#120600 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas study corner, restlessness. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 11/21/2011 3:45:13 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, Op 20-nov-2011, om 17:41 heeft upasaka@... het volgende geschreven: > N: Also when there are sloth and torpor with the akusala citta there > is uddhacca as well. Akusala citta never lacks uddhacca. > ---------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Thanks, Nina. I would presume that typically when thina-middha is > strong, uddhacca is mild. Am I wrong? If yes, then I think I'm not > really clear > on the meaning of 'uddhacca'. > --------------------------------------------- N: This is hard to tell, since all akusala cetasikas that arise with akusala citta condition one another. Thina-middha arises only with akusala cittas that are sasankhaarika, induced, and these are weaker that those that are asankhaarika, spontaneous, without any inducement. We cannot catch uddhacca, or point to it, but it is useful to know that it accompanies each akusala citta. ------------------------------------------ HCW: I will keep that point in mind. ------------------------------------------ It is eradicated by the magga- citta of the arahat, so this will be a long, long time. ------------------------------------------ HCW: Ah, well! ------------------------------------------- ------ Nina. =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120601 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 21-nov-2011, om 11:44 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > Yes, we're thinking alike - my post #120592 crossed with yours! > Never mind 'dhamma' or 'Abhidhamma'. ------ N: Good, I liked that. Never enough reminders. Nina. #120602 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:39 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasikas study corner, restlessness. nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 21-nov-2011, om 12:32 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > L: So kukkucca is worry about deeds done in the past only and > uddhacca then is not a worry? What about being worried not about > deeds done? ------ N: I would not translate uddhacca by worry. Worried about deeds not done: the kusala that one omitted. There was an opportunity but it was wasted, perhaps out of laziness or selfishness. One could help a helpless person but one was only thinking of one's own comfort. This causes regret later on. ------- Nina. #120603 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:40 am Subject: RE: [dsg] dhammasaro Good friend Howard, On: ............ HCW: I make an alcohol-free toast to her health!! You both have my very best wishes. ------------------------------------------ yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ============================ With metta, Howard ............................... Sincere warm thanks.... tis what I teach my Korean Christian English language students... one can participate in a toast with water... most were embarrass in American alcoholic toasts... what to do without offending... peace... Remember; you and yours are invited to visit us at my expense... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ............ rest deleted ................_ #120604 From: "connie" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:27 am Subject: Sangiitisutta Tens, no.3 nichiconn Dear Friends, the sutta continues: CSCD 347. < Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:08 am Subject: [dsg] Sangiitisutta Tens, no.3 and commentary. nilovg Dear friends, Walshe [iii 269] DN 33.3.3(3) 'Ten unwholesome corses of action (akusala- kammapathaa): taking life, taking what is not given, sexual misconduct, lying speech, slander, rude speech, idle chatter, greed, malevolence, wrong view. (Dasa akusalakammapathaa - paa.naatipaato, adinnaadaana.m, kaamesumicchaacaaro, musaavaado, pisu.naa vaacaa, pharusaa vaacaa, samphappalaapo, abhijjhaa, byaapaado, micchaadi.t.thi.) ------- N: The commentary to this sutta follows entirely the Expositor, Book I, Part III, Discourse on Doors, V: Discourse on Courses of Immoral Action ((5, ff). It mentions as to sexual misconduct all the persons to whom a man has no right to go, such as unmarried women under the guardianship of mother, father, brother, sister, etc. The misconduct is smaller or greater according as the forbidden object is devoid of or endowed with virtues such as siila. After that the Co deals with covetousness, abhiijhaa. A process of inclining towards another’s property when confronted with it, thinking, ‘Ah, would this be mine’. It has two constituent factors: another’s property and the bending over of oneself. After that the co deals with ill-will, destroying welfare and happiness, wrong view that does not see realities as they are. It is a smaller or greater offense according as it is of a temporary nature or permanent. The ten unwholesome courses of action can be considered by way of dhamma (reality), of groups, objects, feelings and roots. As to dhamma: seven of them are cetanaa, and three ( covetouness, ill- will and wrong view) are factors associated with cetanaa. The co follows again the Expositor explaining about all these factors. ------- Conclusion: it is helpful that the co explains about the akusala hetus (roots) and feelings with regard to the ten akusala kamma pathas. There are many degrees of akusala and not every akusala citta is an unwholesome course of action. This sutta shows the danger of all kinds of akusala. Even when akusala is of a slight degree and does not motivate a bad deed, it is still dangerous since we accumulate more at the moment it arises. We may believe that we shall never kill, but our past lives are not known and we cannot tell whether there will be conditions for killing in the present life. We cling to all the sense objects and it is clinging that leads to many kinds of akusala. Right understanding of naama and ruupa is to be developed so that there can be detachment from the objects that are experienced. We also take akusala for self, we have an idea of “I am lying, I am using harsh speech”. First the clinging to self has to be eradicated so that eventually all kinds of akusala can be eradicated. ********* Nina. #120606 From: "connie" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] nichiconn dear Chuck, Howard, > > I was most displeased when the ER doctor asked her, under morphine > sedation, if she wanted special care if she died during the operation!!! What operation??? He did not even check her temperature!!! > ------------------------------------------- > HCW: > It strikes me as a crazy question, and he sounds way less than > competent! > -------------------------------------------- > c: Odds are, they'd ask the same thing during any hospital admission, whether a surgery was expected or not, but it does seem at least statistically justifiable in an ER situation. There's Malpractice Insurance & whatever they call that "patient's advanced directives" right-to-die/live with dignity stuff to consider, so yeah, maybe it's a crazy question, but maybe for different reasons than we'd first think. What seems crazy to me is when each hospital person you talk to asks the same things when they've got the charts with the answers filled out from the last people (and probably at least one you had to read and fill out yourself) right there in their hands... that gives me pause to wonder, but then again, literacy probably has nothing to do with it. My irritation is what's important. > > HCW: > I make an alcohol-free toast to her health!! You both have my very best wishes. > ------------------------------------------ c: Yes, let's drink to everyone's long term intoxication with life, love and laughter... and our eventual sobriety. Long live Dhamma friendships, connie (off to refill coffee cup so I can warmly celebrate too) #120607 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:36 am Subject: Further Discussions in India, 4. nilovg Dear friends, Further Discussions in India, 4. When we are reading the Tipi.taka we should know whether we have developed our own understanding or not yet. Whenever we read we should not be careless about particular words, but we should consider the meaning more and more. Visible object and seeing occur now and they are so common, also for those who do not study the Dhamma. Those who just learn the Dhamma think about the terms: seeing is naama, visible object is ruupa, but that is not sufficient. The Buddha did not develop his understandig just to tell us about the names of all these realities. But he had to use the terms in order to define and point out the characteristics of realities to those who are not careless. They will develop understanding gradually until it is their own understanding. Is visible object now known by one’s own understanding? It is just that which can be seen. One should not be careless. There is viriya, effort or energy. We do not have to talk about viriya some other time. At the moment of talking about visible object there can be wise attention, What is appearing now cannot be anything else but that which can be seen, just very fast; from moment to moment, and there is viriya at those moments. One is not lazy while studying the teachings. People may believe that they have to do specific things other than attending to this moment. Now there is viriya. When one has just begun to study one should consider that nobody can create any viriya, viriya is there already. Who can do anything? Realities are conditioned. Develop right understanding until it becomes one’s own penetration of the true nature of realities. One knows that one is on the right Path. ******** Nina. #120608 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa moellerdieter Dear Nina and Sarah, you wrote: 'Op 19-nov-2011, om 19:09 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > It is a bit penetrant to repeat , but don' t we need to work where > we are , not where we like to be? ------ N: A beautiful poem. We are not without sorrow. We are disturbed when there is sickness and death. Every time I asked Kh Sujin about this, she would say: there is seeing now, understand it. This may strange to you, and you wonder: does she answer our questions? It may sound unusual. But here is the truth: there is seeing for everybody now and we should understand what appears right now, that is the way to develop understanding. Only understanding will eventually liberate us from dukkha. Not thinking where we would like to be, but knowing our task now. D: I think we agree in general , assuming that by 'seeing' awareness about the 6 senses media is meant, having the flow of dhammas within the process of Dependent Origination in mind and by ' understanding' , the understanding of its nature , i.e anicca . dukkha, anatta . It is of the former two , that the latter, anatta , has to be realized . And by 'task' , to achieve disentchantment , dispassion and so detachment from that what is subject to change and to suffering , in order to reach the uncreated /unconditioned, the deathless.. but then ..it does involve thinking where we would like to be, doesn't it? with Metta Dieter #120609 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:26 am Subject: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Dear Jon, Sarahm all, >J:In terms of the teachings on dhammas, 'tree' is a concept >(since >there's no dhamma that is 'tree'). >===================================== A: Is there a dhamma called "anatta"? Is there a dhamma called "rise of citta", "persistence of citta", "fall of citta"? Is there dhamma called "samsara"? >J:This word 'dhamma' is important. 