard and the light is seen is helpful for understanding how quickly processes happen, and how little control there is. In addition to seeing the light and feeling the pain there are also so many countless bhavanga cittas, and mind door processes that begin to make sense of the sense door object. But it is all useless. That is a teaching I like these days, useless cittas. I prefer when A.Sujin calls cittas and citta processes useless rather than miraculous which I heard once. They are useless. We live to hear, see, taste, touch, we work so hard at our jobs to feed our need to do so, form friendships and relationships to do so, life after life after countless lifetime, dragged on and on by our sensory intoxication and ignorance. All so useless. But a moment of awareness of a reality of seeing, hearing, tasting touching - just one - and there is a hole in the roof of lobha, a place to stand in the sea of concepts. Understanding is the only way out... Phil #120085 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:58 am Subject: Re: concepts scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Including words and concepts about 'paramattha dhamma'." Scott: Yes, Alex, words designating anything are concepts. A: "And it is ONLY concepts that we can talk about, no matter how precise they can be..." Scott: Yes, Alex, talking about stuff is conceptual. A"...The citta does not last long enough to be investigated by that same citta, or by other citta." Scott: This, of course, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. What is your source? Who is filling your head with this nonsense. Alex, it is the subsequent citta that knows the previous citta. It's Nagarjuna, isn't it? And Howard doesn't even know what you are going on about. A: "Any citta also comes with 7 cetasikas, so it is a group... And group is called a concept by some..." Scott: Yes, the designation 'group' is a concept. What you need to answer is, what is *a reality*? (Not 'reality') Scott. #120086 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:01 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Hi Howard, > -------------------------------------------------------- >HCW:Khandhas by themselves, being literally collections, are >concepts. But 'khandhapaññatti' means "concept of khandha," which >is a concept of a kind of concept. >=========================================== If Khandhas and Khandha are concepts, then when we *talk* about them, we talk (as in using words), about concepts. >HCW:But any particular rupas, any instances of sights, sounds, >tastes, smells, bodily sensations, and any particular namas for >that >matter - these are not concepts. > -------------------------------------------------------------- Right. But we cannot directly speak of them. Whenever we speak, write or read, we are using words not those exact cittas and rupas. One's direct experience is private. Words are like words on menu. Direct experience is like eating the actual food. Of course at this moment there is seeing colors, thinking, with the body feeling of hardness/softness, heaviness/lightness, etc. But when we talk about them, we use words to communicate them. No matter how technical or precise communication using words is, it is still conceptual. Direct experience is ultimately what is needed (this is where meditation comes in). IMHO. With best wishes, Alex #120087 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:07 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Puggala pa~n~natti scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Concept is using words to describe something. At best it is like showing a menu." Scott: Alex, you've performed a miracle - everyone on this list agrees with this statement you've been repeating like a mantra. We get it. A: "Reality is what one experiences right now without having to think about it or to put it in words. Present experience such as seeing color, hearing sound, cognizing, etc is..." Scott: What is *a reality*? I'm not interested in this catch-all, fuzzy, imprecise notion of 'experience.' (Ask Rob E.) Seeing is a reality. Hearing is a reality. Visible object is a reality. Sound is a reality. A: "But when it is put into words (which at best merely point to something), then it becomes a concept that can be communicated." Scott: Yes, Alex. This is stating the absolute obvious and stating it a lot over and over and over again. What, for you, is *a reality*? What is your new-fangled opinion about paramattha dhammaa? It's a fair question. I'm not trying to bug you - well, not too hard yet. Scott. #120088 From: "connie" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 3:22 am Subject: Fw: sangiitisutta, Tens, sutta 2. nichiconn Dear Friends, CSCD 346. Dasa kasi.naayatanaani. Pathaviikasi.nameko sa~njaanaati, uddha.m adho tiriya.m advaya.m appamaa.na.m. aapokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati...pe... tejokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... vaayokasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... niilakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... piitakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... lohitakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... odaatakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... aakaasakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati... vi~n~naa.nakasi.nameko sa~njaanaati, uddha.m adho tiriya.m advaya.m appamaa.na.m. Walshe DN 33.3.3(2) 'Ten objects for the attainment of absorption (kasi.naayatanaani): *1127 He perceives the Earth-Kasi.na, the Water-Kasi.na, the Fire-Kasi.na, the Wind-Kasi.na, the Blue Kasi.na, the Yellow Kasi.na, the Red Kasi.na, the White Kasi.na, the Space-Kasi.na, the Consciousness Kasi.na, *1128 above, below, on all sides, undivided, unbounded. Olds [ 10.2 ] Ten complete spheres:[ 10.2 ] One recognizes the earth device above, below, across, as non-dual[ 10.2.1 ], unbounded. One recognizes the water device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the fire device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the wind device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the deep-blue device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the golden-colored device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the blood-read device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the white device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the space device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. One recognizes the consciousness device above, below, across, non-dual, unbounded. RDs [ 10.2 ] Ten objects for self-hypnosis.[10.2] These, perceived severally as above, below or across, and as homogeneous, and without limits, are a piece of earth [extended matter], water, fire, air, indigo, yellow, red, white, space, consciousness.[10.2.1] *walshe: 1127 Not 'objects for self-hypnosis' (RD). The jhaanas differ from hypnotic trance in that one has full control and is not suggestible. I am indebted to Dr Nick Ribush for this valuable clarification. (cf. n.211). 211 Saka-sa~n~nii hoti: lit. 'becomes own-perceiving'. From the first jhaana on one has some control over one's perceptions. 1128 There is some confusion about the last two members of this list. Elsewhere we find aaloka 'light' instead of consciousness (the latter is difficult to envisage as a kasi.na). See VM 5.26 and n.5 there. ***rd: [10.2] Kasi.na, 'in the sense of entire (sakala).' Comy. Cf. Bud. Ps. Eth., pp. 43 f., n. 4; 57 f., n. 2. [10.2.1] On the varying number of these 'objects' in Buddhist literature see B.P.E., p.57, n.2. Buddhaghosa also comments thereon in The Expositor, p. 249 f., but not here, nor in the Visuddhimagga, though he refers to fuller treatment there. There he drops the 'consciousness' object altogether, substituting aaloka, or brightness. He identifies the former with the second of the Eight Deliverances (or second Aruupa-jhaana). See above (mo: follow links). ...to be continued, connie #120089 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:15 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" philofillet Hi all > > But when we talk about them, we use words to communicate them. No matter how technical or precise communication using words is, it is still conceptual. Direct experience is ultimately what is needed (this is where meditation comes in). IMHO. > Ping! Now we see where all this was going, what Alex's "thesis" was here. Alex has read here for several years and has come to the conclusion that the people who have spent countless hours explaining to him are advocating nothing more than talking about cittas. Phil #120090 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:48 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "...Alex has read here for several years and has come to the conclusion that the people who have spent countless hours explaining to him are advocating nothing more than talking about cittas." Scott: I really sense that Alex is working up to something bigger, Phil. The plug for 'meditation' was expected (and it's about time - I couldn't stand the tension) but I'm thinking there are more surprises in store. Like how experience is all shifting and changing and stuff like that and like I don't know what but that it isn't Nibaana because everything is Nibaana - stuff like this. Scott. #120091 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:54 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "Great, you disagree. Thanks for shedding light on that. Can you say anything intelligible about what you think the conversations between the women were about, other than disagreeing with me?" > > Scott: Tch. Tch. Getting a wee bit petulant, are we Rob? Well, no matter, have a cup of tea or something. > > As noted much, much earlier, these were - to use a phrase that Nina used (but that I'm not so thrilled about) - 'pep talks.' Nothing more. What might you imagine them to be - I mean beyond a 'pep talk' which, when push comes to shove, is nothing at all whatsoever. So basically you think that much of sutta material is just a bunch of junk. Good to know. Buddha couldn't have possibly been pointing out that the practice of satipatthana on the part of those women was praiseworthy, because that would contradict your view. Nice going. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #120092 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:59 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > > > Hi all > > > > But when we talk about them, we use words to communicate them. No matter how technical or precise communication using words is, it is still conceptual. Direct experience is ultimately what is needed (this is where meditation comes in). IMHO. > > > > Ping! Now we see where all this was going, what Alex's "thesis" was here. > > Alex has read here for several years and has come to the conclusion that the people who have spent countless hours explaining to him are advocating nothing more than talking about cittas. Ping! No, actually Alex is pointing out correctly that all linguistic understanding is conceptual. That is good to take stock of. When he says that direct experience is "ultimately" what is needed, wouldn't you agree? His view is that meditation promotes this direct experience, and with that you would disagree. So instead of having an intelligent discussion about what you all agree on, and where you disagree, you give him a nice "Ping" and a sarcastic comment, dismissing everything he says. Nice going. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120093 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:08 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "So basically you think that much of sutta material is just a bunch of junk. Good to know. Buddha couldn't have possibly been pointing out that the practice of satipatthana on the part of those women was praiseworthy, because that would contradict your view. Nice going." Scott: About that cup of tea, Rob. Might be a good idea... Anyway, so yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. Since I disagree with what you interpret the commentarial position to be, it automatically means that I think that 'much of sutta material is just a bunch of junk.' Satipa.t.thaana, naturally developed, arising strength, is praiseworthy. What I do not praise is your interpretation that the so-called 'practice of satipa.t.thaana' is what is being talked about. You've swallowed the whole modern-day misconception about 'practice' and tout it at every turn. I think you are wrong in this. I'm not sure whether I've mentioned this before... Scott. #120094 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:20 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., What I meant to say was:' Me: "Satipa.t.thaana, naturally developed, arising *in* strength, is praiseworthy." Scott: I forgot the word 'in' when I sent it and it looked all wrong and stuff when I read it later and then I had to amend it. By the way, so you don't have to ask what I think about the whole thing, the above *is* my statement of what I think about the whole thing. That is what you can springboard off of for some more intelligent discussion. Scott. #120095 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 10:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" philofillet Hi Scott(and Alex) > Ph: "...Alex has read here for several years and has come to the conclusion that the people who have spent countless hours explaining to him are advocating nothing more than talking about cittas." > > Scott: I really sense that Alex is working up to something bigger, Phil. The plug for 'meditation' was expected (and it's about time - I couldn't stand the tension) but I'm thinking there are more surprises in store. Like how experience is all shifting and changing and stuff like that and like I don't know what but that it isn't Nibaana because everything is Nibaana - stuff like this. ph: We'll see. Nina and Sarah take his questions seriously and praise him for pervevering so maybe I am missing the boat but it seems to me that Alex's purpose with every post is to try to tear down Abhidhamma and/or DSG's approach to Dhamma. But it's somehow hard to stop reading his posts because he does obviously study at least. I remember a few years ago I told James that he might have a road to Damsscus moment and come to appreciate Abhidhamma intensely. There was no reason to think that but with Alex I have a hunch it might possibly happen. So thank you and Rob K , Connie and the triumvirate of ultra patience (N,S and J) for persevering where I can't - he may be Saul on the verge of getting whacked by a view shifting moment of understanding. I say that sincerely. As I said to him the other day he is obvioysly devoted to Dhamma, some strong past life connection to Dhamma. As I said to him I do hope he can ordain some day. #120096 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Hello all, >Scott: I really sense that Alex is working up to something bigger >======================================================= Yes. All that we can say are words. Even thoughts about something is still thinking. When we consider or conceive something, we consider using words. Words and "what they point to" are different. It is one thing to read the list of ingredients and another one is to actually taste it. One of the suttas I've had in mind is MN#1 "There is the case, monks, where [alex: puthujjana] perceives *earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he conceives [things] about earth, he conceives [things] in earth, he conceives [things] coming out of earth, he conceives earth as 'mine,' he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you." [*same is repeated for other 23 items that include within it citta, cetasikas and rupa] Sekha: "A monk who is a trainee...Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not conceive things about earth, let him not conceive things in earth, let him not conceive things coming out of earth, let him not conceive earth as 'mine,' let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you." ======================================================== One needs to directly know. One shouldn't conceive things about experience. ==================================== "A monk who is a Worthy One,...directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he does not conceive things about earth, does not conceive things in earth, does not conceive things coming out of earth, does not conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.001.than.html ===================================== So Direct knowledge, not thinking, needs to be developed and every kind of conceiving abandoned. ================================================== "Consciousness without feature,[1] without end, luminous all around: Here water, earth, fire, & wind have no footing. Here long & short coarse & fine fair & foul name & form are all brought to an end." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html#fnt-1 ===================================================== I understand this to mean that Arhat's consciousness which has seen through concepts does not take a footing, attach or incline to any concept of phenomena including namarupa. Concepts no longer "bother" an Arahant and no conception of what was seen, heard, sensed or cognized can ever negatively affect an Arahant. Of course if any phenomena is considered somehow to be ultimate (and thus more worthy than others), this is attachment that cannot be in the Arahant. ============================================================ ""Thus, monks, the Tathagata, when seeing what is to be seen, doesn't construe an [object as] seen. He doesn't construe an unseen. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-seen. He doesn't construe a seer. "When hearing..."When sensing..."When cognizing what is to be cognized, he doesn't construe an [object as] cognized. He doesn't construe an uncognized. He doesn't construe an [object] to-be-cognized. He doesn't construe a cognizer. Thus, monks, the Tathagata being the same with regard to all phenomena that can be seen, heard, sensed, & cognized is 'Such.' And I tell you: There's no other 'Such' higher or more sublime. "Whatever is seen or heard or sensed and fastened onto as true by others, One who is Such among the self-fettered wouldn't further claim to be true or even false. "Having seen well in advance that arrow where generations are fastened & hung 'I know, I see, that's just how it is!' there's nothing of the Tathagata fastened." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.024.than.html ================================================================== With best wishes, Alex #120097 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:04 pm Subject: Useless cittas [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" philofillet Hi again Nina >I prefer when A.Sujin calls cittas and citta processes useless rather than miraculous which I heard once. I remember now that you pointed out that the "miraculous" refers to the profundity of the Buddha's understanding on these points. I think that in a way that is in itself a benefit of studying Abhidhamma. We get a better sense of how profound Dhamma is, and it makes it less easy to latch on to what we would otherwise see as instructions etc in suttas. The Dhamma is so much more profound than a reading of suttas (especially in translation) can possibly indicate to modern readers. Phil #120098 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 12:49 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi Dieter ( Howard, Nina, all) > I am afraid the message (introduction) will be bit longer .. I know I've been a bit of a bitch recently but I wonder how this project is going to work if (correct me if I am wrong) you and Howard and others will approach studying this aspect of Abhidhamma in order to "come and see it" in a kalamesque way, in other words finding where it is helpful and where it isn't, where it can be understood experientially and where it can't, and so on. It just seems that could only lead to the usual mess of debating, and of course, maybe that *isn't* a mess, maybe debating is very valuable and I am simply incapable of it. But still, I wonder if approaching in a completely receptive way, in a kind of "let's lay down our thinking caps and just accept it as it's taught" (there's probably a word for that) way for the length of this project, to find out exactly what Abhidhamma and commentary to Abhidhamma teaches about cetasikas. And then, at the end of that project, there could be a return to the usual debating, with a better shared understanding of what exactly Abhidhamma teaches improving the quality of the debate. But everyone may enjoy and benefit from the usual debating, so this is just my opinion. And an explanation of why I am steering away from this project though it is obviously a worthy proposition on your part, thaks for suggesting it. Phil #120099 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:07 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, Me: "I really sense that Alex is working up to something bigger" A: "Yes...One needs to directly know. One shouldn't conceive things about experience...So Direct knowledge, not thinking, needs to be developed and every kind of conceiving abandoned...Of course if any phenomena is considered somehow to be ultimate (and thus more worthy than others), this is attachment that cannot be in the Arahant..." Scott: Awesome. Especially the coda, wherein an excellent comprehension of the term 'paramattha' is demonstrated. Is 'direct knowledge' a reality? Scott. #120100 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:11 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "...I wonder if approaching it in a completely receptive way, in a kind of 'let's lay down our thinking caps and just accept it as it's taught' (there's probably a word for that)..." Scott: That's known as 'dogmatism.' Scott. #120101 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:21 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" kenhowardau Hi Alex (Scott and Phil), ----------- >> Scott: I really sense that Alex is working up to something bigger >> > A: Yes. All that we can say are words. Even thoughts about something is still thinking. When we consider or conceive something, we consider using words. Words and "what they point to" are different. It is one thing to read the list of ingredients and another one is to actually taste it. ---------- KH: Is there a hint in there? about what you are working up to? :-) Ven Thanissaro teaches that there is too much "thinking" doesn't he? He says anatta is just a way to stop thinking (about self). And he (or someone at ATI) has said the Abhidhamma is not conducive to meditation. Too much thinking? If I had to bet on what you were "working up to" my money would be on ordination at Wat Metta. Do I win? :-) ----------------- <. . .> > A: One needs to directly know. One shouldn't conceive things about experience. <. . .> > So Direct knowledge, not thinking, needs to be developed and every kind of conceiving abandoned. <. . .> > "Consciousness without feature,[1] without end, luminous all around: Here water,earth, fire, & wind have no footing. Here long & short coarse & fine fair & foul name & form are all brought to an end." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.11.0.than.html#fnt-1 > > I understand this to mean that Arhat's consciousness which has seen through concepts does not take a footing, attach or incline to any concept of phenomena including namarupa. Concepts no longer "bother" an Arahant and no conception of what was seen, heard, sensed or cognized can ever negatively affect an Arahant. > Of course if any phenomena is considered somehow to be ultimate (and thus more worthy than others), this is attachment that cannot be in the Arahant. --------------- KH: That's Thanissaro's doctrine, isn't it? Or aren't you allowed to say? I remember Victor never admitted to having a connection with Thanissaro. Right up to the time when he left DSG to ordain at Wat Metta he never said a word about it. Perhaps he wasn't allowed to. Perhaps it's a rule for prospective initiates. (?) Phil is encouraging you to ordain, but I would encourage you not to. Until you have seen the world as a single moment of nama and rupa, you can have no idea of what being a monk means. Stay at DSG and find out! :-) Ken H PS to all: I will be staying with my unwell mother for a few days no internet. See you next week, I hope. #120102 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Scott, >Scott: Is 'direct knowledge' a reality? >================== What you've said are just words which at best can only point to something, inspire, and give instruction on where to look and what to do in order to have real direct knowledge unmediated by words. Words written in the Book is like items on a menu. Direct knowledge is like eating the food. You can't taste the food by reading the menu. You need to eat the actual food. With best wishes, Alex #120103 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:30 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Hi KenH, >KH: Ven Thanissaro teaches that there is too much "thinking" doesn't >he? >====================================== I don't know. Did Ven. TB teach it? >If I had to bet on what you were "working up to" my money would be >on ordination at Wat Metta. >========================================== I'd prefer a monastery where I can get full ordination quickly. If I am not mistaken, it takes a long time there to get ordained in US. I've been to the webpage for their monastery long time ago. >KH: That's Thanissaro's doctrine, isn't it? >=========================================== All consciousness ceases at Parinibbana. Is that his doctrine? Ven.TB isn't my personal hero, though I am sure he is a very good person and has done many good things and I wish him all the best. With best wishes, Alex #120104 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 1:55 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Phil, > > Ph: "...I wonder if approaching it in a completely receptive way, in a kind of 'let's lay down our thinking caps and just accept it as it's taught' (there's probably a word for that)..." > > Scott: That's known as 'dogmatism.' Woof, woof, throw me a bone. But I think there has to be a kind of provisional acceptance in order to listen to deep Dhamma otherwise there are so many inbred objections that can arise. Somewhere there is a sutta in which the Buddhs praises provisionally accepting that something is true, not accepting it lock and seal, but almost kind of experimenting with believing it is true. I think there is such a sutta, but could be wrong and am probably remembering it incorrectly if there is... Phil Metta, Phil #120105 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:09 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi again I wrote: > Phil > > > > Metta, > > Phil Here a moment of awareness of no-metta conditioned the arising of a moment of radiating metta in just one direction. Having decided to shed the "metta" and just write Phil feels good, reminds me of when I became so bald I went beyond caring. Who cares about salutation choices, I know. But now no more radiating metta jokes, which I enjoyed. Me... Phil #120106 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 2:39 pm Subject: Ivan's Letters 5: realities involved in thinking philofillet Hi all Here is another great letter from Ivan writing as Matt Roke. > > Dear Antony, > > >Mahasi Sayadaw taught: > >"Why don't we meditate on things past or future? Because they > >will not make you understand the real nature and cleanse you of > >defilements. ........... > > When sitting in meditation there are realities arising and falling away that > create a concept of "me sitting in meditation" trying to do things or trying > not to do things. There are realities arising and falling away at the rupa > sense doors, such as sounds, smells and body sensations etc., and there are > realities arising at the mind door, such as lobha, dosa and thinking etc. > > When the reality of thinking arises, the concept it creates may be of the > present, of the past or of the future. It does not matter what the concept > is, because the concept is not real. What is real is the thinking. When > wisdom arises with the cita it will know those moments of thinking for the > reality they are. When it does not arise then there is just the story, which > conditions attachment and aversion and more thinking. > > Thinking that one should not have thoughts of the past or future is just > another concept that arises with ideas about a self and a world, and without > wisdom that knows the moments for the realities that they are. When these > thoughts arise there can be conditions for wisdom to understand the real > nature of the moment and when there is wisdom where are the defilements? > > > >I would like to know how to deal with memories of a beautiful woman I met > >once. Is it too late to perceive her as unattractive with asubha practice?. > > > Memories of a beautiful woman are just more realities arising and falling > away. There is the reality of thinking, the reality of lobha (finding her > attractive and wanting to purge the thought) and maybe the reality of dosa > (regret or guilt about having the thought). > > Changing the thought from one that is attractive to one that is unattractive > is not wisdom. It is still just thinking accompanied by cetasikas that are > unknown because of ignorance. > > Wisdom doesn't discriminate as to whether a thought is about a pretty girl > or an ugly corps, it just knows the reality of thinking for what it is. > > The thoughts of this girl can be a condition for knowing that what arises it > is nama not rupa and for knowing the characturistics of lobha and dosa. > > MattR > > _________________________________________________________________ > Find love today with ninemsn personals. Click here: > http://ninemsn.match.com?referrer=hotmailtagline > #120107 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 3:24 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "What you've said are just words which at best can only point to something, inspire, and give instruction on where to look and what to do in order to have real direct knowledge unmediated by words. Words written in the Book is like items on a menu. Direct knowledge is like eating the food. You can't taste the food by reading the menu. You need to eat the actual food." Scott: I'm finished here, Alex. The above is trite, superficial, pseudo-important and hardly of any use. I guess you must be a modern buddhist teacher now. Scott. #120108 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 3:26 pm Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "So basically you think that much of sutta material is just a bunch of junk. Good to know. Buddha couldn't have possibly been pointing out that the practice of satipatthana on the part of those women was praiseworthy, because that would contradict your view. Nice going." > > Scott: About that cup of tea, Rob. Might be a good idea... Hey, I don't know where you're reading the big agitation but it's all in your own mind. I'm just saying that I think your view is disparaging Buddha and dismissing an awful lot of sutta material. I mean, it wasn't my idea to include the praises of the women in the sutta pitaka, it was the Buddha's and the succeeding councils I guess, who thought it had some value. So, I am calm, dear Scott, but I see in you someone who is picking and choosing what parts of Dhamma he wants to accept. If the women's story is just the story of a meaningless "pep talk," which is basically what you said, then I guess you are a little more clear than Buddha and the commentators on what constitutes the real Dhamma. I don't blame you for focusing your attention on imagined agitation on my part instead of your own makeshift version of Dhamma that dismisses much of what the Buddha said. If I were you I'd be nervous about it too! Good luck buddy! > Anyway, so yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. Since I disagree with what you interpret the commentarial position to be, it automatically means that I think that 'much of sutta material is just a bunch of junk.' Hey, you're the one who said the women's praising of each other's practice of satipatthana was "just a meaningless pep talk." Did you say it or not? You said it, not me, and yet there it is in the commentary. I thought the commentaries at least gave us the "straight talk" on Dhamma. Oh well. [Sorry I keep forgetting it's a commentary not a sutta in this case.] So in this case you are dismissive of the commentary and think they are focusing on "meaningless pep talks." In that you disagree with the commentary which is reporting the praiseworthy behavior of the women. You guys kill me! Recently Phil was critical of K. Sujin! Isn't that the living end? Because she said that sati should be there "all the time," which appears to contradict the idea of sati just arising here and there. Of course she is talking about someone who is developed enough that sati arises more and more frequently and finally is "the natural state" as she put it. But wow, watch the hackles go up as suspicion mounts that perhaps even K. Sujin is talking about a continuous state and saying "should" about it. Even K. Sujin and the commentaries can be thrown overboard in a moment if they say the wrong thing and contradict rigid list-member's desperately-clung-to views of how dhammas arise and the nature of citta. What a hoot! I also noticed the other day how upset you got when Sarah said that book-learning was not pariyatti, and I think you almost had a stroke. > Satipa.t.thaana, naturally developed, arising strength, is praiseworthy. > > What I do not praise is your interpretation that the so-called 'practice of satipa.t.thaana' is what is being talked about. You've swallowed the whole modern-day misconception about 'practice' and tout it at every turn. Well what is the problem with the commentary then? I didn't make the damn thing up - it says that the women would ask "What Arousing of Mindfulness are you practicing" It's in the commentary, for pt's sake, I didn't get it from some new-age guru. Yet instead of acknowledging that this is what it says in the commentary you want to fantasize and make believe that I made it up with some wild new-age notion. It's in the commentary. The women would answer with "Thus and Such Arousing" that they were practicing and if they said "None," they were condemned by those super-panna-infused women. Since those women were a lot smarter than you, and so is the commentary, maybe you can learn something from them, rather than saying they are "new-age kooks" who are misinterpreting Buddhism when they crack your cherished notions. But I'm not holding my breath. > I think you are wrong in this. I'm not sure whether I've mentioned this before... And what about the commentary? What about the women who praised each other for practicing "Thus and such Arousing of Mindfulness?" Can you please tell me what you think they were really secretly up to when they said that? Oh, I forget, right, it was just a meaningless pep talk for which they were praised to the skies as true followers of Dhamma. Scott, you are really stuck in a very tiny box. I hope you get out some day. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #120109 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 3:32 pm Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > What I meant to say was:' > > Me: "Satipa.t.thaana, naturally developed, arising *in* strength, is praiseworthy." > > Scott: I forgot the word 'in' when I sent it and it looked all wrong and stuff when I read it later and then I had to amend it. By the way, so you don't have to ask what I think about the whole thing, the above *is* my statement of what I think about the whole thing. That is what you can springboard off of for some more intelligent discussion. I actually wasn't asking what you think about the natural arising of satipatthana. I was asking what you make of the women praising each other for practicing "Thus and such Arousing of Mindfulness" as it is stated in the commentary. What you think about satipatthana is already well established and can be recited backwards by anyone around here. If you want to talk about the natural development of satipatthana, I'll be happy too. It's a slightly different topic from what those weird women meant by asking each other "which Arousing of mindfulness" they were practicing. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #120110 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 4:15 pm Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., Couldn't resist - it's the straight-man thing you do so well: R: "...Since those women were a lot smarter than you, and so is the commentary, maybe you can learn something from them, rather than saying they are 'new-age kooks' who are misinterpreting Buddhism when they crack your cherished notions..." Scott: I'm sure they were totally cool, those chicks. I'm thinking that the 'new-age kook' is the guy who projects his present-day notions of 'practice' back into a distant, and much more 'enlightened' past. Well, you sort of set that one up, man. Later. Scott. #120111 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 5:07 pm Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > Couldn't resist - it's the straight-man thing you do so well: > > R: "...Since those women were a lot smarter than you, and so is the commentary, maybe you can learn something from them, rather than saying they are 'new-age kooks' who are misinterpreting Buddhism when they crack your cherished notions..." > > Scott: I'm sure they were totally cool, those chicks. I'm thinking that the 'new-age kook' is the guy who projects his present-day notions of 'practice' back into a distant, and much more 'enlightened' past. Well, you sort of set that one up, man. Later. I'm not really that impressed, but what does impress me is your persistence in refusing to deal with what those crazy chicks said. Oh well! Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #120112 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 5:24 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi Scott, Dieter, all > > > > Phil, > > > > Ph: "...I wonder if approaching it in a completely receptive way, in a kind of 'let's lay down our thinking caps and just accept it as it's taught' (there's probably a word for that)..." > > > > Scott: That's known as 'dogmatism.' > > Woof, woof, throw me a bone. > > > But I think there has to be a kind of provisional acceptance in order to listen to deep Dhamma otherwise there are so many inbred objections that can arise. Somewhere there is a sutta in which the Buddhs praises provisionally accepting that something is true, not accepting it lock and seal, but almost kind of experimenting with believing it is true. I think there is such a sutta, but could be wrong and am probably remembering it incorrectly if there is... > Let me add a couple more thoughts on this. It's important, because there is always a lot of talk about parroting and dogma and what not. I am pro-parroting, I remember writing this a few years back, and even while I was complaining about A. Sujin re sila issues, I was still pro-parroting. I am at work too, I encourage students to do a lot of "shadowing", which basically means repeating out loud after listening materials in order that the correct language gets internalized more and more. As we know, after his awakening, the Buddha thought at first that he would abandon any attempt to teach the Dhamma, he saw clearly how much delusion, greed and hatred was burning in the world. And where are we now? More or less, we assume more, always, but who knows. In any case, we are naturally in the same boat as the people (cittas) the Buddha saw, being swept away by defilements, with understanding ultra-radically different from the Dhamma he had enlightened. Nevertheless, people are so confident about their ability to fanthom the deep, deep Dhamma, and they go ahead and do so either blithely or earnestly, or intensely, or insanely, or a mix of all, but in any case, wrong. There is something fundamentally wrong about believing we can think our way through to the Dhamma with the same kind of thinking we have always used in the process of accumulating so many defilements. But we do. So I think that is why I am so uncomfortable with the "come and see" approach that has become so popular thanks to the Kalama sutta, it just doesn't seem logically set to work. So why is there such a sutta? The people in that day were, according to the Buddha's insight on his awakening, also prone to greed, hatred and delusion, and the sutta says what it says. But although this seems like a DSG parrot piece, the people in those days did at least understand Dhamma in deeper ways, in light with Abhidhamma. Who says? Well, fair enough to ask that, I can't answer it. THe Buddha said his teaching would disappear over the centuries to come, so makes sense that people understood better than. In any case, rather than fighting against the stream by rational thinking, the Western way, finding a kind of way to provisionally swim parallel to it, by laying down the strong desire to work things out logically and think think think to find solutions. I favour laying that down and listening, and of course there is thinking involved in listening, but somehow less intent on finding immediate solutions than the thinking involved in debating. ANyways, I seem to keep trying to explain why I don't find debating helpful. Discussion between people who are on the same page, and the understanding can sink in better. Debating between people who are on different pages always seems to be trying to pull each other from one page to the other, so that understanding never settles on either page, or something like that. Again, that's me. And again, since I appreciate how the moderators have worked so patiently to create a nice community where everyone feels welcome, I apologize for creating any bad feeling, I have no idea if I've explained anything clearer here about why I feel discussion between people who are on the same page (and who use parroting as an aide to sharing understanding so it can deepen) is of more use (yes, I'm always looking for effectiveness, self wants it, sure, ditthi there) than debating between people on different pages. This great idea of Dieter's to go through cetasikas, seems at first to mean a page can be established for people to stay on, but that can't be it seems. Anyways, I hope it works out well and even the usual stule of discourse here is helpful of course, to different people in different ways. No need to reply to this, just still wanting to get some thoughts down, because it doesn't come naturally to me to ignore people who are trying to communicate. Metta, Phil #120113 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Reply to Rob E was Do We All Agree... sarahprocter... Hi Howard & Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: >-------------------------------------------------- > > HCW: > > Mmm, I'm not so sure about that. ;-) (I may be just an irritant for > > some here - like a red flag in front of a bull. I don't try to be irritating, > > but the mere expressing of my views seems to raise hackles! And that gets > > a bit wearisome for me. ;-) > > --------------------------------------------------- > > Fortunately I don't experience that at all. :-))) ..... S: :-))) Glad to see the good humour! Metta Sarah ===== #120114 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 7:44 pm Subject: Re: The dark citta (transcript, india 2005, sarnath, pt.1) (to be continued) sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, Thx for the great transcript. Also, under "Darkness" in U.P., there's another great one which Scott posted before, #69763 on the same topic which I'll re-post. m S ***** Scott: This portion of a discussion, suggested by connie, also relates: Kh. Sujin (2001-10-23-e): "Even when one closes one's eyes. Because you see that people think that reality must be quite different from the daily reality but its not at all. Exactly the same. But the pa~n~na grows and knows and discerns inside the true nature of reality as it is. Because each moment is short. No difference whether [it] is seeing or hearing or thinking but when there is not the developed understanding, when its not clear, when its not precise, there is doubt about it and doubt is a reality. So no matter [if] its doubt or anything pa~n~na can see it as dhamma. It fits the meaning from the beginning. Everything is dhamma. We have to come to realise by our own understanding. Start from the beginning: everything is dhamma. "And we can see that the rebirth consciousness and the bhavanga - the citta which follows the birth consciousness - must be very dark. As dark as when there is no seeing process; the same because hardness can be experienced even when there is no seeing, so how dark it is. So the pa~n~na can understand the quality or the characteristic of citta. It doesn't have any shape, no form, nothing else in it at all only the faculty of experiencing an object. It is the indriya, the leader, or the chief of experience. Not like cetasika which feels or remembers. So when we take everything out of this world, what is left? Citta. It knows. "...When ruupa does not appear, citta is there, and at that moment the characteristic is seen by pa~n~na which knows the characteristic of citta as citta, not as cetasika. So one lives in darkness, very, very dark, and only one spot that can make the world bright or light. Just only that. Eye-base only. The other ruupaa cannot condition the appearing of visible object or light. So, in reality, one lives in darkness with the idea or thinking about what is experienced through the other door-ways. And what is darker? Aviija. Doesn't know anything at all... (2001-10-23-f)"...Now, the maano-dvaara of thinking is hidden. Only the five door-ways appear. But when its the pa~n~na which can discern the true nature of realities, maano-dvaara appears as dark as it is with some flash of different object at a time. By then the meaning of dhaatu or element is very clear. And is one ready to give up the idea of self?...Because one must be very brave and very courageous and very cheerful to face the reality as just different reality at a time. And the pa~n~na experiences or citta experiences. "...because its so dark - nothing - so its very frightening when its not the developed pa~n~na. So one knows one's self whether one has the developed level of pa~n~na or not yet to be alone, and its not 'I', but only the element which can experience an object. No friends, no family, no one...So when there is the idea of self, one can try every way to gain Nibbaana because one doesn't know that even the sa.nkhaara dhammaa, the conditioned reality - the reality that is conditioned and falls away - is not Nibbaana. But pa~n~na has to know this before attaining the Four Noble Truths. Even the first Truth. Are we ready?" Sincerely, Scott. ********* #120115 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:05 pm Subject: sangiitisutta, Tens, sutta 2 and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, Tens, sutta 2. Walshe DN 33.3.3(2) 'Ten objects for the attainment of absorption (kasi.naayatanaani): He perceives the Earth-Kasi.na, the Water- Kasi.na, the Fire-Kasi.na, the Wind-Kasi.na, the Blue Kasi.na, the Yellow Kasilna, the Red Kasi.na, the White Kasi.na, the Space- Kasi.na, the Consciousness Kasi.na, above, below, on all sides, undivided, unbounded. ------- N: The co. elaborates on the meaning of kasina: entire (sakala), all. Tiika: completely suffusing. He has defined (as follows): As to the term above (uddha.m): facing the sky. As to below (he.t.thaa), going to the base of the earth. As to across (tiriya.m), everywhere, as a circle, (ma.n.dala). Someone extends the kasina upwards, someone downwards, someone everywhere. In these ways he spreads out (passareti) the kasina, wanting to see colour as a light (aloka). Therefore it is said he perceives the earth kasina above, below, on all sides. As to undivided (advaya.m), another development is not undertaken than (just) one. Just as in the case of someone who has undertaken (the subject of) the water kasina there is only water, evenso when someone has undertaken the earth kasina there is only the earth kasina and no other kasina is mixed in with this one. And it is the same in the case of the other kasinas. As to unbounded (appamaa.na), this is said with reference to someone who suffuses the kasina infinitely. He suffuses it with the mind completely. He does not take it in a limited way, with the idea that this is the beginning of it, this is the middle of it. Tiika: He makes it into an object with the citta that develops (this subject). No matter the kasina is small or great, he pays attention to it completely. As to the kasina of consciousness (vi~n~naa.na), this is said of consciousness that proceeds striking the kasina of space. Therefore it should be known that this is said with reference to consciousness that proceeds thus: he perceives it above, below, across. Co: This is in short. The Visuddhimagga deals in detail with the method of developing the meditation subjects of the earth kasina and so on. ------- N: As we have see at end of the Nines where the text deals with the stages of ruupa-jhaana and aruupa-jhaana, and then mentions the cessation of perception and feeling, this cessation can only be attained by anaagamis and arahats who have developed insight and samatha to the degree of jhaana. When the teachings deal with subjects of samatha such as the kasinas, we should remember that it is not sufficient to develop samatha just for the sake of the attainment of jhaana, but insight should be developed as well. The teachings always point to insight. From the beginning of the development of jhaana until the end detachment is the goal. Only when jhaana and insight are being developed together there can be complete detachment from all realities. Sarah referred to the Pa.tisambhidamagga at the beginning, stating that 201 dhammas to be "directly known" - these are all ultimate realities and include ten kasinas: 72-81. The earth kasina is to be directly known. The water kasina is to be directly known. The air kasina, ..., the blue kasina..., ...The consciousness kasina is to be directly known. [10 kasinas] As we read, the term sakala has been repeatedly used. This means: everything, including everything. All that is seen, no matter what colour, is just colour, a kind of ruupa to be known through eyesense. The colour kasinas can remind one of visible object that should be known by insight as non-self. We read in the Dhammasangani (618, translated by U Kyaw Khine): "What is the corperality which is a visible object that causes the arising of eye-consciousness? Dependent on the 4 primary elements, there is the corporality which is visible, which arises with impingement and is of various colours: dark blue, pale yellow, red, white, black, reddish brown, deep yellow, green, light green; long, short, small, large, spherical, circular, four-sided, six-sided, eight-sided, sixteen-sided; low, high; shade, sunshine;light; star light, light from a looking glass, colour of a precious stone (such as ruby), a conch, a pearl, an emerald; colour of gold and silver. Sarah wrote: ******* Nina. #120116 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:25 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? ptaus1 Hi Scott, Sorry, bit late reply, needed time to finish a proper response, in parts: part 1 > Scott: Now, pt, given that neither one of us differ on the vectors of 'patience,' 'thinking about me,' 'thinking about you,' and 'kusala,' - and that should read 'actually know anything about these aspects of the other' - assumptions about who or who is not 'a prime example' of anything based on the flimsy evidence of the common, ordinary, every-day, written interactions on a discussion list are rather moot, aren't they? pt: Sure, but from my angle the point is a bit different. It's thanks to Phil's and mine shared conceptual story about your online persona and your posts (as being impatient) that his warning - not to loose patience like you - actually served a purpose, reminding me about the value of patience, and still does. What does all that have to do with you? Probably not much at all, since we agree patience comes and goes, so it's not like Scott possesses patience or doesn't posses it what makes him a better/worse person (that also happens not to exist in the first place). However, this is in theory for most of us I think, because most of the time we are attached to "me", "my online persona", etc, so criticising any of these tends to upset, so that's what I'm sorry about, if it did upset you and others like RobK - as in, cause dosa. Sure, I could brush it off with - well, those are your accumulations to respond with dosa, nothing to do with me, but I don't quite agree with such interpretation of things, but more about that later. Anyway, basically, I used a personal comment, even though the dsg guidelines advise otherwise, and sure enough there was trouble. > Scott: You ask, 'How about you?' and so I assume that you are in agreement with the above, and yet, making meta-communicative observations about style and being an advocate of a certain style is merely based on having a view about one style versus another, personifying the view assumed to be inherent in a given style, and then thinking about style in terms of people and kusala versus akusala - you know, good guys versus bad guys. If I'm a 'prime example' of the Impatient Man, does that make you the 'prime example' of the Patient Man' on the basis of making the observation? Of course not. Why? Because neither of us are a prime example of anything. pt: Agreed, but the point was as explained above. Best wishes pt #120117 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:37 pm Subject: Obj. pred. cond. vs. dec. supp. condition of object philofillet Hi Nina A quick technical question. Re this, from p.52 of Conditions: "Desirable rupas which are object predominance condition can also be decisive support condition of object for lobha muula citta." They are so similar I can't understand the difference. Is it possible to give an example of a case where a ruupa that is desirable enough to be o.p.c would not also be enough of a powerful inducement to be d.s. c of object, or vice-versa. I don't think I missed the answer to this in the book... Only when you have a moment, thanks. Phil #120118 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:42 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? ptaus1 Hi Scott, part 2 > Scott: We can agree that certain dhammaa constellate and can lead to certain 'actions' however, it is a major stretch to impute much to discussion style on an internet list. To impute to a certain style anything about 'kusala' or 'akusala' is, in my opinion, a waste of time. That I don't care about the verbiage, or look for the view, or directly offer my opinions - which at any given time I agree with - is only one way to discuss. Does someone get upset? Not my problem. pt: This I think is where we differ the most, so I'll write quite a bit more as I was meaning to discuss this with you for a while, but didn't have the time. Feel free to point out where you disagree below, as I'm not quite sure about some of the issues below either, would appreciate a debate, though apologise beforehand for slow replies: 1. as far as i can tell from your posts, your reasoning seems to be modeled on a (kusala) instance of insight proper - there are no persons, there's only nama and rupa, etc, which then seems to conceptually translate into the attitude - there should only be concern with one's own cittas and cetasikas, whereas how another person responds to my words is due to his accumulations, not the actual words nor my intention when speaking them, etc. I think this is all mostly fine, but I think it is realistically relevant only at moments of insight. However, since such moments happen rarely, if ever, at all other times, the indicator of kusala (dana, sila and bhavana of non-vipassana kind) would be (when it's happening with concepts as objects of cittas, as in - thinking and stories about things) related to caring for another's welfare. If there's no caring for another's welfare, then most probably there's attachment to me and mine, so akusla at the time. 2. When concepts are objects of cittas, imo no one's a "closed system", in the sense that just like an interpretation of someone else's words can be condition for panna of whatever level (though usually conceptual level), so can it be for dosa. 3. not sure, but I think "interpretation" would depend on a shared conceptual understanding, as in thinking about things in a similar way (aside from the matter that thinking on the same issue, in the same words, can possibly be both a/kusala), e.g. "samatha" means this and this and this and not that and that, etc. Maybe we can discuss this bit as i'm not quite sure here. 4. Although one's response to someone's words would ultimately depend on accumulations (as in just dhammas arsing and falling), that doesn't really negate the point that we all know eachother well by now, as in, generally share the same conceptual interpretations - think about things in similar ways and about the same stories, so it's relatively easy to guess what RobE's response would be to a certain sort of tone, etc. Sure, there's room for surprises, but usually it all goes as expected, and often the poster knows exactly what sort of reaction he will get. 5. The most important point imo - if RobE then reacts to your/mine post with dosa, well, dosa is real, it exists, it has a characteristic of suffering. We can say there's no RobE, we can say his dosa happened due to accumulations, but it is real, and it has a characteristic of suffering. So, there's suffering happening, and one of the conditions for it were your/mine words (or rather, yours/mine and his shared interpretation/story about them). 6. Nina and Sarah recently mentioned that among akusala factors, dosa is worse than lobha, because it hurts. 7. Of course, maybe my/your posting intention was generally kusala, and then the reader reacted with dosa, and well, that's life (accumulations). But, if the poster knew what sort of reaction he would get (strong dosa), still went ahead and posted without even trying to explain things in a way that could possibly avoid a reaction with dosa, and then keept doing it repeatedly, well, I find it hard to see how it can be done with kusala intention at all, and it rather seems like trying to upset the other person on purpose, or at least caring a little too much about being right, so attachment to "me", so all this being akusala intention. 