'Dhammas' refers to those >phenomena that have a unique characteristic that can be directly >experienced (by panna). >=============================================== A: Those people without panna cannot directly experience dhammas? What do they directly experience, concepts? >J:is unique to that dhamma and is the same for all time and for all >beings by whom any dhamma of that kind is experienced. >==================================================== A: So the "kind of dhamma" has a tri-temporal, eternal existence? It exists in past, present and future" ? With best wishes, Alex #120610 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:33 am Subject: direct study of the present moment. truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S:I think there are two kinds of study: there is book knowledge >study as you describe and there is the study of realities which the >Buddha taught. >S: Again, it depends on the kind of study we're talking about >================================================== By "meditation" I mean the direct study of the present moment. >S:If it's just a deeper and deeper "conceptual hole" without the >development of any direct understanding of realities, it isn't the >path of satipatthana. On the otherhand, there has to be the hearing >and considering about present realities in order for satipatthana to >develop. >================================================= What *exactly* do you mean by "considering about present realities in order for satipatthana to develop." What is the principal difference between that and meditation? Thank you for your posts. With best wishes, Alex #120611 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >A: Development of direct understanding is an intentional activity >through the mind. > .... >S: What do you mean by this? >============================== That cetasikas such as (cetana, chanda, adhimokkho, viriya, etc) are present and that wisdom doesn't just "fall on one's lap". >S:Let's talk about lobha (attachment). Lobha arises with particular >cittas and then falls away as those cittas fall away. In the >subsequent mind-door process, the characteristic of lobha (the >reality) can be the object of cittas accompanied by panna which >directly know the reality of lobha... >=========================================== How does one know that what has just arisen and ceased is lobha and not something else that feels similar? It is one thing to read the menu and another thing to actually taste the food. If one has never tasted a certain exotic food or anything similar to it, then no amount of textbook description about it would 100% explain it. One has to actually taste it. One's idea of the taste based on study of ingredients and the actual taste, can be very different. With best wishes, Alex #120612 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:09 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa moellerdieter Hi Sarah and Rob E , In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" 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 ? .... S: Is that a slow foxtrot? As you'll see, I'm going v.slowly... D: how about blues then ..? though it might be a bit too sexy :-) >R: 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. ... S: No need to "chagrin some" - no need 'study more systematically" - let it be fun and interesting. D: no need ..we just try .. Robert, my idea was first of all to find a possible platform of common interest where teaching of dhammas and the conventional one can easier meet than the usual 'debates between camps '..., something like an oasis within the valley of dried bones , blues included ;-) S: I haven't read all the posts on uddhacca (restlessness) yet. It seems obvious when we're jumping all over the place that there is restlessness, a conventional idea about restlessness. What about now when there's a feeling of comfortable warmth and a little attachment to it or just ignorance when we look out of the window? Whenever the cittas are akusala (i.e all those in the javana processes not involved with dana, sila or bhavana), uddhacca is arising, along with ahirika and anottappa. In other words, whenever there isn't kusala calm (most the time), there is uddhacca arising. Hmmm, plenty of food for thought in the Dhamma... Never mind whether we call it Abhidhamma, Dhamma or Sutta - it's all there to be understood at this moment. D: Connie mentioned the spicy soup in regard to the text of Milinda Panha recently , which I think fits nicely with the topic of cetasika: we can't speparated the many spices anymore , but we may recognice a special ingredient by its odour and /or flavour.. The feeling of comfortable warmth provides a nice 'seat' for exploration .. doesn't it? with Metta Dieter #120613 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:29 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Looks like CDL, too moellerdieter Dear Connie, you wrote: (D: all of us ?.. ) c: 'Fraid so. It's said that of the following four 'people' listed in "Human Types", only the last two walk today: (5) Uggha.tita~n~nuu, vipa~ncita~n~nuu [vipacita~n~nuu (sii.) a. ni. 4.133], neyyo, padaparamo. 5. One of quick understanding, one of medium understanding, one of slow understanding, the superficial reader. They are described in chapter 4: snip " D: what I said was: "all of us ? snip ..Although interested and glad to join the Abhidhamma (pitaka) discussion , I am quite certain that there is no need for more details than already provided by the 2 other baskets ,which include as well some of the higher teachings" You quoted- I assume -from Puggala Pannatti , which is more or less that what has been said in Anguttara Nikaya . Thanks for confirming my comment , so why 'fraid ? ;-) with Metta Dieter #120614 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 7:16 am Subject: Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E & Dieter, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >R: 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. > ... > S: No need to "chagrin some" - no need 'study more systematically" - let it be fun and interesting. That sounds good! ... > Hmmm, plenty of food for thought in the Dhamma... Never mind whether we call it Abhidhamma, Dhamma or Sutta - it's all there to be understood at this moment. :) Good to keep directing the attention back to the moment... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #120615 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 7:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Looks like CDL, too moellerdieter Hi Scott (and Connie, all), you wrote Dieter, D: "...Although interested and glad to join the Abhidhamma (pitaka) discussion , I am quite certain that there is no need for more details than already provided by the 2 other baskets ,which include as well some of the higher teachings..." Scott: Your interest is good but all the more mysterious given this outlandish statement. You suggest there is no need for the detailed analysis given in the Abhidhamma. D: I excluded myself from the 'all', you claimed , but wouldn't deny a need for those , prefering an intellectual /philosophical approach . From what I have studied so far (i.e. mainly Sutta Pitaka ) , I know, it is more than enough to get the picture what must be done to translate the instructions into training. So in my case and I assume that of many others too , it is not the point of knowing even more details but the lack of determination , diligence and energy ..to be serious with detachment (= life of the homeless, a Bhikkhu ) and finally being so consequent like Prince Siddharta, who ' made this mighty decision: "Let just the blood and flesh of this body dry up and let the skin & sinews fall from the bones. I will not leave this seat before having attained that absolute supreme Enlightenment!" S: (D: "hm... starting school with calculus?") Scott: As I've noted, this is superstitious thinking and is part of a certain modern perspective that has no basis in the texts. Nor are you paying attention. If you were you'd notice, for example, that the 52 cetasikas represent the basic units of 'experience' - for lack of a better word. These are enumerated and described according to characteristic and function. Calculus has to come *after* learning basic number theory. There is no doubt about this. Abhidhamma is like basic number theory - stripped to the bone, basic, essential. The analogy you use is a poor one and easily done away with. D: Scott , why is Abhidhamma mostly translated as 'Higher Teaching' ?, D: "the Dhamma is a gradual teaching , the mundane or conventional teaching before the higher ..sounds logical , doesn't it?..." Scott: No, Dieter, just wrong. When any dhamma is mentioned in the suttas, framed for the most part in a conventional manner, that dhamma is actually only what is clarified in the Abhidhamma as a paramattha dhamma. The language of the suttas is predominantly 'conventional.' Your mistake is to assume that there exists a 'conventional teaching' that differs from an ultimate one in more than just style of language. D: the gradual teaching is a fact , easily to checked by canonical statements Certainly it is a mistake to conclude that the sutta pitaka refers to conventional teaching only , but in its conventional language the (suffering) person is adressed . Or take the first Noble Truth in respect to examples of suffering and the brief conclusion 'suffering is 5 khanda attachment' S: Consider Buddhaghosa from The Dispeller of Delusion: "647. Herein, the first triad is taken in accordance with the Pariviimansasutta (S ii 80). For therein it is said: 'If he forms a formation of merit, consciousness achieves merit; if he forms a formation of demerit, consciousness achieves demerit; if he forms a formation of the imperturbable, consciousness achieves the imperturbable'. The second triad is taken in accordance with the Vibha"ngasutta next to that. (It is permissible to say that it is taken with the method of the Samaadi.t.thisutta, M i 154, too.) For therein it is said: 'The bodily formation, the verbal formation and the mental formation. "648. But why are these taken in accordance with these suttas? *This Abhidhamma is not newly made; nor is it spoken by sages [outside the dispensation], nor by disciples, nor by deities. But this is spoken by the Omniscient Conqueror. It is in order to illustrate this meaning that a single textual passage is set forth in like manner to the Abhidhamma and in the suttas.*" D: perhaps we may settlean understanding with Nyanatiloka's Guide to the Abhidhamma" By the way, it may here be noted that, just as in the Abhidhamma Piþaka many terms are being found, which one may in vain may look for in the Sutta Piþaka, so again in the Abhidhammatthasaògaha and the commentaries, various other new terms, and even teachings, are introduced. This, however, does not necessarily imply any deviation from the canonical Abhidhamma with regard to its contents, but may show the necessity felt of having terms better fitted for the work of summarizing and systematizing. It would prove of no little interest to have all those technical terms not met with in the earliest books collected and chronologically registered.Regarding the difference between the Suttas and the Abhidhamma, the 'Higher Doctrine,' it does not really so much concern the subject, but rather its arrangement and treatment.The subject in both is practically the same. Its main difference in treatment, briefly stated, may be said to consist in the fact that in the Suttas the doctrines are more or less explained in the words of the philosophically incorrect 'conventional' everyday language (vohára-vacana) understood by anyone, while the Abhidhamma, on the other hand, makes use of purely philosophical terms true in the absolute sense (paramattha-vacana). Thus the Suttas often speak of individuals and persons, of 'I,' 'you,' and 'self,' even of the rebirth of a self, etc., as if such socalled individualities really existed. The Abhidhamma, however, treats of realities (paramattha-dhamma), i.e. of psychical and physical phenomena, which alone may be rightly called realities, though only of momentary duration, arising and passing away every moment. For in reality, or in the 'absolute sense' (paramattha), as the expression runs, there does not exist any real, self-dependent, permanent 'entity,' no such thing as the so-called 'ego,' but only this ever-changing process of conditionally arising and passing phenomena. Hence, the whole Abhidhamma has to do only with the description, analysis, and elucidation of such phenomena. While these phenomena are in the Suttas treated under the aspects of the five groups (khandha), i.e. corporeality, feeling, perception, mental formations, and consciousness (rúpa, vedaná, saññá, sankhára, viññáóa), the Abhidhamma treats them generally under three aspects: consciousness, mental concomitants, and corporeality (citta, cetasika, rúpa). Also most of the terms of the Abhidhamma Matrix itself can be traced direct to the Suttas, or are derived from Sutta terms and teachings; an illustration of the close inner connection between the teachings of the two Piþakas. The Matrix provides a screen for sorting the fundamental raw material of the Abhidhamma for further analytical and relational treatment. The classifications, each by its particular angle, process the brute facts of experience, so bewildering in their enormous complexity, and lend to them an orderly arrangement thus rendering them pliable and workable