8. There's the sutta where the Buddha defines the circumstances in which he speaks to others - there being something like 5-6 parameters, from memory, like the right time, being agreeable to the other person, being kindly spoken, of benefit, etc. And basically all of the parameters have to be fulfilled, including the other person's frame of mind, otherwise the Buddha doesn't speak. Perhaps someone can locate this sutta. *** Anyway, I'm not saying that at times when you write there's no kusala and no caring for another's welfare. That only panna will know. But, the way you usually present your arguments to those who disagree with you, well they seem confrontational and hostile and more concerned with you feeling good about yourself, being right, etc, so I see little care for others there, as in just more attachment to "me" and "mine". But I don't really know of course, in the same way like I don't really know whether RobE's intention to meditate is a/kusala, but it seems it often is akusala from reading his posts. Best wishes pt #120119 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nilovg Dear Dieter, Thank you for the texts, and I also enjoyed the German. Many explanations about the terms, and now the follow up, considering their meaning with relation to our daily life. Op 8-nov-2011, om 19:27 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > Ven. Bodhi: Hiri is an innate sense of shame over moral > transgression; ottappa is moral dread, fear of the results of > wrongdoing. -------- Hiri and ottappa accompany each kusala citta and ahirika and anottappa accompany each akusala citta. Kusala citta and akusala citta alternate so rapidly, and it is difficult to distinguish them. There are many degrees of kusala and akusala and thus also many degrees of the accompanying cetasikas. When we are shouting to someone else or insulting him it is obvious that there are no hiri and ottappa. We do not abhor akusala at that moment and we do not fear its result, unpleasant vipaaka that will arise later on. However, when we hear a loud sound or we suddenly have a slight pain aversion arises before we realize it. It may be a slight aversion, but still, it accompanies akusala citta and thus there are also ahirika and anottappa. Then we make the situation worse by thinking about the sound or the pain, and the cittas that think are akusala if they do not think with the objective of daana, siila or bhaavanaa. This shows that ahirika and anottappa arise countless times a day, but it is good to know this. We are most of the time lost in stories about people and situations, and it is good to know with what types of cittas we are thinking. The unpleasant objects and appear are quite unpredictable. Last night we heard about a dear friend who had suddenly passed away. Sadness, surprise. Long stories of thinking about him, quite lost in our stories. A more refined hiri and ottappa is seeing the danger of lack of mindfulness, such as when lost in stories. Now we can appreciate that the Buddha taught satipa.t.thaana to be developed in whatever situation. If there are conditions for mindfulness even of thinking of stories, clinging to self who thinks will very, very gradually become less. ------- Nina. #120120 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 8:48 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? ptaus1 Hi Scott, part 3 > Scott: I only care about your chosen style when you want to make me adopt it, thinking it's somehow better. pt: "Style" I think is just an expression of understanding, patience, etc, that are present or not at the time of writing. The fact that a person appears to have a "style" I think just shows that change in accumulations is slow. As in, if for someone patience doesn't come most of the time, that's going to affect the general thrust/style of his posts most of the time. As for making you adopt a style, there are two issues here imo: 1. is about furthering understanding, mine, and perhaps yours. Basically, like you can question RobE's "meditation practice" through which his actual understanding, patience, etc, or lack of these, become evident, and can then be discussed, thus (ideally) furthering understanding of the discussing parties, in the same way it seems right to question your "posting practice" since through it your understanding, patience, etc, or lack of these, become evident and can then be discussed thus (ideally) furthering our understanding. E.g. when RobE writes about meditation, and I compare that with what others on dsg are saying, well, he seems a bit off, in the sense that he must understand some things differently - or basically misunderstands them. Hence the discussion ensues, and to you for example it seems right to question his understanding and practices. Similarly, when you write to others, especially to those who disagree with you, something seems off when I compare it to when others here write in the same circumstances, so again to me it seems there are some things you understand differently, or basically misunderstand them. Hence, the discussion ensues, and to me it seems right to question your understanding and practices. 2. the other issue is about about respect and privilege that come with participating in a community like this one. I'll address that in the next part as it's related to the other bit you wrote. Best wishes pt #120121 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:00 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? ptaus1 Hi Scott, part 4 (last) > Scott: The problem with 'diplomacy' or 'diplomats' - say, like yourself in this connection (and this is *not* in reference to anyone who may or may not have any connection to with 'real diplomacy' in the so-called 'real world') - is that there are a larger entity's interests in mind and the diplomacy is always part of that entity's interactions with other entity's. > > I happen to agree with pretty well all Dhamma interpretations found on the list - and not on purpose - but I don't happen to be a member of the list's 'diplomatic corps' when it comes to relations with members of other 'diplomatic corps' from 'other entities' - read views, whatever. I like to consider the view. Playing around with the various personalities on the list is harmless - except for the problem that some, read yourself, think it's more than that when it isn't. I have no need to 'set an example' stylistically to somehow maintain the group's desired social persona so it's views will somehow be moved forward in the world. pt: imo it's not really about the persona of the group. It's more about respecting other members of the community, as well as being given the privilege to participate in the community. In particular: 1. there are the guidelines which clearly advise to avoid sarcasm and personal comments, etc. Lately on the list, personal comments are flooding the list (I'm not innocent there either). 2. there's that sutta I mentioned about the circumstances when the Buddha speaks, and there are other texts which describe when speech is best - with kindness, with other's welfare in mind, about dhamma, etc. 3. we have the example of our elders here when they speak to those who disagree with them and do so with patience and understanding and little or no attachment to their opinion, being right, etc. If the above outlines a "style", are you meant to adopt/copy it? No, ideally it's meant to help with arising of patience, understanding, etc, at the time of writing. If these do arise, then the style changes accordingly. But, if you were to change your style to conform, that wouldn't be any good either, as it would just more about be attachment, etc. However, what to do if you choose to stick to your adopted style on purpose as if it's a real thing and other people keep getting upset about it? I don't know, to me it just seems the best to keep questioning you about the style, understanding, attachment, patience, etc. Perhaps it'll help and one day we'll have just as much patience for those who disagree with us, just like Nina and Sarah and others here have. Perhaps it won't help at all, I don't know. > Scott: Coming back to internet discussion lists and Dhamma, views are apparent, there is right and wrong, people disagree and agree, there are different styles and more. All of this is simply a given. My thesis to you is, since this is all a given: Get on with discussion in a way you see fit and leave the rest alone. pt: I hope I explained why it seems right atm to keep questioning you on the style and tone issues. Best wishes pt #120122 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:09 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? philofillet Hi pt > pt: Sure, but from my angle the point is a bit different. It's thanks to Phil's and mine shared conceptual story about your online persona and your posts (as being impatient) that his warning - not to loose patience like you - actually served a purpose, reminding me about the value of patience, and still does. I'd like to say again that I didn't warn you not to, I wondered if you would. When you arrived at DSG you reminded me of Scott when he arrived, nice combo of gentle manners and understanding, so I wondered if you would go the way of Scott, driven to quit DSG (no indication tgat he would ever return at that point. Until you go head to head with Alex ( for exampke) for a good little while, you have no "street cred" for patience here, only NSJ, the Khanti Krew, can yo! on that one. For example, take a careful look at Alex's last 5 or 6 posts. You'll find he's saying that Dhamma as explained by A.S amounts to nothing more tgan re iting names, talking about names. How many man hours have been expended by various people explaining tge natural development of satipattgana. Apparently not a single word has sunk in. Alex is just one very clear example of the message not getting through. I think the interesting thing is not how people lose patience, but rather how The Khanti Krew don't, I find it quite inspirational... And Scott is still talking to Alex and Rob E, great. I've decided to basically turn my back on them. Kudos to Scott. Whatever it takes to keep him around this time, bring it on. As Connie said his knowledge of the texts make him extremely valuable here. This is Dhamma Study Group not Dhamma Demonstration of Patience Group. Hopefully no more from me on this topic... as if. Phil #120123 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:23 pm Subject: Re: Canki Sutta sarahprocter... Hi Scott & Howard Glad to read your discussion and Scott's quote (#119508). Also more under 'Canki Sutta' in U.P. (of course!) including some helpful commentary notes which Nina supplied in #68205 which you may like to refer to in any further discussion. Metta Sarah ==== #120124 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Obj. pred. cond. vs. dec. supp. condition of object nilovg Dear Phil, Op 9-nov-2011, om 10:37 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > A quick technical question. Re this, from p.52 of Conditions: > "Desirable rupas which are object predominance condition can also > be decisive support condition of object for lobha muula citta." > They are so similar I can't understand the difference. Is it > possible to give an example of a case where a ruupa that is > desirable enough to be o.p.c would not also be enough of a powerful > inducement to be d.s. c of object, or vice-versa. I don't think I > missed the answer to this in the book... ------- N: Decisive support condition of object for lobhamuulacitta: then you have to think of a cogent reason, it is a very strong condition. This is said in general, but it is hard to pinpoint. The object has to be highly desirable. U Narada explains it as the cittas have to be strongly dependent on that object. As I understand it is a matter of the intensity of the conditioning force that causes the arising of lobha-muulacitta. ----- Nina. #120125 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 9:33 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? ptaus1 Hi Phil, > Ph: For example, take a careful look at Alex's last 5 or 6 posts. You'll find he's saying that Dhamma as explained by A.S amounts to nothing more tgan re iting names, talking about names. How many man hours have been expended by various people explaining tge natural development of satipattgana. Apparently not a single word has sunk in. Alex is just one very clear example of the message not getting through. pt: My take on Alex's "style" of learning is that he tests things by trying to counter them, sort of like positing a hypothesis in an experiment and then trying to disprove it. If it can't be disproved, then it's true. So, when he comes here seemingly countering a view by you, A.S., or whoever, he doesn't do it out of spite (like some might), but in order to test it for his own sake of learning. The fact that he still questions most of the things that are said to him only means he's still not convinced. So, that's life. Help, or don't, as one feels inclined. Best wishes pt #120126 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 10:33 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Rob E (119954) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Scott, and Jon. > ... > > Scott: SN 42:7 The Simile of the Field. > > "The poor field that is sandy, salty and with bad soil is like my wandering recluses and Brahmans of other sects.[3] To them I also teach the Dhamma which is lovely in its beginning, lovely in its middle and lovely in its ending, in spirit and in letter, I display to them the holy life, perfectly fulfilled and purified. Why? Because if they only understand a single phrase, it would long be for their profit." > > [RE:] This suggests that even if we may not be too good at it, Buddha would enjoin us to study Dhamma, practice, etc., for even if we understand just a little bit, it will elevate our understanding and gradually produce more kusala. =============== J: Yes, no distinction between the 3 categories of persons -- monks and nuns, lay followers and followers of other teachings -- in terms of the manner in which the Dhamma is taught. As regards the point on which you had asked me for a reference (namely, that suttas were generally addressed to those of more advanced level of understanding), the 3 categories of persons are likened to the 3 kinds of fields that are given different priority by the farmer in terms of how the (limited) time of the sowing season should be used. I see a clear implication that the Buddha's suttas are similarly more likely to be directed to listeners who have the potential to attain enlightenment. And there are other passages (in the commentaries if not in suttas) in which the Buddha's daily routine is described including, during a certain watch of the day, his practice of surveying the world systems to see who would most benefit from hearing the teaching. (As before, I don't have any reference at hand. Anyone?) Jon #120127 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 11:18 pm Subject: Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... philofillet Hi all > Phil quoted a discussion in which someone asked KS how to help a friend who is lonely. She said help them to understand realities. If they can't understand them, they have to suffer from loneliness. The same applies to impatience. If there is no understanding of realities now, there will continue to be the idea that the problems in life are the other people or the situation of one kind or other, when actually the only real problem is ignorance now. ph: just heard something interesting again, re loneliness. Someone said had said that anatta felt lonely, and Jon asked "does visible object (etc) feel lonely" and the answer was no, and jon added "it's the self that feels lonely" and that might feel trite to some, but so true, just as it's the self that feels hopeless and gets lost in wrong view as it flails around ( ever so 'calmly' of course) for solutions. But it also made me think how difficult it would be to help a lonely person by talking about realities now, unless they were attuned to Dhamma. Well, case by case, as Sarah discovered at the beach. Anyways, thanks for that, Jon. Phil #120128 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 11:35 pm Subject: Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... philofillet Hi again > > ph: just heard something interesting again, re loneliness. Someone said had said that anatta felt lonely, and Jon asked "does visible object (etc) feel lonely" and the answer was no, and jon added "it's the self that feels lonely" Correction, he said "if we say visible object (etc) is anatta does it feel lonely?" then "it is the idea of self being not self that feels lonely." Phil #120129 From: "philip" Date: Wed Nov 9, 2011 11:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Obj. pred. cond. vs. dec. supp. condition of object philofillet Hi Nina I posted a thanks and a comment but it hasn't shown up yet, perhaps later, but for now thanks. Well, I wondered if someone desiring alcohol after having one very good experience with it compared to the decisive need for alcohol of the cittas of an alcoholic could be a good example, in the latter case both o.p.d and d.s.c of o, in the former case only o.p.d...but that is probably thinking too scientifically. That's ok, thanks. Enough for now. Phil #120130 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Dieter) - In a message dated 11/8/2011 8:49:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Dieter ( Howard, Nina, all) > I am afraid the message (introduction) will be bit longer .. I know I've been a bit of a bitch recently but I wonder how this project is going to work if (correct me if I am wrong) you and Howard and others will approach studying this aspect of Abhidhamma in order to "come and see it" in a kalamesque way, in other words finding where it is helpful and where it isn't, where it can be understood experientially and where it can't, and so on. It just seems that could only lead to the usual mess of debating, and of course, maybe that *isn't* a mess, maybe debating is very valuable and I am simply incapable of it. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Phil, I hope you aren't of the opinion that everybody must approach something exactly as you would have it approached. (And what, BTW, is the problem with the Kalama Sutta?) As for how I wish to approach Abhidhamma with an experiential slant, which is the project being discussed, it is to come to appreciate the Abhidhamma teachings in the "what is actually happening right now" manner that Nina and Khun Sujin often point to. But attempts to control how others approach the Dhamma are, IMO, both improper and futile. If I'm misreading you, I do apologize. ------------------------------------------------ But still, I wonder if approaching in a completely receptive way, in a kind of "let's lay down our thinking caps and just accept it as it's taught" (there's probably a word for that) way for the length of this project, to find out exactly what Abhidhamma and commentary to Abhidhamma teaches about cetasikas. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Jumping to conclusions without giving a full hearing is certainly foolish. But as for "let's lay down our thinking caps and just accept it as it's taught," how much dismissing of our own mentality does that suggest? If it amounts to putting on blinders and fully accepting without considering, well, yeah, I think there is a word for that, and for me a mild choice of word would be 'blind'. To understand what is being taught, considering and questioning is an important part of the process. Passively "accepting" is not fruitful. The world has been, and is, filled with people who close off their mind and just "accept," and it is not a fortunate fact about the world. One thing I will say: If it is insisted that participants leave their minds on the shelf during the process of learning, then I will not participate in the project. ------------------------------------------------------------ And then, at the end of that project, there could be a return to the usual debating, with a better shared understanding of what exactly Abhidhamma teaches improving the quality of the debate. But everyone may enjoy and benefit from the usual debating, so this is just my opinion. ------------------------------------------------------------ HCW: I don't view enjoying debating or not as the issue. The point is to properly learn, and that requires NOT shutting off our mental faculties. ----------------------------------------------------------- And an explanation of why I am steering away from this project though it is obviously a worthy proposition on your part, thaks for suggesting it. --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Well, I may skip it as well. Then, perhaps, you'll consider reenlisting. --------------------------------------------------------- Phil =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120131 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:26 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "I'm not really that impressed, but what does impress me is your persistence in refusing to deal with what those crazy chicks said. Oh well!" Scott: Again, you think they are talking about 'practice.' This is the modern use of the term, derived from countless translations of 'bhaavanaa' asThe question asked was, as translated in the section given by Nina was: 'Mother, which Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?' The Paa.li is: 'amma tva.m katara.m satipa.t.thaanabhaavana.m manasikarosii' ti Scott: Mother, what is known of the level of development of sati available for application in your mind? Scott: As far as I can tell, there is no Paa.li in the text which could be translated as 'practice.' 'Manasikarosii' is synonymous (according to the PTS PED) with 'paajaanati.' This refers to the function of pa~n~naa in discerning the level of sati. Bhaavanaa is 'development.' This translation has messed you up. Nina would be able to correct me on this, my lame attempt at demonstrating the text. Scott. #120132 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa upasaka_howard Hi again, all - In a message dated 11/9/2011 8:25:32 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, Upasaka@... writes: Hi, Phil (and Dieter) - =============================== Nina, I apologize for having missed including you in my salutation. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120133 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:33 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., Correction (rushing): Me: "Again, you think they are talking about 'practice.' This is the modern use of the term, derived from countless translations of 'bhaavanaa' as 'meditation' and the implication of 'practice' that follows. The question asked was, as translated in the section given by Nina was: 'Mother, which Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?'..." Scott. #120134 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 am Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 pt, pt: "Sorry, bit late reply, needed time to finish a proper response, in parts..." Scott: Sleep much? I'll reply as time allows. Thanks. Scott. #120135 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:40 am Subject: Re: Canki Sutta scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, S: "...Also more under 'Canki Sutta' in U.P. (of course!) including some helpful commentary notes which Nina supplied in #68205 which you may like to refer to in any further discussion." Scott: Yup. Read them already. Good ole U.P. Scott. #120136 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:43 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Rob E., The fully corrected version. Use only this. Do not respond to the original, nor the correction. This is the official version of my excellent, well thought-out response. R: "I'm not really that impressed, but what does impress me is your persistence in refusing to deal with what those crazy chicks said. Oh well!" Scott: Again, you think they are talking about 'practice.' This is the modern use of the term, derived from countless translations of 'bhaavanaa' as 'meditation' and the implication of 'practice' that follows. The question asked was, as translated in the section given by Nina was: 'Mother, which Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?' The Paa.li is: 'amma tva.m katara.m satipa.t.thaanabhaavana.m manasikarosii' ti Scott: Mother, what is known of the level of development of sati available for application in your mind? Scott: As far as I can tell, there is no Paa.li in the text which could be translated as 'practice.' 'Manasikarosii' is synonymous (according to the PTS PED) with 'paajaanati.' This refers to the function of pa~n~naa in discerning the level of sati. Bhaavanaa is 'development.' This translation has messed you up. Nina would be able to correct me on this, my lame attempt at demonstrating the text. Scott. #120137 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:49 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa sarahprocter... HI Dieter, Phil , Howard & all in the CDL (Cetasika in Daily Life) corner, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > I wrote: > > > Phil > > > > > > > > Metta, > > > > Phil > > > Here a moment of awareness of no-metta conditioned the arising of a moment of radiating metta in just one direction. .... S: :-) ... > > Having decided to shed the "metta" and just write Phil feels good, reminds me of when I became so bald I went beyond caring. .... S: and at those times of "not caring" the lack of hiri and ottappa, the lack of shame of harm or concern about the consequences, abounds. Even when we just speak impatiently or eat greedily - simple daily life examples - there are ahirika and anottappa arising, not seeing the shame of lobha, dosa and moha all day long. .... P:> Who cares about salutation choices, I know. But now no more radiating metta jokes, which I enjoyed. > > Me... > > Phil .... S: :-) I enjoyed the jokes too - see more ahirka and anottappa arising with the lobha. It may be common, ordinary attachment that doesn't hurt anyone and yet at such moments of arising, there is no hiri and ottappa, no 'guardians' that see the shamefulness and effects of accumulating lobha. Thanks for starting the CDL corner, Dieter. I suggest we go slowly through the cetasikas - like one (or two if paired) a week, so anyone can contribute and to give slow dancers like me a chance to catch up! Metta Sarah p.s Howard, I'll be glad to read your comments - never mind if anyone steps on your toes! ===== #120138 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:53 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "Woof, woof, throw me a bone. But I think there has to be a kind of provisional acceptance in order to listen to deep Dhamma otherwise there are so many inbred objections that can arise..." Scott: I'm all for that which others call 'dogmatism,' by the way. I agree with you in the above. I hate my own interpretations and almost dogmatically refuse to offer them. I am opinionated, though, in case this has gone under the radar. Scott. #120139 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:55 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 Dear Sarah, S: "...p.s Howard, I'll be glad to read your comments - never mind if anyone steps on your toes!" Scott: I was actually wondering who Howard was referring to here... Scott. #120140 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 9-nov-2011, om 14:49 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > and at those times of "not caring" the lack of hiri and ottappa, > the lack of shame of harm or concern about the consequences, > abounds. Even when we just speak impatiently or eat greedily - > simple daily life examples - there are ahirika and anottappa > arising, not seeing the shame of lobha, dosa and moha all day long. > .... > P:> Who cares about salutation choices, I know. But now no more > radiating metta jokes, which I enjoyed. > .... > S: :-) I enjoyed the jokes too - see more ahirka and anottappa > arising with the lobha. It may be common, ordinary attachment that > doesn't hurt anyone and yet at such moments of arising, there is no > hiri and ottappa, no 'guardians' that see the shamefulness and > effects of accumulating lobha. ------ N: Thank you Sarah for adding more examples. One may not notice lobha that does not hurt anyone and that is so common all the time. But unknowingly we accumulate more and more and that is dangerous. Ignorance, moha, accompanies each and every citta. Before we realize it there are ahirika and anottappa and we do not even know this. ------- Nina. #120141 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving nilovg Dear Scott, Op 9-nov-2011, om 14:26 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > The Paa.li is: > > 'amma tva.m katara.m satipa.t.thaanabhaavana.m manasikarosii' ti > > Scott: Mother, what is known of the level of development of sati > available for application in your mind? > > Scott: As far as I can tell, there is no Paa.li in the text which > could be translated as 'practice.' 'Manasikarosii' is synonymous > (according to the PTS PED) with 'paajaanati.' This refers to the > function of pa~n~naa in discerning the level of sati. Bhaavanaa is > 'development.' This translation has messed you up. Nina would be > able to correct me on this, my lame attempt at demonstrating the text. ------ N: Katara: which one (of the... a certain number) my Pali dictionary states. Mother, which one of the developments of satipa.t.thaana do you apply yourself to? That number would be: which among the four... Satipa.t.thaanabhaavana would stand for the applications of mindfulness, I think. ----- Nina. #120142 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:22 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Perfections, was: Pt's Galaxy ... nilovg Dear pt, Op 9-nov-2011, om 13:18 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Pt: just heard something interesting again, re loneliness. Someone > said had said that anatta felt lonely, and Jon asked "does visible > object (etc) feel lonely" and the answer was no, and jon added > "it's the self that feels lonely" and that might feel trite to > some, but so true, just as it's the self that feels hopeless and > gets lost in wrong view as it flails around ( ever so 'calmly' of > course) for solutions. -------- N: Glad you mention this. This can easily happen. If one loses a dear person through death, the sadness is very selfish: one misses the company of the dear one. One always thinks of oneself. ----- Nina. #120143 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving scottduncan2 Dear Nina, N: "Katara: which one (of the... a certain number) my Pali dictionary states. Mother, which one of the developments of satipa.t.thaana do you apply yourself to? That number would be: which among the four... Satipa.t.thaanabhaavana would stand for the applications of mindfulness, I think." Scott: Thanks. 'Satipa.t.thaana' is 'applications of mindfulness,' as I understand it. 'Bhaavanaa' is develompment. What is the meaning of this compound - satipa.t.thaanabhaavana? Is this translated in a conventional way - that is, using conventional language to convey ultimate terms? Does this mean, therefore, that the question *was* about a literal 'practice' as Rob E. suggests? I take it to refer to the level of development, in addition to 'which one,' as you add. Scott. #120144 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:51 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/9/2011 8:49:53 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: p.s Howard, I'll be glad to read your comments - never mind if anyone steps on your toes! =============================== :-) Thank you! With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120145 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:32 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa moellerdieter Hi Sarah, all, you wrote: 'Thanks for starting the CDL corner, Dieter. I suggest we go slowly through the cetasikas - like one (or two if paired) a week, so anyone can contribute and to give slow dancers like me a chance to catch up!' D: fine with me .. slowfox a good choice, isn't it ? with Metta Dieter #120146 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:42 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Rob E > > (119954) > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > Hi Scott, and Jon. > > ... > > > Scott: SN 42:7 The Simile of the Field. > > > > "The poor field that is sandy, salty and with bad soil is like my wandering recluses and Brahmans of other sects.[3] To them I also teach the Dhamma which is lovely in its beginning, lovely in its middle and lovely in its ending, in spirit and in letter, I display to them the holy life, perfectly fulfilled and purified. Why? Because if they only understand a single phrase, it would long be for their profit." > > > > [RE:] This suggests that even if we may not be too good at it, Buddha would enjoin us to study Dhamma, practice, etc., for even if we understand just a little bit, it will elevate our understanding and gradually produce more kusala. > =============== > > J: Yes, no distinction between the 3 categories of persons -- monks and nuns, lay followers and followers of other teachings -- in terms of the manner in which the Dhamma is taught. > > As regards the point on which you had asked me for a reference (namely, that suttas were generally addressed to those of more advanced level of understanding), the 3 categories of persons are likened to the 3 kinds of fields that are given different priority by the farmer in terms of how the (limited) time of the sowing season should be used. I see a clear implication that the Buddha's suttas are similarly more likely to be directed to listeners who have the potential to attain enlightenment. > > And there are other passages (in the commentaries if not in suttas) in which the Buddha's daily routine is described including, during a certain watch of the day, his practice of surveying the world systems to see who would most benefit from hearing the teaching. (As before, I don't have any reference at hand. Anyone?) Thanks for your thoughts on this issue. I think it may be true that Buddha would direct his teachings at a given time to those who seemed most likely to benefit, but at times he also addressed those who were very hardened or very skeptical as I recall, so I think the emphasis may have varied depending on the circumstances. Whether or not that is the case, I think that it must be true that we cannot always know when a sutta or commentary will "hit the mark," and so we may benefit or not from a given passage at a given time. So I'm inclined to keep an open mind - at least about that. :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #120147 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:47 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott, and Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "I'm not really that impressed, but what does impress me is your persistence in refusing to deal with what those crazy chicks said. Oh well!" > > Scott: Again, you think they are talking about 'practice.' This is the modern use of the term, derived from countless translations of 'bhaavanaa' asThe question asked was, as translated in the section given by Nina was: 'Mother, which Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?' > > The Paa.li is: > > 'amma tva.m katara.m satipa.t.thaanabhaavana.m manasikarosii' ti > > Scott: Mother, what is known of the level of development of sati available for application in your mind? > > Scott: As far as I can tell, there is no Paa.li in the text which could be translated as 'practice.' 'Manasikarosii' is synonymous (according to the PTS PED) with 'paajaanati.' This refers to the function of pa~n~naa in discerning the level of sati. Bhaavanaa is 'development.' This translation has messed you up. Nina would be able to correct me on this, my lame attempt at demonstrating the text. You may be surprised that in this case I appreciate your attempt at translating the Pali, which I don't find lame at all. I would very much like to hear what Nina thinks about the gist of the statement, taken as a whole, but I think your translation is worth contemplating. In fact I love a "raw" translation like this that highlights the basic meanings of the individual words. It's a substantive response, and I will spend some time thinking about it. I know that bhavana is one of those words on which rests an awful lot of the disputes over meditation vs. natural development. The use and application of that word, and whether or not it was used as a term for "practice involving or causing development" or only "natural development" is one of those issues which doesn't seem to get easily resolved, but it would be worthy of further fine investigation. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #120148 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:49 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa moellerdieter Dear Nina, all, you wrote: 'Thank you for the texts, and I also enjoyed the German. Many explanations about the terms, and now the follow up, considering their meaning with relation to our daily life.' > Ven. Bodhi: Hiri is an innate sense of shame over moral > transgression; ottappa is moral dread, fear of the results of > wrongdoing. -------- Hiri and ottappa accompany each kusala citta and ahirika and anottappa accompany each akusala citta. Kusala citta and akusala citta alternate so rapidly, and it is difficult to distinguish them. There are many degrees of kusala and akusala and thus also many degrees of the accompanying cetasikas. When we are shouting to someone else or insulting him it is obvious that there are no hiri and ottappa. We do not abhor akusala at that moment and we do not fear its result, unpleasant vipaaka that will arise later on. However, when we hear a loud sound or we suddenly have a slight pain aversion arises before we realize it. It may be a slight aversion, but still, it accompanies akusala citta and thus there are also ahirika and anottappa. Then we make the situation worse by thinking about the sound or the pain, and the cittas that think are akusala if they do not think with the objective of daana, siila or bhaavanaa. This shows that ahirika and anottappa arise countless times a day, but it is good to know this. D: ahirika and anottappa is the negative of hirika and ottappa , that means both are absent , doesn't it? Wouldn't you agree that it is the lack of the former ,which offers potential akusala kamma , not the arising of the latter ? N:We are most of the time lost in stories about people and situations, and it is good to know with what types of cittas we are thinking. D: I had in mind to ask :in which way do you distinguish the type of cittas in respect to cetasikas , but am a bit afraid that may lead to a new topic (?) N:The unpleasant objects and appear are quite unpredictable. Last night we heard about a dear friend who had suddenly passed away. Sadness, surprise. Long stories of thinking about him, quite lost in our stories. D: Oh yes, and as we getting older ,unpleasant events are unfortunately increasing.. Sorry for the bad news ... friends are real treasure in life . N:A more refined hiri and ottappa is seeing the danger of lack of mindfulness, such as when lost in stories. Now we can appreciate that the Buddha taught satipa.t.thaana to be developed in whatever situation. If there are conditions for mindfulness even of thinking of stories, clinging to self who thinks will very, very gradually become less. ------- D: well, the state of mourning (in German we speak of Trauerarbeit) means suffering . Which cetasika would that be? (Unpleasant) feeling , as one of the 7 universals? with Metta Dieter #120149 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:51 am Subject: Re: Sati each moment! was:Buddha recommended striving epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > The fully corrected version. Use only this. Do not respond to the original, nor the correction. This is the official version of my excellent, well thought-out response. > > R: "I'm not really that impressed, but what does impress me is your persistence in refusing to deal with what those crazy chicks said. Oh well!" > > Scott: Again, you think they are talking about 'practice.' This is the modern use of the term, derived from countless translations of 'bhaavanaa' as 'meditation' and the implication of 'practice' that follows. The question asked was, as translated in the section given by Nina was: 'Mother, which Arousing of Mindfulness do you practice?' > > The Paa.li is: > > 'amma tva.m katara.m satipa.t.thaanabhaavana.m manasikarosii' ti > > Scott: Mother, what is known of the level of development of sati available for application in your mind? > > Scott: As far as I can tell, there is no Paa.li in the text which could be translated as 'practice.' 'Manasikarosii' is synonymous (according to the PTS PED) with 'paajaanati.' This refers to the function of pa~n~naa in discerning the level of sati. Bhaavanaa is 'development.' This translation has messed you up. Nina would be able to correct me on this, my lame attempt at demonstrating the text. Just acknowledging the fully corrected version of your response. I think my response to your original can remain pretty much the same. Thanks for working on these specific details - I find them valuable. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #120150 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:56 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa epsteinrob Hi Sarah and Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Sarah, all, > > you wrote: > > 'Thanks for starting the CDL corner, Dieter. I suggest we go slowly through the cetasikas - like one (or two if paired) a week, so anyone can contribute and to give slow dancers like me a chance to catch up!' > > D: fine with me .. slowfox a good choice, isn't it ? I look forward to this thread - and the slow pace, so that the cetasikas can be carefully examined one by one [or two by two.] I seem to learn about the complexities of Abhidhamma more easily by corresponding in these posts - an interactive approach that fits my learning style. It chagrins some that I don't study more systematically by sitting down and reading a whole book, but I find that difficult these recent years; so I really am glad that Dieter initiated this idea, and that you are enthusiastic -- very exciting. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #120151 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:02 am Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 pt, pt: "...However, this is in theory for most of us I think, because most of the time we are attached to 'me', 'my online persona'...I used a personal comment, even though the dsg guidelines advise otherwise, and sure enough there was trouble..." Scott: I say, 'so what if there was trouble?' This is all very relative; this is one tiny nanoparsec of ether-space containing a small number of opinion-generating algorhythms and the stuff is really so very unimportant. If the ideal is true 'in theory' when compared to the actual, and if the actual amounts to, in this case, 'a personal comment,' then who cares? If the 'personal comment' leads to discussion, then again, who cares? If you disagree with me in any way I'll discuss or not as I see fit. If you'll notice, the 'guidelines' seem to have much latitude given the sorts of things said once in awhile by most of the local algorhythms over time. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. So what if you and I have different relationships to authority? Scott. #120152 From: "Dieter" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 5:18 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view moellerdieter Hi Howard, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Dieter (and Nina & Sarah & all) - > >> ====================================== > Dieter, thank you for starting this off! > Nina, Sarah, and all -" I'm afraid that as regards the Abhidhamma, > due, with little doubt, to "deficiencies of accumulation" on my part, my > learning in this area needs to proceed by spoon feeding, and especially by means > of a practical, "right now," introspective-experiential ("look-see") > approach. I really look forward to this, and I also hope that as the > teaching-questioning-answering-discussing process proceeds, the 24 conditions will be > brought in, in the same practical way. I am glad you like the topic and will participate. Actually I am interested to get an idea about the concept , which brings all formations of mental phenomena into a framework of 52 categories. Let us see how far we come ..the danger of course is that we get bogged down in details or getting astrayed in Abhidhamma's overabundance , but I think it is worth the trial. with Metta Dieter #120153 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 6:16 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa moellerdieter Hi Phil , Howard, and all, there are a number of issues in your postings to talk about and frankly speaking , my impression is that presently you are in some way confused about Dhamma understanding .Perhaps leaning too much on the teaching in an absolute sense and rejecting the conventional one which for whatever reasons may have disappointed you. But both are true within their own domain and thinking otherwise may cause a conflict of mind . Howard has adressed already some points . I like to refer to : "ANyways, I seem to keep trying to explain why I don't find debating helpful. Discussion between people who are on the same page, and the understanding can sink in better. Debating between people who are on different pages always seems to be trying to pull each other from one page to the other, so that understanding never settles on either page, or something like that. Again, that's me. And again, since I appreciate how the moderators have worked so patiently to create a nice community where everyone feels welcome, I apologize for creating any bad feeling, I have no idea if I've explained anything clearer here about why I feel discussion between people who are on the same page (and who use parroting as an aide to sharing understanding so it can deepen) is of more use (yes, I'm always looking for effectiveness, self wants it, sure, ditthi there) than debating between people on different pages." D:Of course it is up to you whith whom you like to discuss .. and when your intention is to learn by heart (parroting) with people of the 'same page ' by all means please do so . The list offers the possibility for that without the need of participating in debates. My ideas was trying a clarification what the Cetasika categories means in daily life , possibly a platform of a 'common page' .. whether this will result (too) into endless debates , must be seen. with Metta Dieter P.S. : P:" No need to reply to this, just still wanting to get some thoughts down, because it doesn't come naturally to me to ignore people who are trying to communicate." D: As I mentioned before 'see you later , alligator ' ,it is ok to ignore my post ..there is no bad feeling, Phil ;-) #120154 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 7:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 11/9/2011 1:18:21 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Dieter (and Nina & Sarah & all) - > >> ====================================== > Dieter, thank you for starting this off! > Nina, Sarah, and all -" I'm afraid that as regards the Abhidhamma, > due, with little doubt, to "deficiencies of accumulation" on my part, my > learning in this area needs to proceed by spoon feeding, and especially by means > of a practical, "right now," introspective-experiential ("look-see") > approach. I really look forward to this, and I also hope that as the > teaching-questioning-answering-discussing process proceeds, the 24 conditions will be > brought in, in the same practical way. I am glad you like the topic and will participate. ------------------------------------ ;-) ------------------------------------ Actually I am interested to get an idea about the concept , which brings all formations of mental phenomena into a framework of 52 categories. Let us see how far we come ..the danger of course is that we get bogged down in details or getting astrayed in Abhidhamma's overabundance , but I think it is worth the trial. -------------------------------------- HCW: I'm most "excited" by the prospect of coming to understand the cetasikas in an experiential way, using practical examples (complementing the theory). ---------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120155 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 8:56 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi Dieter (Howard, Scott, Sarah, all) > there are a number of issues in your postings to talk about and frankly speaking , my impression is that presently you are in some way confused > about Dhamma understanding .Perhaps leaning too much on the teaching in an absolute sense and rejecting the conventional one which for whatever reasons may have disappointed you. But both are true within their own domain... ph: Thanks Dieter, yes , you are right, confused. I don't think anyone here would agree with the degree to which I doubt the ability of modern people to think for themselves correctly and "come and see" Dhamma in a Kalama way without getting in a mess. This is not new for me, I remember I said near the beginning of the foundation of that Kalama Dhamma group that I couldn't feel comfortable discussing Dhamma in tgat way, without leaning on texts( or on the word of people I trust to understand the texts including commentary thoroughly) as heavily as possible. I just don't seem to be able to get by that. For example, when the cetasikas usually translated as "confidence", "determination" and "energy" come up for study, can you really appreciate what is taught about them without conventional attachments to them getting in the way? Of course that is true for all of us. Yes, no hard feelings, as I said, thanks for suggesting this study projectand I am sure it will lead to an improved understanding of Abhidhamma for everyone involved. I will leave it there rather than making further comments. As you say of course no hard feelings, I know my aversion to debate represents an intellectual deficiency on my part. at least in terms of this society we live in. Phil #120156 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:30 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "...Let us see how far we come ..the danger of course is that we get bogged down in details or getting astrayed in Abhidhamma's overabundance, but I think it is worth the trial." Scott: Abhidhamma *is* 'details;' Abhidhamma *does* provide an 'overabundance.' I have never understood the rather superstitious notion that there is 'danger' in studying Abhidhamma. Scott. #120157 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:36 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 Phil, ph: "...I don't think anyone here would agree with the degree to which I doubt the ability of modern people to think for themselves correctly and 'come and see' Dhamma in a Kalama way without getting in a mess..." Scott: In case you hadn't noticed, Phil, I'm with you on this. Scott. #120158 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:41 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi again Dieter, all > I am sure it will lead to an improved understanding of Abhidhamma for everyone involved. After having read your comment about not wanting to "get bogged down in details or the abundance of Abhidhamma" I take that back, without an appreciation of the details you will just be adding a bit of Abhidhamma flavour to your conventional approach, I think. Please remember that Abhidhamma represents the most profound understanding of the Buddha and approach with as much humility as possible. The details are where the profundity of the Buddha's penetration of the truth is proven I also worry (only a little) that Nina will be put in a position of having to skip by details and so a watered down presentation of Abhidhamma will be featured at DSG for as long as this project goes on, I hope you can prove me wrong. No further comment, thanks. Phil #120159 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 9:57 am Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 pt, Huge post, man. One at a time, I guess: pt: "...1. as far as i can tell from your posts,..." Scott: I'll reiterate that someone's posts are likely a poor indication of things. pt: "...your reasoning seems to be modeled on a (kusala) instance of insight proper - there are no persons, there's only nama and rupa, etc, which then seems to conceptually translate into the attitude - there should only be concern with one's own cittas and cetasikas, whereas how another person responds to my words is due to his accumulations, not the actual words nor my intention when speaking them, etc..." Scott: I'm not sure what you mean by 'a (kusala) instance of insight proper.' It's true - there *are no persons* - this isn't just a 'model' as far as I'm concerned. That being said, I think about them all the time. Paramattha dhammaa are literally all there is. Now, I've read it once if I've read it a million times on the list that one is exhorted to 'mind one's own cittas.' So why one should start minding the cittas of others in the face of that exhortation is beyond me. pt: "...I think this is all mostly fine, but I think it is realistically relevant only at moments of insight..." Scott: No, I don't agree at all. One moment at a time all the time. Kusala or akusala, whatever but only and always one moment at a time. I may not be understanding this 'moment of insight' model you are trying to posit. pt: "...However, since such moments happen rarely, if ever, at all other times, the indicator of kusala (dana, sila and bhavana of non-vipassana kind) would be (when it's happening with concepts as objects of cittas, as in - thinking and stories about things) related to caring for another's welfare. If there's no caring for another's welfare, then most probably there's attachment to me and mine, so akusla at the time..." Scott: Yes, as I thought we agreed - mostly akusala. That's why I say, 'Discuss anyway.' No, I think you are a moderate on this question but it's a slippery slope to the magical thinking that underlies the naive belief that one can 'radiate mettaa.' And, to put a finer point on it, I think you'd want to think twice (ha ha) about using thoughts as reliable indicators of kusala. Just because you think you are caring about someone's welfare doesn't mean you are. I think you believe in 'having an effect on someone.' Scott. #120160 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:04 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view truth_aerator Hello all, >Scott: Abhidhamma *is* 'details;' Abhidhamma *does* provide an >'overabundance.' I have never understood the rather superstitious >notion that there is 'danger' in studying Abhidhamma. >======================================================= Of course there is danger in that the person will mistake one's knowledge of the words for the attainment, or worse, for truth and nothing but the truth. The more one knows, the more questions one can ask (look at me). The more questions one asks and get answers for the more one knows... And the cycle continues. The more one knows, the more one has to let go off. So rather than making path easier, excessive study just makes it worse. Not seeing this, some justify their lack of progress for "lack of accumulations" and the need to study more (which just digs a deeper conceptual hole). "Whatever is seen or heard or sensed and fastened onto as true by others, One who is Such among the self-fettered wouldn't further claim to be true or even false. "Having seen well in advance that arrow where generations are fastened & hung 'I know, I see, that's just how it is!' there's nothing of the Tathagata fastened." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.024.than.html "If a monk understands the meaning and the text of Dhamma-even if it be but a stanza of four lines-and be set on living in accordance with the dhamma (dhammaanudhammappa.tipanno), he may be called "one widely learnt (bahussuto), who knows Dhamma by heart.". A ii, 177 AN 4.186 Approach "Having heard that all things are unworthy of attachment, he directly knows every thing. Directly knowing every thing, he comprehends every thing. Comprehending every thing, he sees all themes as something separate." - SN 35.80 With best wishes, Alex #120161 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:10 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view scottduncan2 Alex, A: "...The more questions one asks and get answers for the more one knows... And the cycle continues. The more one knows, the more one has to let go off. So rather than making path easier, excessive study just makes it worse..." Scott: This is just silly supertitious, magical thinking. Scott. #120162 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:10 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa truth_aerator Hi Phil, >ph: "...I don't think anyone here would agree with the degree to >which I doubt the ability of modern people to think for themselves >correctly and 'come and see' Dhamma in a Kalama way without getting in >a mess..." >======================================================== If you doubt (a hindrance) the ability of modern people to correctly think for themselves, then why trust what some of them say and teach? With best wishes, Alex #120163 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:13 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view truth_aerator Scott, >A: "...The more questions one asks and get answers for the more one >knows... And the cycle continues. The more one knows, the more one >has to let go off. So rather than making path easier, excessive study >just makes it worse..." > >Scott: This is just silly supertitious, magical thinking. >========================================= Prove it. Prove your point to be correct. No straw man, red herring or ad hominems please. Alex #120164 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:13 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi Scott > ph: "...I don't think anyone here would agree with the degree to which I doubt the ability of modern people to think for themselves correctly and 'come and see' Dhamma in a Kalama way without getting in a mess..." > > Scott: In case you hadn't noticed, Phil, I'm with you on this. But at least you are willing to confirm your suspicions in discussion. I just form prejudices and hide behind them. Of course there are often true reasons for prejudices, but it is also intellectually mature to make an effort to find out where the prejudices can be confirmed or reconsidered. That's what you've been doing with Rob E, and again kudos for that. Phil #120165 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:58 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nichiconn Hi Dieter, > D: ahirika and anottappa is the negative of hirika and ottappa , that means both are absent , doesn't it? c: If you look back at your original overview, they (moral shame and dread/fear of doing wrong) are part of the 19 universal beauties group - so not just those 2, but that whole group will always arise together. If there is the lack of shame and dread, then delusion and restlessness must come into play. Plus, of course, at least 7 of the 13 ethically variable group & then however many other unwholesomes there happen to be. I'm somewhat curious as to why you decided to take things out of order. It's not a big deal. Sure enough, the different books will deal with theses same things in different orders so it's not like there's a right and wrong to it... just me assuming your list represented an outlined plan of "attack". > ------- > > D: well, the state of mourning (in German we speak of Trauerarbeit) means suffering . Which cetasika would that be? > (Unpleasant) feeling , as one of the 7 universals? > Dosa if i had to just pick one. 