for more detailed analysis of other sorts. The final purpose here is a practical one: to help in the realization of liberation through insight. The Abhidhamma serves that purpose (1) by breaking up the seeming unity or compactness of things and persons (ghana-vinibbhoga) by analysis; and (2) by breaking into the intimidating 'hardness of objective facts,' showing their dependent origination and their complex inter-relatedness. Thus these 'hard facts' of the inner and outer world are demonstrated to be accessible to the transforming power of a mind developed by virtue, meditation, and insight. unquote as the Venerable states : power of mind developed by virtue, meditation, and insight , i.e. the 3 fold Noble Path training : sila-samadhi-panna. Scott: As you study the cetasikas - the sine qua non of the Abhidhamma method - you are studying that which clarifies the suttas and teaches the way in which the suttas are meant to be understood. It is not the other way round. D: "The view of reality as presented in the Abhidhamma stems from a single philosophical principle, which gave direction and shape to the entire project of the Abhidhamma .systematization. This principle is the notion that all phenomena of empirical existence are made up of a number of elementary constituents, the ultimate realities behind the manifest phenomena. These elementary constituents, the building blocks of experience, are called dhammas. The dhamma-theory is not merely one principle among others in the body of Abhidhamma philosophy but the base upon which the entire system rests. It would thus be quite fitting to call this theory the cornerstone of the Abhidhamma. But the dhamma-theory was intended from the start to be more than a mere hypothetical scheme. It arose from the need to make sense out of experiences in meditation and was designed as a guide for meditative contemplation and insight. For the Abhidhamma, to see the world correctly is to see - not persons and substances - but bare phenomena (suddha-dhamma) arising and perishing in accordance with their conditions. The task the Abhidhamma specialists set themselves was to specify exactly what these "bare phenomena" are and to show how they relate to other "bare phenomena" to make up our "common sense" picture of the world. http://www.lankalibrary.com/Bud/time.htm (D: ok , unhumble... nevertheless with no relation to Buddhaghosa , who speaks of the Abhidhamma. I never stated to have anymore than a beginners understanding of Abhidhamma unlike that of the Sutta Pitaka. A so called intellectual oriented mind requires more details ...it is ok if you do , but don't include me in your standards...") Scott: You are coming to the Abhidhamma for reasons only you know. Be forewarned that your preconceptions will be shattered if you are lucky. D: I haven't been shattered that way since many years ..indeed it would be a nice surprice , however "this is (could be) superstitious thinking "as you mentioned before. S: Buddhaghosa again (The Dispeller of Delusion): "...the Vinaya and the Suttanta are both figurative (pariyaaya) teaching; but the Abhidhamma is literal (nippariyaaya) teaching..." Scott: Children are incapable of learning figuratively; children need literality until their cognitive capacity matures. Like it or not, no matter what you think you know without knowing the Abhidhamma clarification - a teaching for the most thick-minded as we *all* are - this is the same for all of us. It is very good that you find yourself interested in Abhidhamma. You seem to be in spite of yourself. Just don't pretend you've already got it figured out. D: Scott , let's talk further within the framework of 'cetasikas in daily life ' project.. we run into endless debate otherwise .. with Metta Dieter #120616 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:21 am Subject: Still about cetasikas scottduncan2 Dieter, Regarding: D: "...let's talk further within the framework of 'cetasikas in daily life 'project..." Scott: This discussion *is* within that framework. It's a meta-conversation. D: "...I excluded myself from the 'all', you claimed , but wouldn't deny a need for those, prefering an intellectual /philosophical approach..." Scott: And here you perpetuate the unfortunate modern anti-Abhidhamma view, much like your quip about 'a valley of dry bones' elsewhere. You are proceeding to study cetasikas intellectually but knowing dhammas - real study - isn't in the books. It's not stopping you from the study here, is it? You seem to have a need to set yourself apart. D: "...From what I have studied so far (i.e. mainly Sutta Pitaka ), I know, it is more than enough to get the picture what must be done to translate the instructions into training. So in my case and I assume that of many others too , it is not the point of knowing even more details but the lack of determination , diligence and energy ..to be serious with detachment (= life of the homeless, a Bhikkhu ) and finally being so consequent like Prince Siddharta, who ' made this mighty decision: 'Let just the blood and flesh of this body dry up and let the skin & sinews fall from the bones. I will not leave this seat before having attained that absolute supreme Enlightenment!'..." Scott: What you haven't gleaned from an unstructured [by Abhidhamma] study of the suttas is the meaning of anatta. Abhidhamma in the books is all about anatta; abhidhamma in real life is the same. I will not get into a debate with you about 'practice' but I now see more clearly where you are coming from. I have no interested in pursuing yet another discussion with a 'practitioner.' You will see, studying cetasikas, that one of them - a mental factor arising and falling away with citta - is known as 'effort.' The Abhidhamma view of this mental factor ought to challenge some of what you imagine 'effort' to be. D: Scott, why is Abhidhamma mostly translated as 'Higher Teaching'?..." Scott: This is in reference to paramattha dhammaa: citta, cetasika, ruupa, and Nibbaana. The notion of 'higher' as in 'advanced' is a misconstruing of the meaning - just a modern buddhist myth. Maybe because everyone is so interested in progressing from something lower to something higher, I don't know. It sure isn't 'higher' like so advanced that you have to have prerequisites - it is so totally basic that it's ultimate. D: "...perhaps we may settle an understanding with Nyanatiloka's Guide to the Abhidhamma..." Quote: '...The Abhidhamma, however, treats of realities (paramattha-dhamma), i.e. of psychical and physical phenomena, which alone may be rightly called realities, though only of momentary duration, arising and passing away every moment...'" Scott: There it is again. Nyanatiloka agrees: Paramattha dhammaa. D: "...I haven't been shattered that way since many years ..indeed it would be a nice surprice , however 'this is (could be) superstitious thinking' as you mentioned before..." Scott: Yeah, says me. Scott. #120617 From: "charlest" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 2:54 am Subject: Sincere Warm Thanks dhammasaro Good friends all, Very sincere thanks to you all... I am sure your chant/meditation/prayer and international calls asking about my very clinging "love of my life" beloved Chumnmien ensured her well being... In fact, her attending 5th floor nurse carried Chumnien's belongings to our car. A first!!! In closing, please remember all medicos, both in Thailand and USA. They do not have an easy career... nor, an easy life... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #120619 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:19 am Subject: Infinite is Friendliness! bhikkhu5 Friends: How to develop infinite Friendliness: Begin by extending Friendliness towards yourself: May I be free from ill-will. May I be free from hostility. May I be free from adversity. May I be happy. May I be free from suffering. May I not be separated from the good fortune I have attained. I am the owner of my kamma and must inherit its results. May the guardian deities in this house be free from anger. May they be free from hostility. May they be free from adversity. May they be happy. May they be free from suffering. May they not be separated from the good fortune they have attained. They are owners of their kamma and will inherit its results. Next, extend Friendliness to your parents, teachers, relatives, and friends: May my mother and father, teacher, relatives, and associates be free from anger. May they be free from hostility. May they be free from adversity. May they be happy. May they be free from suffering. May they not be separated from the good fortune they have attained. They are owners of their kamma and will inherit its results. Then extend Friendliness to all kinds of living beings: May all sentient things, all breathing things, all beings, all persons, all individuals, all women, all men, all Noble Ones, all ordinary persons, all deities, all human beings, all those destined for the states of loss, may all these individualities be free from anger. May they be free from hostility. May they be free from adversity. May they be happy. May they be free from suffering. May they not be separated from the good fortune they have attained. All beings are the owners of their kamma and must inherit its results. Finally, extend Friendliness in all directions: In the east, the south, the west, the north, the south-east, the south-west, the north-west, the north-east, below, and above. May all sentient things, all breathing things, all beings, all persons, all individuals, all women, all men, all Noble Ones, all ordinary persons, all deities, all human beings, all those destined for the states of loss, be free from anger. May they be free from hostility. May they be free from adversity. May they be happy. May they be free from suffering. May they not be separated from the good fortune they have attained. All beings are the owners of their kamma and will inherit its results. More on this shining, radiating through all everywhere beaming Friendliness: http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/The_Buddha_on_Noble_Frienship.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Harmlessness_and_Tolerance.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/All_Embracing_Kindness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/All-Embracing_Kindness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Rejoicing_Bliss_is_Mudita.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Blazing_Friendliness.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Blazing_ &_Bright.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Goodwill_Encore.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/II/Good_Friendship.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Metta.htm Forwarded by a good friend. Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Sam�hita _/\_ * #120620 From: "philip" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 12:32 pm Subject: A reminder for Sarah and Nina [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life philofillet Hi Sarah and Nina > > Yes, we're thinking alike - my post #120592 crossed with yours! > > Never mind 'dhamma' or 'Abhidhamma'. > ------ > N: Good, I liked that. Never enough reminders. I would like to give you a reminder from your good Dhamma friend, Ajahn Sujin. (I add the word 'transcript' now to be able to find it in a search later. It's from Nalanda 2004, pt.1) In this discussion, there had been some talk about dealing with street children in India. Is there really patience, or imitation patience, self trying etc? And as elsewhere in the talks from this trip there was discussion on how it is too difficult to sort out kusala from akusala when there hasn't been vipassana nana that knows nama from rupa. Without that understanding, it is all about self wanting to sort things out: "Q: Just getting back to akusala and kusala, I think although it's difficult to always know the difference...is it true to say that akusala appears more than kusala? A.S: Appears to what? Just the name, or the characterstic, or the reality of not self? For example, if we do not talk about dhamma (Dhamma?) what about the citta after seeing and hearing? We just learn from (a) book that it's asava, not the anusaya, but it's asava. (note - I don't understand that part, I hope I got "asava" right.) SO should we mind, trying to know? But there is no understanding of realities like visible object, and seeing, while there is visible object and seeing, not like asava. Why not develop understanding of these instead of thinking about akusala, like asuya (asava?). So it's not just the matter of trying to judge the moment, whether it's kusala or akusala, it's the self who's doing so, but it's knowing that it's the lack of understanding of the characteristic of reality as a reality. So develop (the understanding of) *any* reality, because it arises and falls away so fast, before one tries to think whether it's kusala or akusala. This is the way to develop the understanding of the characteristic of reality as not-self, by knowing it's nama, the reality that experiences, or rupa, which cannot experience." (end quote) Sorry for the mess about asava/asuya which I don't understand. but doesn't really matter.I could have found other sections, more clear on this point, such as the great one in which a woman wonders about her tears at the holy place, kusala or akusala, but A. Sujin makes it clear that that is just thinking, with self, trying to sort things out. It is only developing understanding of realities that *are* appearing, such as seeing and visible object, that is what is going to develop panna to the point of the first vipassana nana, thinking about sorting out namas, such as cetasikas, it is beyond our understanding. So now DSG has this "Cetasikas in Daily Life project" founded by someone who has finally (not surprisingly) announced that he doesn't think studying Abdhidhamma is of value, everything he needs to know he learned in the suttanta! And here you are above bending over backwards to try to accomodate this sort of view, suttanta, Abidhamma, whatever, just dhammas. But of course that is just tatemae, trying to speak nicely for the "concensus" that Dieter says he is hoping for. Concensus Dhamma discussion. No, that is terrible, what a shame if DSG become a "concensus Dhamma group." Yuck. I don't think it will. This Cetasika thing will fall apart in the usual meditation debate mess as soon as cetasikas like adhimokha and virya come up, and we will be off to the empty trees and huts and burning turbans and bodies not getting up from the tree until their skin falls off and their blood dries up and their bones fall apart or however that good one goes. All that self-rooted, greed-rooted nonsense that, if you were discussing with like-minded fellows, you would simply dismiss as wrong view, but here, for the sake of concensus and nice group feeling you will tolerate and accomodate. ANyways, enough ranting. On a more specific point, as this cetasika thing goes on, please remember the above transcript. In order to try to persuade the Kalama sutta lovers that Abhidhamma is in the suttanta and is useful and helpful, are you going to encourage people to try to sort out cetasikas in daily life? That will be promoting the use of self, the promotion of wrong view. I hope you will avoid that. (I continue to study cetasikas, but we have to do so with humility, not thinking we can figure them out by thinking about them and discussing them, first things first, developing understanding of nama and rupa.) I continued reading after leaving the group, but recent developments make even that much impossible. Please don't hope for DSG to become a pleasant concensus-based discussion group, there are others like that. Please stay with the deep truth about the anattaness of dhammas, the non controllability and non-selectability of dhammas, even if it lets the Kalama lovers down...thanks! Phil p.s no further comment, as usual, just hoping you will keep the above transcript - there are so many discussions like it - in mind when discussing "cetasikas in daily life." #120621 From: "connie" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:11 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Looks like CDL, too nichiconn dear Dieter, I'm afraid I will continue to quote from any of the Baskets as well as translated Commentary I'm lucky enough to find. Please feel free to ignore any of my posts if that bothers you. connie #120622 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 1:27 pm Subject: Re: Still about cetasikas scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "...Scott, why is Abhidhamma mostly translated as 'Higher Teaching'?..." Scott: Here's a real expert, Buddhaghosa, answering the question, not some modern-day sort: "...Herein what is meant by 'Abhidhamma'? That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas). The prefix 'Abhi,' like 'Ati,' is used in the sense of preponderance and distinction, as in such passages as, 'Sever pains overwhelm (abhikhamantii) me, brother; and do not abate'; and 'of eminent (abhikhantaa) beauty.'...Even so this 'dhamma' is called Abhidhamma, because it excels and is distinguished by several qualities from the other Dhamma [...the Suttanta]...But in this Abhidhamma there is a detailed classification of knowledge...*Thus it is to be understood that the Abhidhamma exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma," (The Expositor, pp.4-5). Scott: Pretty clear, right Dieter? Scott. #120623 From: "charlest" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 4:26 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism dhammasaro Good friends all, As my Korean Zen Buddhist good friend taught me, in this ole Texican bag of bones: Before Enlightenment, shoveling snow... After Enlightenment, shoveling show... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #120624 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 5:22 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Sincere Warm Thanks dhammasaro Good friends all, a further story.... Buddhist??? Please understand, I fully respect all medico persons... Some many, many years ago my ex-wife had a a severe tooth ache... her psychiatrist said to call his friend, a dentist. The dentist was playing tennis. He was waiting at his office when we arrived!!! That is one of many positive experiences with medicos... FWIW, my beloved is a retired RN... Please remember all medicos in your way... A pragmatic Buddhist thought... Any discussion? peace.... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #120625 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:49 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Rob E (118758) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > [J:] Insight (panna), like any other wholesome quality, develops by its occurrence coupled with recognition of the benefit or advantage of its occurrence. The idea that it will occur more frequently, or in a stronger form, if certain practices are carried out is not a message contained in the teachings. > > [RE:] Obviously, I disagree, based on a direct reading of the relevant suttas. > =============== J: If you have a passage directly on point, I'd be interested to see it (no offence meant, but as I know from personal experience, one's recollection of things previously read often gets coloured by things read or thought about since). > =============== > [RE:] No direct sayings of the Buddha state that practice does not develop conditions to develop panna, and in fact many many instances of his encouraging such practice. Saying that one who practiced satipatthana for 7 years, 7 months, 7 weeks or even 7 days, points out that he is giving a time frame for practice and encouraging it to be done, rather than, as you say, depending only on "gradual development" with no practice. > =============== J: I think you have in mind the Satipatthana Sutta, which ends with the following passage: ********************** "O bhikkhus, should any person maintain the Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner for seven years, ... for six years... for five years... one year ... seven months ... a week, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge (arahantship) here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning (the Third Stage of Supramundane Fulfillment). "Because of this was it said: 'This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." ********************** This passage is known as the 'assurance of attainment'. You say this passage gives a time frame for practice and encourages practice to be done (i.e., in a deliberate manner). I don't think it does. Note that it speaks of the person who is able to "maintain mindfulness ... in this manner", that is to say, in the manner described in the preceding part of the sutta. So as far as the development of the path is concerned, the text here is simply referring back to what has been set out earlier. In any event, to my reading, the reference to the person who is able to *maintain mindfulness* for an extended period implies a person who has already developed mindfulness to the stage where it has become a power, where it can be said that there's a preponderance of mindfulness. So I would not see the assurance of attainment as suggesting any time frame for a practice to be done, or as encouraging a kind of deliberate practice. > =============== > [RE:] I realize that there are some commentaries and subcommentaries that support a no-practice view, but I don't give them the same degree of trust that I give to the suttas. > =============== J: The commentaries and sub commentaries are all in line with the teaching in the suttas, provided the suttas are read carefully and without making assumptions. I agree that the interpretation they give is not always be the one we might expect, but that should not surprise us and is not itself a ground to doubt their authenticity as reflecting the views of the enlightened elders. There is a certain uniformity and consistency throughout the commentarial texts that would hardly be there if they were other than what they have been taken to be over the centuries (or millenia), at least until relatively recent times. > =============== > [RE:] The teachings are obviously a great cause for understanding and development, but it is not established that such intellectual understanding can create the path by itself. There is nowhere that Buddha says that right understanding by itself creates the path without practice, and just as he says that Dhamma is a great cause of understanding, he also says in many suttas that concrete practice is a great cause of development of the path as well. > =============== J: Regarding your comment that the Buddha says that concrete practice is a great cause of development of the path. I think that's something that people read into the suttas (as you perhaps have done with the 'assurance of attainment' at the end of the Satipatthana Sutta). I would agree that such a reading is easy to give, but I think that fact reflects the general level of held views about what practice involves. If the suttas are approached from the perspective of the commentarial literature, a different message or emphasis emerges. Jon #120626 From: "jonoabb" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 7:15 pm Subject: Right Concentration of the NEP as the 4 jhanas jonoabb Hi Rob E (118758) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: Not sure if you have a particular text in mind here but, obviously, the 4th jhana must be preceded by the 3rd, and so on. Is this what you mean by an 'order of practice'? If so, what is being described is actually an order of *occurrence*. > > [RE:] I have quoted the relevant suttas at length in our previous posts. I am sure you know the suttas that describe the progression from one jhana to the next. Buddha doesn't describe then as a mere occurrence but actively praises and promotes them as Right Concentration, a major ingredient of the Noble 8FP. > =============== J: You are referring here to the description of Right Concentration in terms of the 4 jhanas. This needs to be understood in its context, which I see as being the following: - The 4th Noble Truth is the Truth of the Path leading to the cessation of dukkha (i.e., Nibbana). - That Path has 8 factors (Pali: anga), or constituent parts. - One of those factors is Right Concentration, which is described in terms of the 4 jhanas. Before considering the meaning of the description of any individual path factor, we need to know what the factors of the NEP are all about (i.e., collectively). According to the ancient texts, the 8 path factors are mental factors (Pali: cetasikas) that arise together with consciousness (citta) at the moment of path attainment. As regards the path factor of Right Concentration, the texts explain that at moments of path attainment the accompanying concentration is of the same intensity as the concentration that accompanies jhana consciousness, regardless of whether mundane jhana has been attained in the same lifetime. So what is being said is that when there is Right Concentration there is jhana (or jhana-equivalent) concentration