'Suffering' is another example of different approaches. In general, dukkha is pretty much any and all conditioned things, but when it is 'the truth of suffering', it is only bodily and mental painful feeling. Only 5 feelings out of everything possible? I guess this is partly where the "(existential) stress" translation comes from. connie #120166 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:58 am Subject: Re: view 'I have no self' is wrong view scottduncan2 Alex, Me: "This is just silly supertitious, magical thinking." A: "Prove it. Prove your point to be correct. No straw man, red herring or ad hominems please." Scott: Ha, good one, Alex. I dig the imperatives. It's an opinion, Alex. And I'm sticking to it. Scott. #120167 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:15 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi Alex > If you doubt (a hindrance) the ability of modern people to correctly think for themselves, then why trust what some of them say and teach? Much more reliance on and respect for the texts, basically. A sense that they understand how profound Dhamma is and don't approach it with a lot of desire for results here and now. In the West, people want results, big results, in this lifetime. If doubting in their judgement is a hindrance, so be it. Even when I was attacking A. Sujin and joined a group called Kalama Sutta, I tried but almost immediately found I couldn't get into that "come and see for yourself" approach, I always assumed the commmentaries must *of course* represent a much better understanding of Dhamma than a group of fellows on the internet reading suttas in translation and discussing based on that could possibly have. So I'm pretty sure this is not about slavish adherence to Ajahn Sujin and her students. No further comment. Phil #120168 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:23 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nichiconn Wow, connie, > > 'Suffering' is another example of different approaches. In general, dukkha is pretty much any and all conditioned things, but when it is 'the truth of suffering', it is only bodily and mental painful feeling. Only 5 feelings out of everything possible? I guess this is partly where the "(existential) stress" translation comes from. > 1. painful or unpleasant mental feeling 2. painful or unpleasant bodily feeling not 5. c. #120169 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:37 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa truth_aerator Hi Phil, >A:If you doubt (a hindrance) the ability of modern people to >correctly think for themselves, then why trust what some of them say >and teach? > >P:Much more reliance on and respect for the texts, basically. >============================================= It is one thing to rely on the text, and another thing to rely on a very controversial and unique commentary of a commentaries. Broken telephone? Especially when it contradicts what VsM and suttas have said. >P: A sense that they understand how profound Dhamma is and don't >approach it with a lot of desire for results here and now. In the >West, people want results, big results, in this lifetime. If >doubting in their judgement is a hindrance, so be it. >=============================================== This is one of the things that attracted me to the Dhamma. Results in this life rather than after this life and after putting lots of blind faith in who knows what. If what one studies doesn't produce any fruits, what good is it? How does it distinguishes from various religions that promise results only after this life? With best wishes, Alex #120170 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:44 am Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > as far as i can tell from your posts, your reasoning seems to be modeled on a (kusala) instance of insight proper - there are no persons, there's only nama and rupa, etc, which then seems to conceptually translate into the attitude - there should only be concern with one's own cittas and cetasikas, whereas how another person responds to my words is due to his accumulations, not the actual words nor my intention when speaking them, etc. I think this is all mostly fine, but I think it is realistically relevant only at moments of insight. However, since such moments happen rarely, if ever, at all other times, the indicator of kusala (dana, sila and bhavana of non-vipassana kind) would be (when it's happening with concepts as objects of cittas, as in - thinking and stories about things) related to caring for another's welfare." ++++++++++++ Dear Pt Out of welfare for you and other readers I think it behoves me to point out that anatta is absolutely true even when there are no momnets of insight. To suggest that at times when there is not direct insight into nama and rupa one should not be putting the theory of anatta to the fore is misguided and shows lack of confidence in Dhamma, probably rooted in wrong view. I think you said you were so concerned by my post about the section on urination and defecation in the satipatthana sutta that from now you were taking the side of meditation? Perhaps you believe that one should be able to sit down and bring up desirable states rooted in sati? robert #120171 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:46 am Subject: doubt as hindrance nichiconn Hi Alex, I think doubt as a hindrance refers more to doubting the Triple Gem & not knowing akusala from kusala so that we ‘waiver’ in doing the right thing... not the same kind of doubt as in a healthy questioning of things like other peoples’ opinions, but the doubt that goes away at stream entry. Until then, we all have our doubts about the teachings, no matter what we give lip service to. connie #120172 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:08 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 connie, c:"1. painful or unpleasant mental feeling 2. painful or unpleasant bodily feeling not 5." Scott: The fifth is the 'mystery feeling.' Mysterio. #120173 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:17 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa philofillet Hi Connie and Scott > c:"1. painful or unpleasant mental feeling > 2. painful or unpleasant bodily feeling > > not 5." > > Scott: The fifth is the 'mystery feeling.' > I have an indifferent feeling about that. Phil #120174 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:24 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 Phil, Ph: "I have an indifferent feeling about that." Scott: Mysterious. Scott. #120175 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:34 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nichiconn > > > c:"1. painful or unpleasant mental feeling > > 2. painful or unpleasant bodily feeling > > > > not 5." > > > > Scott: The fifth is the 'mystery feeling.' > > > > P: I have an indifferent feeling about that. > Mr's A-mused and B-mused have spoken, C-mused. #120176 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:37 pm Subject: Re: doubt as hindrance truth_aerator Hi Connie, >C:I think doubt as a hindrance refers more to doubting the Triple Gem >====================================================== Yes, doubting the Buddha's skill as a Teacher to mean exactly what He has said. Doubting the aryan sangha who practices correctly is another doubt... With best wishes, Alex #120177 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:38 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 connie, c: "Mr's A-mused and B-mused have spoken, C-mused." Scott: Oh, what were you musing about? Scott. p.s. I'll stop now. Have to go pick up a kid from some other kid's house. #120178 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:41 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? truth_aerator RobertK, >R:Perhaps you believe that one should be able to sit down and bring up >desirable states rooted in sati? >-================================================== That is straw man. Meditation is not about controlling what cannot be controlled. Anyone who has more than 2 brain cells and has meditated for a bit knows that you can't control the mind. Meditation It is about developing understanding, not control. Developed understanding will be the cause for future kusala mental states and eventually will bring maggaphala. With best wishes, Alex #120179 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:41 pm Subject: Re: doubt as hindrance scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Yes, doubting the Buddha's skill as a Teacher to mean exactly what He has said..." Scott: Yeah, no that's not it. But we could mention doubting the translators' opinions, modern teachers' opinions, and for absolutely, positively sure, doubting the opinions of modern commentators such as yourself. Scott. #120180 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:46 pm Subject: Re: doubt as hindrance truth_aerator Scott, >A: "Yes, doubting the Buddha's skill as a Teacher to mean exactly >what He has said..." > >Scott: But we could mention doubting the translators' opinions, >===================================================== Sure. I like to check MULTIPLE translations of the same sutta. I also like to check the pali and translate some things myself. Is there a teacher whose translations you don't doubt? >S:positively sure, doubting the opinions of modern commentators such >as yourself. >================================================== This is why I like to quote a lot of suttas and VsM. To show that I say what they say. Alex #120181 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:48 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 Alex, A: "That is straw man. Meditation is not about controlling what cannot be controlled. Anyone who has more than 2 brain cells and has meditated for a bit knows that you can't control the mind." Scott: Scarecrow maybe? Read, 'Can't meditate.' A: "Meditation It is about developing understanding, not control. Developed understanding will be the cause for future kusala mental states and eventually will bring maggaphala." Scott: Words, words, words. At least you're back into familiar territory... Scott. #120182 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:51 pm Subject: Re: doubt as hindrance scottduncan2 Alex, A: "...Is there a teacher whose translations you don't doubt?" Scott: Nope. A: "This is why I like to quote a lot of suttas and VsM. To show that I say what they say." Scott: Oh. Will you please be my teacher then? You and Rob E., I mean. You both actually say exactly what the Buddha *and* Buddhagosa say. Amazing. Scott. #120183 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:52 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? truth_aerator Hi Scott, > Scott: Scarecrow maybe? Read, 'Can't meditate.' >========================================= To speak precisely no "one" can meditate. Meditation occurs as a result of certain conditions and there is no cartoonish control that RobertK tries to depict and to take down like a strawman. >A: "Meditation It is about developing understanding, not control. >Developed understanding will be the cause for future kusala mental >states and eventually will bring maggaphala." > >Scott: Words, words, words. At least you're back into familiar >territory... >===================================================== When one parrots what one has read but has not experienced and doesn't experience, that is "Words, words, words". Alex #120184 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:04 pm Subject: It has arisen already (transcript, Gangtok, India 2004, p..m,.2) philofillet Hi all Something really clicked for me when listening to this talk. Earlier in the talk there had been some explanation, which up to now I hadn't understood, about why it is necessary to eradicate wrong view of self before one expects to eradicate attachment to sensuous object. We usually get it the other way around, I had for years. But finally begins to make sense. I'll pick up at this point: Q: That's quite amazing, I hear the sotapanna, who has absolutely no wrong view, but still has lobha for many objects. It shows me how deeply rooted the lobha must be, because even sotapannas are still attached to going shopping, perhaps, liking many things.... A.S: What is now arising, wrong view or attachment to realities? Q: Both, for me... A.S : Both you mean you have wrong view together with attachment to sensuous object? Or what is more? Q: Well, the attachment I would think. A.S: To? Q: Everything I see, and hear... A.S Sensuous objects, it's so thick, and deeply rooted. So what should be eradicated first must be wrong view, wrong understanding. And then the sotappana is aware of lobha, which is not as gross, because it doesn't arise with ditthi, so it begins to see the danger of the gross attachment to sensuous objects, until that person has become sakadagami. (ph: I used to believe that by getting rid of gross attachment, without understanding, conditions would be created for understanding to deepen, and then eventually sotappana. Everything will be clear for the sotapanna. But there is no sotappana until wrong view is eradicated, I had it backwards, so common. So when I warn meditators about all the lobha involved, it should be a warning about the danger of wrong view, which is why we always hear warnings about wrong view from the beginning.) I will skip ahead to the part of the talk from which the title comes: Q: "You were talking about 'giving up the burden', can you say a little more about giving up the burden? A.S In tipitika, when on lost the dear one, a son, or wife, when that person came to see the Buddha, there were conditions to understand realities, and some can become enlightened. So it's not a question of whether we should have none (ph: attachment to loved one, I think) but it depends on panna which can understand... Q: Giving up the burden at that moment... OK NOW THE ULTRA COOL MOMENT IN THE TALK! PRICK UP YOUR EARS! Q: (it helps) tremendously when one knows one doesn't have to try to give up attachment to sensuous objects, like you try to cut down on the sugar, or try not to enjoy the visible objects, and one can see the silabbataparammasa creeping in... A.S: Do you know why? Q: Why it helps so much? A.S: Do you know why it's like that? Q: Um, I think it's more detachment from the clinging to self. A.S: Because it has already arisen, what can you do? Q:It's happened already (Some anecdotal talk about lobha while shopping here) A.S (cutting in): So you know why again? It has arisen. (More anecdotal talk about shopping starts9 A.S (cutting in quickly): It has arisen already so we don't have to move away from it because it can be object of understand. As long as it hasn't arisen yet, who can have that moment as its (understanding's) object. It has to be that which has arisen, like now, at this moment. (More anecdotal talk about lobha when shopping starts) A.S (cutting in) So right understanding can understand reality which has arisen. ph: What an awesome talk. In addition to reminding me of one of my favourite movie scenes where the shrink in Good WIll Hunting keeps saying "it's not your fault" until it finally clicks with the angry kid, the point here, that, as Rob K has said, each and every moment is so instructive, all the running away and selecting of objects we try to do because we think they are better, we just really miss the point of Dhamma, the opportunity to understand whatever has arisen. I really recommend listening to it, starts with about 5 minutes remaining in the section, I think.) Phil #120185 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 12:56 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 Alex, A: "To speak precisely no 'one' can meditate. Meditation occurs as a result of certain conditions..." Scott: Yeah, no one can 'meditate.' I'll agree with that. I'll bet that your 'conditions' include deciding to sit down in the right posture on the right cushion with the right idea that you are going to do all of this because deciding to of your own free will is the main condition. Scott. #120186 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:20 pm Subject: Strawman truth_aerator Scott, >A: "To speak precisely no 'one' can meditate. Meditation occurs as a >result of certain conditions..." > >S:...deciding to of your own free will is the main condition. >============================================================ Free will does not need to exist in order for meditation to occur. Wise meditator does not believe in free will. So another straw man here. "No control" needs to be understood and realized. With best wishes, Alex #120187 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 1:49 pm Subject: Buddhaghosa is correct,? rjkjp1 A: "This is why I like to quote a lot of suttas and VsM. To show that I say what they say." ++++++++ Dear Alex yesterday when I cited Buddhaghosa about Vijjammanapannati and Avijjapannati you didn't seem impressed? Do you now accept that - as per Buddhaghosa- that thre are designations which refer to unreal things , like people, and also designations for absolute realities like the khandhas and ayatanas? Also in the VsM it says: There is no doer of a deed, or one who reaps the result. Phenomena alone flow on, no other view than this right." Visuddhimagga XIX19 "This is mere mentality-materiality, there is no being, no person" XVIII24 "The mental and material (nama rupa) are really here But here is no human being to be found, for it is void and merely fashioned like a doll" XVII31 I think in the past you didn't concur with these quotes, I guess now you do? robert #120188 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:08 pm Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa is correct,? truth_aerator Dear RobertK, I have no problem with those Anatta quotes. I don't believe in The Atta. With best wishes, Alex #120189 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:13 pm Subject: Re: Buddhaghosa is correct,? rjkjp1 Ok , But I also asked about vijjamana pannati and avijjamanapannti. What is your Opinion of those terms - as used by Buddhaghosa? robert --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear RobertK, > > I have no problem with those Anatta quotes. I don't believe in The Atta. > > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #120190 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:14 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. Finally getting back to this one... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: Well to begin with, most suttas were addressed to listeners who were ready for enlightenment, and so were persons of highly developed insight (even if that was not apparent before they heard the teachings in that lifetime). > > > > [RE:] Is there scriptural support for this understanding that I can read? > =============== > > J: I recall some textual references, including suttas, but I don't have them at my fingertips. There is for example the sutta where the Buddha gives the simile of the farmer who sows his most fertile field first and the least productive one last. Perhaps someone can help with a reference on this point (anyone?). That sutta indicated that Buddha would sow all his fields, even the sandy, rocky ones -- like me -- :-) -- so it is possible that some suttas were more advanced, others were more for beginners; and some may have been for everyone, to take from it what they could. In the simile of the field Buddha said it was worth teaching Dhamma even to followers of other teachings -- quite a different stance than the story about how he almost didn't teach at all, and that the teaching was only for those with "a little dust..." Seems quite opposite in fact. The reason for teaching even the "hard of head" is that as Buddha put it, [paraphrasing:] "if even one sentence of Dhamma was understood by that person, it would make their path infinitely better." So perhaps Buddha believed that in the gradual course of time, the teachings would be absorbed even by such people. > =============== > > > Secondly, there are often some clues in the wording of the sutta. In the case of the section in the Satipatthana Sutta on mindfulness of breathing, these are found in the introductory words: > > > > > > "Here, O bhikkhus, a bhikkhu, gone to the forest, to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sits down, bends in his legs crosswise on his lap, keeps his body erect, and arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him. > > > > [RE:] From the versions I have seen [6 or 7+] this is an unusual translation. Because the meaning of this sentence is of pivotal importance, I think it would be a good idea to look at a few translations and also seem what commentaries have said about it. Thai monks and Visudhimagga followers have disagreed on interpretations of key aspects of the text, including the meaning of this key sentence, and so it is far from settled. > > ... > > If the interpretation that several of these translators have given, as to "putting mindfulness to the fore" or "putting mindfulness in front of him" are correct, as favored by B. Bodhi, no mean translator, it can and seems to have the simple meaning of focusing the attention on mindfulness and with mindfulness in order to engage the practice of mindfulness, which is about to be instructed, as it seems to me, from scratch. > =============== > > J: You are equating the idea of "focusing the attention on mindfulness and with mindfulness in order to engage the practice of mindfulness" with that of "arousing mindfulness". I think these are quite different notions. Looking back at your translation: "...arouses mindfulness in the object of meditation, namely, the breath which is in front of him..." it now seems pretty simple and seems fine with me. I don't know what my problem was with it before. Arousing mindfulness in the object of meditation seems pretty clear - it is spurring citta to be mindful of the breath. It seems pretty precise, doesn't it? The question I guess would be how does one "arouse mindfulness" in the object of meditation, the breath? It is clear from the passage that the practitioner in this sutta is sitting down in front of a tree purposefully in order to arouse mindfulness in the breath, and then practicing mindfulness of breathing. So the question is, how does he do this? He is doing it purposely, he is sitting down to meditate. This is established even in your translation. So what do you think about this situation? > =============== > > [RE:] I understand that you have a philosophical commitment to sati being a pure 100% cetasika that is either there or not there, but that is not justified or discussed by the text. That is an interpretation based on a predisposed view. I see mindfulness as a quality that is increased over time through practice, and that is the sense in which these suttas are written. > =============== > > J: The commentarial view/interpretation is that mindfulness is one of the wholesome mental factors (which, as you know, are momentary in nature). I think this is deceptive. Of course sati like anything else, will arise in a given moment, but if one is advanced in satipatthana there are going to be many more moments of mindfulness and often in a row, which creates a markedly different "state of consciousnes" over time than if sati only arises once in a rare while. So I think it is the preponderance of the moments that matters in some senses. The arahant no longer has certain defilements arising at all, and will have sati arising all the time, so it does make a difference what is happening over the long spate of cittas, rather than just one at a time. If you're analyzing the reality of a single citta and the cetasikas that are involved, etc., then it can make sense to talk about a single citta, or if you are talking about how a single citta demonstrates anicca, then it makes sense. But when you are talking about the development of mindfulness through cultivation, and the "arousing" of mindfulness, which has to take place in more than one moment, I think, something else is in play. There are two things that I am thinking of that I think relates to this. One is recent conversations about when one of the enlightenment factors becomes a "power," and can be summoned at any time. Obviously that only happens for the extremely advanced, but it still seems contradictory to the notion that there is no willful summoning of these abilities. The arahant can turn qualities on and off - why is that? Secondly, I am thinking of the K. Sujin statement that has recently been discussed - that "sati should be there all the time." It doesn't matter about the "should" so much as the suggestion that sati *can* be there all the time. There is a suggestion beyond the "single moment" for sure there. So what does "arousing mindfulness" mean? This is being done, it doesn't just happen, so what is the doing involved? > If you are suggesting here that mindfulness is a mental factor of mixed wholesome and unwholesome quality (not sure is that's what you're saying), then that would definitely be an interpretation on your part since there is no statement to that effect in this (or any) sutta. No, I think that the resultant state that we would call "mindfulness" is made up of many moments, and that again, it is the preponderance of the moments, making up a critical mass, that puts the mind of the advanced practitioner in a higher spiritual state. While states come and go from moment to moment, the accumulations dictate that certain states will be around more, and others less, based on those accumulations and tendencies. Obviously, for a sotapanna, there will be less akusala arising than for an ordinary person, so it is not just a single moment involved, but the state of affairs from moment to moment. > =============== > > [RE:] If mindfulness were already able to be maintained in the object of awareness *continuously,* as you assert, there would be *no need* for this sutta to ever have been given. The ability to maintain mindfulness and develop that capacity in each of the four "foundations" or applications, is what the sutta is there *to teach.* So your interpretation would pre-empt the purpose of the sutta and make it unnecessary and meaningless. > =============== > > J: When wholesome qualities are highly developed they may reach the stage of becoming a power (Pali: bala), at which stage they are very constant. That makes a lot of sense, and takes away the sense that only each single citta in isolation is implicated by this practice. > =============== > > > Of course, references in the sutta to mindfulness are to mindfulness proper and not to a 'practice' of mixed kusala and akusala. > > > > [RE:] I disagree that this set of black-and-white distinctions are inherent in the sutta, or are in any way referenced by this sutta. That is a presumption on your part. I believe that this is a guide to *developing* satipatthana, not a description of how it already arises. > =============== Even though sati arises at each moment, or not, the development of satipatthana seems like it would be a progression towards more moments of sustained sati, and less of akusala. > J: As far as I know, other objects of samatha development (apart from breathing) are not given the same kind of 'treatment' by the Buddha. I see this passage as addressing the particular case of the person who is developing samatha with breathing as object. I think the Buddha makes clear in different passages that the breath is being used for both samatha and satipatthana development. That is clearly the goal in both anapanasati and satipatthana suttas, I think. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #120191 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:17 pm Subject: a/vijjamana pannati truth_aerator Hi RobertK, >RK:Ok, But I also asked about vijjamana pannati and avijjamanapannti. >================================================= When were they first used? We need to properly interpret them and what they mean. They are still pannati. With best wishes, Alex #120192 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:28 pm Subject: Re: a/vijjamana pannati rjkjp1 Ok I see. They were used by Buddhaghosa in his elucidation of the section of the Puggalapannati that you cited. Specifically: Palimuttakena (CS:pg.26) pana atthakathanayena aparapi cha pabbattiyo- vijjamanapannaatti, avijjamanapannaatti, vijjamanena avijjamanapannatti, avijjamanena vijjamanapannatti vijjamanena vijjamanapabbatti, avijjamanena avijjamanapabbattiti. Tattha kusalakusalasseva saccikatthaparamatthavasena vijjamanassa sato sambhutassa dhammassa pabbapana vijjamanapabbatti nama. Tatha avijjamanassa lokaniruttimattasiddhassa itthipurisadikassa pabbapana avijjamanapabbatti nama. Sabbakarenapi anupalabbhaneyyassa vacavatthumattasseva pabcamasaccadikassa titthiyanam anupakatipurisadikassa va pabbapanapi avijjamanapabbattiyeva. This section makes a very clear distintction between names/designations that refer to ULTIMATE realities - and those names/designations referring to unreal things such as people. Do you agree with it? Do you think there is a distinction in accordance with what Buddhaghosa says? robert --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi RobertK, > > >RK:Ok, But I also asked about vijjamana pannati and avijjamanapannti. > >================================================= > > When were they first used? > We need to properly interpret them and what they mean. They are still pannati. > > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #120193 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:35 pm Subject: Re: Strawman scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Free will does not need to exist in order for meditation to occur. Wise meditator does not believe in free will. So another straw man here. 'No control' needs to be understood and realized." Scott: Scarecrow, Alex. So anyway, when you wisely decide to meditate and wisely sit on your meditation cushion in your wise meditation posture and wisely choose your meditation subject and wisely meditate - you aren't controlling anything. It's all by conditions. The main one being your amazingly wise decision to meditate - after that, since the initial condition is automatically correct, the rest just follow suit and voila - hello Nirvana! So good to have you back on the meditation bandwagon! Philosophy is not a strong suit. Scott. #120194 From: "connie" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 2:39 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nichiconn scott, c: "Mr's A-mused and B-mused have spoken, C-mused." Scott: Oh, what were you musing about? c: conceit and (self-)justification in following lobha's lead. connie #120195 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:19 pm Subject: "There should be sati all the time" philofillet Hi Nina Rob E has latched hungrily on to that quotation and will now suck every last drop of life out of it. You have listened to A. Sujin for 40 years, or more. Does she recommend the intentional cultivation of sati? Please explain when you have a moment, thank you. Phil #120196 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:29 pm Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa scottduncan2 connie, c: "conceit and (self-)justification in following lobha's lead." Scott: Like in discussions on the list and like that? s #120197 From: "philip" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 3:49 pm Subject: Re: "There should be sati all the time" philofillet Hello again Nina (p.s to Rob E) > Rob E has latched hungrily on to that quotation and will now suck every last drop of life out of it. You have listened to A. Sujin for 40 years, or more. Does she recommend the intentional cultivation of sati? > > Please explain when you have a moment, thank you. Never mind. Let's let A.Sujin speak for herself, for what good it will do. Perhaps Rob E will refer to the following passage the next time he tries to recruit A. Sujin as a wrong view advocate: >>>We do not have to wonder whether there should be sati and when there should be sati, there should be sati all the time. However, we should beware not to fix on it, or try to have it or to wish for it while discussing Dhamma, reading texts or by being alone. Then there will be little result of all such efforts. Defilements are subtle, difficult to eradicate and pa~n~naa must be subtle, otherwise there will be wrong practice. Someone who wants to practise the Dhamma is wondering why sati does not arise and why he cannot practise the Dhamma immediately. By being aware of the characteristics of realities that appear the idea of wanting to practise can be eliminated. One can become someone who develops satipa.t.thaana naturally. One can be aware immediately of seeing, sound, thinking or feeling. Otherwise there is no way to eliminate the idea of wanting to practise the Dhamma." (end quote, but not misuse of quote, I bet.) Phil p.s any reply to the group, not to me personally Rob E, thanks. I make the mistake of reading your posts for entertainment purposes including the one where you mocked me for saying A.Sujin was wrong. (By the way,I have said so before, and I will again, I'm sure, she is not infallible. For example, I heard her say that a mother couldn't kill her child as we see in the desert crossing simile. That was obviously wrong, so saying she is wrong is not a problem but thankfully she is never wrong in the gross way you are desperately seeking to justify you wrong practices, see above. Well, if you actually have those practices.) Hopefully I won't make that mistake of reading your posts again. #120198 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:01 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 pt, "...2. When concepts are objects of cittas, imo no one's a 'closed system', in the sense that just like an interpretation of someone else's words can be condition for panna of whatever level (though usually conceptual level), so can it be for dosa..." Scott: 'Closed system.' What do you mean by this? Kusala can be condition for kusala; kusala can be condition for akusala; akusala can be condition for akusala; akusala can be condition for kusala. Is this what you mean? And what about natural decisive support condition - pakatupanissaya - could be something from many lives ago. And more. If I'm following your thrust here, you mean that my words here on the list, or your words here on the list can either condition pa~n~naa or dosa in a reader. Or how about many, many other possible mental factors? And so? What is the point you want to make here? (Sorry if you've made it in number 3, and this is just a preliminary point.) If you're talking about seeing words on a screen undersigned by a name of someone, then we are definitely talking about mind-door stuff when it comes to thoughts and concepts. You don't even need 'an interpretation of someone else's words' - sometimes just the name will do. Think back moments ago to your reaction when you saw that this post from ME was awaiting you. You didn't even know what it's contents were at the time, let alone had time to interpret them. And there it was - your immediate reaction. Just that fast. Are you suggesting that we should try to write in a certain way so that we can increase the chances of being condition for kusala to arise *in someone else*? Or decrease the chances for akusala to arise *in someone else*? I find this highly controversial, if this is your gist, not to mention impossible given that anatta characterises all the dhammaa operative. That's like writing on dsg as a practice - a deliberate practice. No way, son. Scott. #120199 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 10, 2011 4:19 pm Subject: Re: is number conceptual or ultimate reality? scottduncan2 pt, pt: "...3. not sure, but I think 'interpretation' would depend on a shared conceptual understanding, as in thinking about things in a similar way (aside from the matter that thinking on the same issue, in the same words, can possibly be both a/kusala), e.g. 'samatha' means this and this and this and not that and that, etc. Maybe we can discuss this bit as i'm not quite sure here..." Scott: Yeah, I'm a bit lost with what you are trying to say. Right off the bat I'm leery of your 'shared conceptual understanding' clause because you are linking this to 'interpretation' and this seems very precarious. Have you not read any of the discussions I've been having with Rob E.? He claims, by using the same shared 'words' or 'language' to understand anatta, for example. And yet Rob E. continues to believe in the deliberate setting of conditions he calls 'practice' or 'meditation.' He claims that my interpretation is wrong and I know his is. And we are 'interpreting' the same textual objects completely divergently when all this is going on. So, 'shared conceptual understanding' would come in how in all that? We suffer from lack of consensus. It's called 'disagreement.' Do you imagine that both of us can be right in some way at the same time - you know, like 'win-win' or something - with such clearly divergent views? Do you actually believe Rob E.'s claim to understand anatta while touting deliberate practice? If so, then you don't understand anatta. Are you suggesting that consensus seeking trumps truth? I can imagine you saying, 'Well, we understand it differently and we must beat around the bush and come to some consensual, mutual interpretation.' I don't think it's 'truth by committee' when it comes to Dhamma. Do you? Scott.