also. However, the obverse, i.e., that when there is jhana there is Right Concentration, is not being said, and does not hold. Also, note that the term 'factors' is closer in meaning to 'parts' (hence the standard translation of eight factors as "Eightfold") than it is to 'steps' or 'practices'. This is consistent with the commentarial explanation of the 8 path factors as co-arising cetasikas. > =============== > > J: What is described is the succession from one jhana to the next. The connotation of 'working through' is your own gloss, I think. What particular words in the passage convey to you that particular connotation? > > [RE:] It looks like you have snipped out the part of the post where I quoted the sutta. I don't have it handy, and it was a while ago, so it is hard for me to reference it directly right now. > =============== J: OK, here's one of the passages you quoted: > "And what is right concentration? There is the case where a monk...enters & remains in the first jhana...enters & remains in the second jhana...enters & remains in the third jhana...enters & remains in the fourth jhana: purity of equanimity & mindfulness... This is called right concentration." > â€" SN 45.8 > =============== But the Buddha praises each phase and talks about the benefits therefrom, and describes the 4th jhana as the fulfillment of equanimity and satipatthana. That's a clue, I think, that there is more going on in the jhanas the way Buddha teaches them, than mere jhana-citta, but that they are being used to develop insight, as described in the suttas as well. > =============== J: We agreed in an earlier post that both jhana and insight are being referred to the passage. For the disciple who has developed both mundane jhana and insight to a high degree, there can be insight with that jhana as basis and, in such cases, the factor of Right Concentration is of the same intensity as the mundane jhana that has been attained. > =============== > [RE:] Each path factor obviously plays an important distinct role. I'm not claiming to be an expert, just going by what I read and from whatever practice I am familiar with. But I think you can deduce the role of each factor by what Buddha says about them and the area that each one impacts. > =============== J: But first we have to understand what it means to be a 'path factor', i.e., what is the factor/thread that is common to each of the eight. I don't see any common thread in the various interpretations you give to the different path factors just below. > =============== > [RE:] Obviously, certain factors like Right Livelihood would have to do with livelihood, as it says. That is not a meditation factor, but one that has to do with action in the world. Right Concentration and Right Mindfulness are described in the suttas as the fruit of meditative practice, however you interpret this. To me they are clearly developed through the practices described in the corresponding suttas, the anapanasati and satipatthana being the chief among them. > =============== J: As we know, the suttas don't speak in terms of 'meditative practice', or 'action in the world', as part of the development of the path. You however read the suttas as alluding to those kind of activities. To you it is an obvious and natural interpretation. But there is a danger in ignoring an interpretation given by the ancient texts, in preference for something quite different but that seems obvious and natural to us. That danger is that our judgement is likely to be coloured by wrong view, and there's no way of discerning this except by reference to a more authoritative source than our own limited understanding. > =============== > [RE:] Any way, I know my opinions are not based on being any kind of expert, ... > =============== J: None of us here can claim to be any kind of expert. The only 'experts' on the teachings are those who have attained enlightenment in the past. We do know that there was an abundance of such experts at the time of the Buddha and in the centuries that followed his parinibbaana. The compilers of the commentaries were the recorders of the teachings as explained and elaborated by those experts. > =============== > [RE:] ... but many aspects of these things are clearly spoken about in sutta and also are described and discussed in other places as well. > =============== If so, please share :-)). Jon #120627 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 7:51 pm Subject: Re: A reminder for Sarah and Nina [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life sarahprocter... Hi Phil, I'm sure you won't be able to resist taking a peek at any replies to this! So a few comments: >"Q: Just getting back to akusala and kusala, I think although it's difficult to always know the difference...is it true to say that akusala appears more than kusala? > >A.S: Appears to what? Just the name, or the characterstic, or the reality of not self? For example, if we do not talk about dhamma (Dhamma?) what about the citta after seeing and hearing? We just learn from (a) book that it's asava, not the anusaya, but it's asava. .... S: Note: just the point Nina and I were making - the Dhamma, dhamma or Abhidhamma is not a 'book definition', but the reality such as the seeing or hearing or annoyance right now which can be directly known. ... >(note - I don't understand that part, I hope I got "asava" right.) .... (yes, asava (effluents/fermentations, the common akusala arising now. The anusaya are the dormant kilesa.) ... >KS: SO should we mind, trying to know? But there is no understanding of realities like visible object, and seeing, while there is visible object and seeing, not like asava. Why not develop understanding of these instead of thinking about akusala, like asuya (asava?). So it's not just the matter of trying to judge the moment, whether it's kusala or akusala, it's the self who's doing so, but it's knowing that it's the lack of understanding of the characteristic of reality as a reality. So develop (the understanding of) *any* reality, because it arises and falls away so fast, before one tries to think whether it's kusala or akusala. This is the way to develop the understanding of the characteristic of reality as not-self, by knowing it's nama, the reality that experiences, or rupa, which cannot experience." .... S: No selection at all - yes, understanding what appears, a nama or rupa, anatta. .... > >(end quote) > >Sorry for the mess about asava/asuya which I don't understand. but doesn't really matter.I could have found other sections, more clear on this point, such as the great one in which a woman wonders about her tears at the holy place, kusala or akusala, but A. Sujin makes it clear that that is just thinking, with self, trying to sort things out. It is only developing understanding of realities that *are* appearing, such as seeing and visible object, that is what is going to develop panna to the point of the first vipassana nana, thinking about sorting out namas, such as cetasikas, it is beyond our understanding. .... S: Agreed. Even whilst 'thinking about sorting out namas', there can be awareness and understanding. Like now, whilst writing, whilst thinking about what we say or thinking about how "it's beyond our understanding", there can be awareness too. I think you'll see that in all the messages in the CDL corner, Nina and I have been stressing the present understanding of dhammas as opposed to just repeating theoretical book knowledge. ... >So now DSG has this "Cetasikas in Daily Life project" founded by someone who has finally (not surprisingly) announced that he doesn't think studying Abdhidhamma is of value, everything he needs to know he learned in the suttanta! And here you are above bending over backwards to try to accomodate this sort of view, suttanta, Abidhamma, whatever, just dhammas. But of course that is just tatemae, trying to speak nicely for the "concensus" that Dieter says he is hoping for. .... S: If you ask Dieter, Howard, Rob E or anyone else here, I'm sure they will assure you that we have and have had plenty of disagreements over the years and in recent days. Yes, we "speak nicely", but that doesn't mean we "bend over backwards to accommodate" any view we disagree with. No one here is under any illusion about that. For example, we've been strongly disagreeing with you and others on the topic of speaking politely! If we just wrote 'Yuck" in all our messages when disagreeing on points, there would not be any further discussions and those who have never read outside the Suttanta would not feel encouraged to do so at all. .... >Concensus Dhamma discussion. No, that is terrible, what a shame if DSG become a "concensus Dhamma group." Yuck. I don't think it will. .... S: Sometimes there's consensus, often there's not. I personally don't look for consensus with anyone. I'm more interested in understanding more about the dhammas now in my life and discussing this understanding with others. ... >This Cetasika thing will fall apart in the usual meditation debate mess as soon as cetasikas like adhimokha and virya come up, and we will be off to the empty trees and huts and burning turbans and bodies not getting up from the tree until their skin falls off and their blood dries up and their bones fall apart or however that good one goes. All that self-rooted, greed-rooted nonsense that, if you were discussing with like-minded fellows, you would simply dismiss as wrong view, but here, for the sake of concensus and nice group feeling you will tolerate and accomodate. .... S: :-)) We'll see. If you think you can be of more assistance, then why not try to do so in a way that our friends listen and learn, rather than just being the spolier? We don't have to repeat in every sentence that we consider it to be wrong view to try and select any dhamma, to go to an empty tree (what's that?) to meditate and so on. Everyone knows and has heard that ad nauseum. Look at the messages I wrote to Alex yesterday - we never let up on it, don't worry! Usually, it's more helpful to talk about different realities being experienced now than to just rave on about someone's wrong view, which is a wrong view in itself (taking the view to be 'that person's). It all comes back to the realities now, Phil - not the other people!! Remember, just namas and rupas now - anatta!! No Dieter, no Sarah, no Nina!! ... > >ANyways, enough ranting. On a more specific point, as this cetasika thing goes on, please remember the above transcript. In order to try to persuade the Kalama sutta lovers that Abhidhamma is in the suttanta and is useful and helpful, are you going to encourage people to try to sort out cetasikas in daily life? That will be promoting the use of self, the promotion of wrong view. I hope you will avoid that. (I continue to study cetasikas, but we have to do so with humility, not thinking we can figure them out by thinking about them and discussing them, first things first, developing understanding of nama and rupa.) .... S:You make some good points here - as you say, if cetasikas are not understood as namas, not sth to be understood by self, then it's pretty useless. Why make derogatory comments whilst making good points however? ... > >I continued reading after leaving the group, but recent developments make even that much impossible. Please don't hope for DSG to become a pleasant concensus-based discussion group, there are others like that. Please stay with the deep truth about the anattaness of dhammas, the non controllability and non-selectability of dhammas, even if it lets the Kalama lovers down...thanks! ... S: Again, no one's interested in a "pleasant consensus-based discussion group". Your fears are unfounded in this regard. Nina and I are always the first to say we welcome those with different views, different understandings. (In fact, weren't you the one that was suggesting it should be a "consensus-based" group of "AS students"? Never mind!) Let's drop this talk of "Kalama lovers" - it's unhelpful and unfriendly. >p.s no further comment, as usual, just hoping you will keep the above transcript - there are so many discussions like it - in mind when discussing "cetasikas in daily life." ... S: Thanks, Phil. Much appreciated, along with your kind concerns in between all the raves:-)) Metta Sarah ====== #120628 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] santhana pannatti and santati pannatti sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, Nina & Connie, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Lukas, > > Op 15-nov-2011, om 9:47 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > > > What is a difference between santhana and santati pannatti? I need > > some details. > ------ > N: sa.n.thaana: series or continuity, refers to the arising and > falling away of cittas in succession, in their own series. As > pa~n~natti: we see people. In reality seeing sees what is visible and > thinking defines it as a thing or person. We take different cittas > together. > Santati: a concept of mountain is given as an example. Again a whole, > but in reality there are different elements arising and falling away. > It seems that it is also applicable to cittas. The meanings of these > two terms seem to be close. Anyway, it refers to a distorted view of > reality. .... S: I wasn't quite sure what was behind Lukas's qu..... but to add to the 'mix' as we're looking at meanings. More on santati: 1. Also, the 4 lakkha.na (characteristics) or rupas, i.e the upacaya (production), ***santati (continuity)***, jarataa (decay) and anicca 2. On santati as the continuity of dhammas: "But it is owing to not keeping what in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment of what that these characteristics [S: 3 characteristics of realities] do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating rise and fall owing to its being **concealed by continuity (santati). ***The characteristic of pain does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating continuous oppression and owing to its being concealed by the postures (iriyaapatha). The characteristic of no-self does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the resolution into the various elements (naanaadhaatu-vinibbhoga) owing to its being concealed by compactness(ghana).... ....When resolving of the compact (ghanavinibbhoga) is effected by resolution into the various elements, the characteristic of no-self appears in accordance with its true essential nature." (Sammohavinodani. transl as 'Dispeller of Delusion', Class. of Bases, 243). .... Metta Sarah ====== #120629 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 8:59 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" sarahprocter... Hi Howard, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > 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? > > ------------------------------------------------- >S: The khandhas are just as much paramattha dhammas as are the ayatanas, > dhatus or indriyas. > > Each rupa is khandha. Each vedana and so on. Khandha, as I understand, > refers to the *distinction* between each conditioned dhamma. So the rupa > appearing now through the eye-sense is different from the one that appeared a > moment ago and different from the one that is appearing a moment later. Each > one falls away, never to appear again. So this is why we read about the > eleven-fold classification: > > "Whatever form is past, future, or present; internal or external; > blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: that is called the > aggregate of form." > > S: In other words, each form, each rupa is khandha and the same for the > other dhammas. > ============================== >H: This is just a matter of language use, but I disagree with the > usefulness of yours in this case. ... S: I think as Scott said, more than a matter of "language use". You suggested above to Alex that khandhas were concepts in contrast to ayatanas, dhatus and indriyas which were paramattha dhammas. I'm pointing out that just as visible object is an ayatana or a dhatu (i.e a reality), so it is also a khandha - rupa khandha. .... > A khandha is a heap/collection/mass. To say that each rupa is khandha > is like saying that each of us here is DSG. It's not so: Each of us here is > a member of (or participant in) DSG. It's also like saying that each cell > in the body is body. That is also not so. The "Each rupa is khandha" > terminology treats the noun 'khandha' as if it were an adjective. The problem > with that, IMO, is confusion, lack of clarity, and a danger of reification. .... S: "Whatever kind of form there is (Ya.m ki~nci ruupa.m - 'whatever materiality'), whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near: this is called the form aggregate...." (SN22:48, Also see first section of Vibhanga). In other words "whatever kind of form..." Visible object past, future or present, each one is rupa khandha. Khandha is a reality, just as ayatana or dhatu is a reality. DSG is like a chariot - a concept. I have no idea why suggesting that visible object, a dhatu or visible object, a khandha is "reification". Quite the opposite - it is by understanding dhammas as dhatus or khandhas, each one quite distinct from any other, that ideas of atta are dissipated. .... > If, as you say, khandhas are paramattha dhammas, then what sort of > paramattha dhamma is the rupakkhandha? Is it a rupa? If so, is it a visible > object? A sound? An odor? Etc? ... S: Each one is rupakkhandha. Not "the rupakkhandha". This is why the text spells out "whatever kind of rupa..... i.e the rupa which is seen now, the rupa which was seen a moment ago, the rupa which is heard now....any rupa -- all distinct -- are rupakkhandha. ... >If it is a paramattha dhamma, it must be a > very specific one of these, and not all of them. The only way to be all is to > be a collection. > Again, this only discusses language usage, and not the Dhamma. So, not > critical. .... S: Just as ayatanas, often translated as sense fields refers to different realities. Each one is ayatana. Same with khandhas - forget about 'aggregates'. Each conditioned reality is a khandha. Difficult, I know. (More in U.P. under 'Khandhas8 -realities, each conditioned dhamma as khandha?' and 'Khandhas - 11fold classification'. Metta Sarah ==== #120630 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:08 pm Subject: Re: The camp thing... sarahprocter... Dear Ann & Phil, I thought your comments to Phil were nicely expressed here, Ann and I fully agree with them (snipped a little...): --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "glenjohnann" wrote: > I have been following your threads with Sarah and Nina on various topics quite closely. Many of your comments have struck me as being most useful and have prompted more consideration of the topic involved. I have really appreciated them. A dana of dhamma - that is what contributions to the discussions can be. And it is so valuable to have the opportunity here to both contribute and appreciate any contributions that come our way. <...> ... . Avoidance, just like trying to select situations, is rooted in misunderstanding too. It is the defilements that are the problem, for everyone, not the situations. Again, <....> the situations are only concepts and thinking. Not always comforting to hear, but it is true. > > Different moments will bring different thoughts about your participation and perceptions of the DSG group. It would be a loss to the group should you not continue. .... S: Like Ann, I think you (Phil) have been contributing a lot to the discussions, rocking the boat along the way!!. I've especially appreciated the transcriptions with extra comments, Matt's old posts and your kind comments to Chuck, Lukas and other friends ...oh and all those excellent abhi qus. Ann, I appreciate your kind and gentle encouragement to everyone. Metta Sarah p.s Do hope you and Glen are well these days. ===== #120631 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dribble Was: Looks like Buddhism sarahprocter... Hi Sukin & Chuck, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Sukinderpal wrote: > I was saying to a friend David, last week, that I saw no difference in > terms of experiences through the five senses and the mind, before and > during the floods. Indeed this was quite encouraging as I noted that the > attachments and aversions arose with more or less the same frequency, > only that the concepts were different. My wife and children are away in > India and I told David that at this time instead of worrying about them, > I now worry about the water getting into my house and thieves breaking > into it. And this just showed that these unwholesome tendencies got > their way as they always do. .... S: Always something to worry about as Terry Jones (from Monty Python) pointed out beautifully: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-prhaikK9I&noredirect=1 Yes, the "unwholesome tendencies got their way as they always do". As soon as we wake up, there are opportunities for them to arise! The asavas, the effluents oozing out all day. ... > > Had my house got fully flooded or is robbed (which can still happen), > I'm sure I'd be experiencing more aversion than I do now. But I know > also that attachment and conceit will find their way to create concepts > on which to feed. And if no level of understanding arises then, this > does not change the fact that in reality there is just the experience > through one of the five senses and the mind at a time. .... S: Nicely put! Lots of papanca - lots of proliferation on account of the attachment, conceit and views, hiding the realities being experienced through the senses now, no matter 'the story'. Pop in more often! Metta Sarah ====== #120632 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:29 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism sarahprocter... Hi Ken H, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > As for the assertion that the Dhamma was conventionally true as well as ultimately true, I must admit I have a very loose definition of `conventionally true.' .... S: I would rather say that there are conventional truths (sammuti sacca) and ultimate truths (paramattha sacca). Rupas, cittas, cetasikas and paramattha dhammas are paramattha sacca. When we (or the Buddha) uses expressions such as 'tree', 'car' `I', `you', `person' or `individual', these are things which do not exist in reality. We are using conventional language for communication. They are sammuti sacca. > To take a silly, fictitious example, let's say the Buddha made some comments in passing about rainbows, and let's pretend he said rainbows were ladders used by devas for travelling to clouds where they lived. And – for good measure – they had pots of gold at the ends of them. > > If there was a sutta that said that, how should we understand it? > > Here are some possible ways that occur to me: (1) We could say rainbows really are ladders with pots of gold. (2) We could say the Buddha knew rainbows were actually refracted light, but he preferred to describe them in a way that was generally accepted in ancient times. Or (3) we could say rainbows, light refraction, ladders and pots of gold are all just concepts and all equally unreal. > > I like the third possibility. If a concept fits, wear it. If it doesn't fit, find another concept that does. ... S: Yes agreed. ... > It's only the dhammas that matter. .... S: Yes, true. ... > PS: Thanks for asking about my mother. No improvement, I'm afraid. I will be down there again next week – and for the foreseeable future - talking it in turns with my sister. .... S: I think I've responded to this already now!! Kusala cittas whilst taking care of your mother or shovelling snow are also real and to be encouraged!! Metta Sarah ===== #120633 From: Lukas Date: Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:07 pm Subject: A Dhamma books gift appreaciation szmicio Dear Nina and Chew, Thank you for your dana. It is of a great assistance to me. Chew I got your books few days ago, very fast delivery from Myanmar. I was thinking about Survey of Paramattha Dhamma you send, this is one of the first editions? The point is language that is sometimes not 'smooth'. But that's fine to me. To all, could you pls give a links to any topics here on DSG from past month/s that you found helpful or interesting? I miss a lot last time, and also I am lack of time to read all topics. I just usually check only post addressed to me(if wanna me to read it address my name). Best wishes Lukas #120635 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:55 am Subject: Re: direct study of the present moment. sarahprocter... Dear Alex & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S:I think there are two kinds of study: there is book knowledge >study as you describe and there is the study of realities which the >Buddha taught. > >S: Again, it depends on the kind of study we're talking about > >================================================== > > By "meditation" I mean the direct study of the present moment. .... S: And what is "the present moment"? .... > >S:If it's just a deeper and deeper "conceptual hole" without the >development of any direct understanding of realities, it isn't the >path of satipatthana. On the otherhand, there has to be the hearing >and considering about present realities in order for satipatthana to >develop. > >================================================= > > > What *exactly* do you mean by "considering about present realities in order for satipatthana to develop." .... S: We have to hear/read, like now, about what present realities are and carefully consider this. Otherwise there cannot be the direct understanding of those realities. For examples, we've had many discussions about how it is visible object which is seen, not a 'tree', a 'car' or a 'person'. It is hardness and other tangible objects only which are experienced through the body sense. Gradually, panna begins to understand that such experiences through the senses are the worlds at this moment in between the many processes of thinking about them. Like now, there is a hearing of a sound as I write and immediately there are stories about traffic on the roads outside. Actually, it's just sound that's heard. If we hadn't heard about cars and traffic and so on, there'd be no proliferation, no imagining about them at all. So now we hear about hearing, sound and various dhammas that are all anatta. When there is firm theoretical understanding, direct understanding gradually develops of these dhammas and then there is no doubt about the path. .... > > What is the principal difference between that and meditation? .... S: There are two kinds of meditation (bhavana) - samatha bhavana and vipassana bhavana. Only vipassana bhavana is the development of satipatthana, the development of the understanding of realities. Pariyatti, the right considering about present dhammas leads to this. We have to be specific - we can't just talk about 'meditation of the present moment' because there may not be any understanding of realities as anatta. ... > Thank you for your posts. ... S: Likewise. Pls ask for any further clarifications anytime. The tendency for doubt, vicikicca, is only eradicated at the stage of sotapanna. By beginning to understand realities now, there will be the wearing away of doubt, very gradually, until it has completely gone. There will be no more confusion about cars and trees. Without hearing the Buddha's Teachings, no one could know that what is heard now is just sound, what is seen now is just visible object - realities which are taken for 'things' and 'people' all the time. By hearing about these dhammas, it's a reminder for the understanding and awareness of what is heard now, what is seen now, what is touched now, the thinking about these dhammas, the doubt and other realities. The Teachings can only ever be proved when there is such understanding at this moment. Metta Sarah ===== #120636 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:58 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/22/2011 4:59:33 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: S: I think as Scott said, more than a matter of "language use". You suggested above to Alex that khandhas were concepts in contrast to ayatanas, dhatus and indriyas which were paramattha dhammas. I'm pointing out that just as visible object is an ayatana or a dhatu (i.e a reality), so it is also a khandha - rupa khandha. ============================== I believe this is entirely a matter of language use, and we differ on that usage. Any visible object is rupa, making it a *member* of the rupakkhandha, that latter being the collection/heap/aggregate of all rupas. It is rupa, not rupakkhandha. The rupakkhandha is not an individual paramattha dhamma. IMO, it is very important to distinguish individuals from collections of individuals. The smearing together of the two is not helpful to clarity of thought or discussion, it seems to me. But I think I do understand the basis for your usage of 'rupakkhandha'. I think you use it as a category name rather than a collection name. From that perspective, one might say, as you do, that every visible object is rupakkhandha. But one could instead say, and much more clearly, IMO, that every visible object is rupa (or a kind of rupa), using 'rupa' as the category word. With metta, Howard P. S. On another recent issue, I totally agree with you on not considering "concensus" to be a great value. There are a number of folks whom I know, folks from what some consider to be "the camp of evil doers" (LOL! My terminology), who are extremely uncomfortable unless agreement/concensus is reached. For me, that is an instance of anal-retentive clinging. There is no need for concensus. What IS very useful, essential even, however, is clear understanding of the perspectives of others. Without that understanding, no decent conversation can ensue, and there is no real chance of learning from others. Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120637 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:18 am Subject: Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" scottduncan2 Howard, H: "...P. S. On another recent issue, I totally agree with you on not considering 'concensus' to be a great value...There is no need for concensus. What IS very useful, essential even, however, is clear understanding of the perspectives of others. Without that understanding, no decent conversation can ensue, and there is no real chance of learning from others." Scott: No need for consensus eh? Good. From the man who doesn't like to 'argue.' Wink, wink, lol. When it comes to this notion of 'clear understanding of the perspectives of others' I laugh because in the main part of your recent post you assert that your difference with Sarah is a matter of language usage only. This after being shown otherwise. With that amount of slipperiness there is no way of pinning your view down. You argue that this *is* a paramttha dhamma, while that *is not* a paramttha dhamma while clearly not even agreeing with the notion of paramattha dhammas in the first place. How is there to be a 'clear understanding' of this sort of slipperiness? Scott. #120638 From: "connie" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:54 am Subject: Re: [dsg] nichiconn dear Chuck, if we didn't ask them at the time, what's the point in our trying to figure it out now when they're not even here to explain their sides of the story? I will repeat what I thought was the important part of my "thesis": > My irritation is what's important. Of course, it was just dosa (not "mine"); but isn't my regularly paying more attention to 'the story' and 'them' than 'minding my own cittas' a sad practice! connie #120639 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:16 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Looks like CDL, too moellerdieter Dear Connie, I felt not bothered at all , actually I enjoy our communication and hope you did and do likewise as well in future.. By all means continue to quote ... Dhamma sources are our treasure of truth... And please take it with a sense of humor , in case you may have provided an argument for an issue you intented to refute .. with Metta Dieter ----- Original Message ----- From: connie To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 3:11 AM Subject: [dsg] Re: Looks like CDL, too dear Dieter, I'm afraid I will continue to quote from any of the Baskets as well as translated Commentary I'm lucky enough to find. Please feel free to ignore any of my posts if that bothers you. connie #120640 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:19 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -Ahirika -Anottappa nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 21-nov-2011, om 18:21 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > D: I think we agree in general , assuming that by 'seeing' > awareness about the 6 senses media is meant, having the flow of > dhammas within the process > of Dependent Origination in mind and by ' understanding' , the > understanding of its nature , i.e anicca . dukkha, anatta . > It is of the former two , that the latter, anatta , has to be > realized . And by 'task' , to achieve disentchantment , dispassion > and so detachment from that what is subject to change and to > suffering , in order to reach the uncreated /unconditioned, the > deathless.. > > but then ..it does involve thinking where we would like to be, > doesn't it? ------- N: Thinking of the goal, reaching nibbaana, is thinking of something we cannot imagine. When conditioned dhammas have not been thoroughly understood, we have no idea what the unconditioned dhamma is. More understanding of this moment can bring already a fruit in this life. It is a gain to understand visible object that appears now as a dhamma, an impersonal element, not a person, not a thing. We can come to see life differently from the way we used to see it. Life is one moment of experiencing one object through one of the six doors. Often quoted here are the verses of the VIsuddhimagga: Life, pleasure, pain, all in one moment that flicks by... We attach so much importance to pleasure and pain, but they are insignificant dhammas that are there for an extremely short moment and then gone. At each moment of understanding there can be a little detachment from taking it for self, for something. -------- Nina. #120641 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:05 am Subject: Re: Still about cetasikas moellerdieter HI Scott, you wrote : D: "...Scott, why is Abhidhamma mostly translated as 'Higher Teaching'?..." Scott: Here's a real expert, Buddhaghosa, answering the question, not some modern-day sort: "...Herein what is meant by 'Abhidhamma'? That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas). The prefix 'Abhi,' like 'Ati,' is used in the sense of preponderance and distinction, as in such passages as, 'Sever pains overwhelm (abhikhamantii) me, brother; and do not abate'; and 'of eminent (abhikhantaa) beauty.'...Even so this 'dhamma' is called Abhidhamma, because it excels and is distinguished by several qualities from the other Dhamma [...the Suttanta]...But in this Abhidhamma there is a detailed classification of knowledge...*Thus it is to be understood that the Abhidhamma exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma," (The Expositor, pp.4-5). Scott: Pretty clear, right Dieter? D: pretty clear, Scott ;-) you may have recognized that I inverted commas for higher , indicating that it is not the only accepted translation. I fully agree with Buddhagosa's definition : "That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas)..."it excels and is distinguished by several qualities from the other Dhamma [...the Suttanta]... , in fact I mentioned already something like that . But consider whether your statement "Scott: As you study the cetasikas - the sine qua non of the Abhidhamma method - you are studying that which clarifies the suttas and teaches the way in which the suttas are meant to be understood. It is not the other way round." fits , when it is said by Venerable Budhagosa 'that what exceeds.." So , when Venerable Nyanatiloka , who is a highly respected Dhamma authority within the Theravada community , writes in his introduction to 'Guide through Abhidhamma ' writes: " I wish to point out that the study of the Abhidhamma requires a previous thorough acquaintance with the fundamental teachings and ethical aims of Buddhism" he says exactly the opposite what you claim. It IS the other way round. Pretty clear , right Scott ? ;-) D: "...let's talk further within the framework of 'cetasikas in daily life 'project..." Scott: This discussion *is* within that framework. It's a meta-conversation. D: I have not much interest in meta -conversation when the obvious is disputed. S: (D: .I excluded myself from the 'all', you claimed , but wouldn't deny a need for those, prefering an intellectual /philosophical approach...") Scott: And here you perpetuate the unfortunate modern anti-Abhidhamma view, much like your quip about 'a valley of dry bones' elsewhere. D: well, isn't 'an oasis within a valley of bones' not not a cheerful reminder , that the sheer factual information 'bone dry') of the Abhidhamma waits to be moistered by practice? A forum needs a bit of fun too. S:You are proceeding to study cetasikas intellectually but knowing dhammas - real study - isn't in the books. It's not stopping you from the study here, is it? You seem to have a need to set yourself apart. D: ??? I am interested to know how Abhidhamma describes the 52 cetasikas and how to connect the categories with experience in daily life. And as such I proposed the 'Cetasika in Daily Life' project , which is both : study the guideline , contemplate and experience by practise : "...From what I have studied so far (i.e. mainly Sutta Pitaka ), I know, it is more than enough to get the picture what must be done to translate the instructions into training. So in my case and I assume that of many others too , it is not the point of knowing even more details but the lack of determination , diligence and energy ..to be serious with detachment (= life of the homeless, a Bhikkhu ) and finally being so consequent like Prince Siddharta, who ' made this mighty decision: 'Let just the blood and flesh of this body dry up and let the skin & sinews fall from the bones. I will not leave this seat before having attained that absolute supreme Enlightenment!'..." Scott: What you haven't gleaned from an unstructured [by Abhidhamma] study of the suttas is the meaning of anatta. Abhidhamma in the books is all about anatta; abhidhamma in real life is the same. I will not get into a debate with you about 'practice' but I now see more clearly where you are coming from. I have no interested in pursuing yet another discussion with a 'practitioner.' D: I take this unfriendly statement with equanimity or should I say, with indifference , Scott ;-) with Metta Dieter #120642 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:53 am Subject: rupakhandha without rupa truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S: And what is "the present moment"? >=========================== Momentary instance of namarupa. Thank you very much for the rest of the post. with best wishes, Alex #120643 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 4:56 am Subject: rupakhandha without rupa truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, If absolutely all rupa everywhere disappears, would rupakhandha still exist? In what way? With best wishes, Alex #120644 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:22 am Subject: Re: Still about cetasikas scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "...So , when Venerable Nyanatiloka , who is a highly respected Dhamma authority within the Theravada community , writes in his introduction to 'Guide through Abhidhamma ' writes: 'I wish to point out that the study of the Abhidhamma requires a previous thorough acquaintance with the fundamental teachings and ethical aims of Buddhism'..." Scott: Yeah, Buddhaghosa trumps Nyanatiloka everytime. I guess, if you agree with Nynanatiloka, I disagree with both of you. Since we don't have 'consensus' maybe you can say what it is that the quote means to you anyway. Scott. #120645 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" moellerdieter Hi Howard, just between.. you wrote: But I think I do understand the basis for your usage of 'rupakkhandha'. I think you use it as a category name rather than a collection name. From that perspective, one might say, as you do, that every visible object is rupakkhandha. But one could instead say, and much more clearly, IMO, that every visible object is rupa (or a kind of rupa), using 'rupa' as the category word. P. S. On another recent issue, I totally agree with you on not considering "concensus" to be a great value. There are a number of folks whom I know, folks from what some consider to be "the camp of evil doers" (LOL! My terminology), who are extremely uncomfortable unless agreement/concensus is reached. For me, that is an instance of anal-retentive clinging. There is no need for concensus. What IS very useful, essential even, however, is clear understanding of the perspectives of others. Without that understanding, no decent conversation can ensue, and there is no real chance of learning from others. D: well, you need a consensus about the use and the meaning of terms in order to understand eachother's perspective ,not to talk about accepting the Buddha Dhamma to be the teacher and judge in disputes within a framework of a Therava Buddhist list. Do you mean , there is no need for a consensus in respect to eachother's perspective? with Metta Dieter #120646 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 6:23 am Subject: Fw: Still about cetasikas moellerdieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Dieter Moeller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 7:53 PM Subject: Re: Still about cetasikas Hi Scott, you wrote: (D: "...So , when Venerable Nyanatiloka , who is a highly respected Dhamma authority within the Theravada community , writes in his introduction to 'Guide through Abhidhamma ' writes: 'I wish to point out that the study of the Abhidhamma requires a previous thorough acquaintance with the fundamental teachings and ethical aims of Buddhism'...") Scott: Yeah, Buddhaghosa trumps Nyanatiloka everytime. I guess, if you agree with Nynanatiloka, I disagree with both of you. Since we don't have 'consensus' maybe you can say what it is that the quote means to you anyway. D: Nyanatiloka showed always great respect to Buddhagosa . B.T.W. , he translated the Visuddhi Magga into German . Your interpretation of Buddhagosa's statement "That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas)." means the other way round , i.e. in opposition to Nyanatiloka, is not sustainable . There may be a consensus among the members that we disagree with eachother ... As it was mentioned recently , there is no need for a consensus in different perspectives.. , however for a benefitial exchange and further discussion it is . with Metta Dieter , #120647 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 6:36 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > [J:] Insight (panna), like any other wholesome quality, develops by its occurrence coupled with recognition of the benefit or advantage of its occurrence. The idea that it will occur more frequently, or in a stronger form, if certain practices are carried out is not a message contained in the teachings. > > > > [RE:] Obviously, I disagree, based on a direct reading of the relevant suttas. > > =============== > > J: If you have a passage directly on point, I'd be interested to see it (no offence meant, but as I know from personal experience, one's recollection of things previously read often gets coloured by things read or thought about since). No offense taken. If you are not offended by all the undereducated challenges I've thrown your way, I'm not offended by anything you say to me, to be sure! :-) I mean, there are some obvious conventional statements that point in this direction, such as "practice this for 7 yrs., months or days and you will become enlightened." You can argue that this is only for one capable of "really practicing" for the 7 weeks or days, but still, it is a specific result, a fruit of the path, based on doing a specific practice. It is clearly not just awaiting for kusala moments to arise, but is a practice said to take place in a defined time frame, so we are talking "conventional time" here, not the space of a single citta. Here is the quote from the satipatthana sutta: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html E. Conclusion "Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return. "Let alone seven years. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for six years... five... four... three... two years... one year... seven months... six months... five... four... three... two months... one month... half a month, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return. "Let alone half a month. If anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven days, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance — non-return." So this is saying not only will certain factors develop if practiced consistently according to the sutta, but that the culmination of enlightenment, or else non-return if there is still a bit of clinging left, will ensue from such a practice. > > =============== > > [RE:] No direct sayings of the Buddha state that practice does not develop conditions to develop panna, and in fact many many instances of his encouraging such practice. Saying that one who practiced satipatthana for 7 years, 7 months, 7 weeks or even 7 days, points out that he is giving a time frame for practice and encouraging it to be done, rather than, as you say, depending only on "gradual development" with no practice. > > =============== > > J: I think you have in mind the Satipatthana Sutta, which ends with the following passage: > > ********************** > "O bhikkhus, should any person maintain the Four Arousings of Mindfulness in this manner for seven years, ... for six years... for five years... one year ... seven months ... a week, then by him one of two fruitions is proper to be expected: Knowledge (arahantship) here and now; or, if some form of clinging is yet present, the state of non-returning (the Third Stage of Supramundane Fulfillment). > > "Because of this was it said: 'This is the only way, O bhikkhus, for the purification of beings, for the overcoming of sorrow and lamentation, for the destruction of suffering and grief, for reaching the right path, for the attainment of Nibbana, namely, the Four Arousings of Mindfulness." > ********************** > > This passage is known as the 'assurance of attainment'. Yes, I quoted it above as well just now, but will leave it there in context. That is one passage I had in mind... > You say this passage gives a time frame for practice and encourages practice to be done (i.e., in a deliberate manner). I don't think it does. Note that it speaks of the person who is able to "maintain mindfulness ... in this manner", that is to say, in the manner described in the preceding part of the sutta. So as far as the development of the path is concerned, the text here is simply referring back to what has been set out earlier. > > In any event, to my reading, the reference to the person who is able to *maintain mindfulness* for an extended period implies a person who has already developed mindfulness to the stage where it has become a power, where it can be said that there's a preponderance of mindfulness. > > So I would not see the assurance of attainment as suggesting any time frame for a practice to be done, or as encouraging a kind of deliberate practice. Why the mention of all the years and such, and giving a definite time frame and then saying an even shorter time frame would do as well. What's that all about? The assurance of enlightenment has to take place in some time frame, otherwise it is not a contractual assurance. :-) I really don't have any legal background at all, but I recall that a contract without a time frame is moot, since one can put off the guarantee forever without violating the contract. > > =============== > > [RE:] I realize that there are some commentaries and subcommentaries that support a no-practice view, but I don't give them the same degree of trust that I give to the suttas. > > =============== > > J: The commentaries and sub commentaries are all in line with the teaching in the suttas, provided the suttas are read carefully and without making assumptions. I'd enjoy a few examples of this from your reading of the suttas. I hear you saying there is no time frame in the above assurance, but yet you have not accounted for the time frame that is given, or why it is given, if there is in fact no time frame. That doesn't seem to add up to me. Buddha does give a time frame; it's right there. But then you say there is no time frame. Can you explain? > I agree that the interpretation they give is not always be the one we might expect, but that should not surprise us and is not itself a ground to doubt their authenticity as reflecting the views of the enlightened elders. Not in itself, but there should be some way, even if roundabout, of making a sensible case for the interpretation, given the necessary information, so that it does not seem like a separate agenda, but somehow an explanation of what the Buddha said and why he said it. Would you agree with that? > There is a certain uniformity and consistency throughout the commentarial texts that would hardly be there if they were other than what they have been taken to be over the centuries (or millenia), at least until relatively recent times. Well, it does seem somewhat consistent from the excerpts I've seen, but it seems more consistent to itself than to the suttas. It seems like the scholars who wrote the commentaries did indeed dig into a lot of details in their explanations, but it seems a much more analytic and academic stance towards understanding than the way Buddha expressed the teachings. That leads me to think that there may be another perspective on the teachings in the commentaries and that they may have had a sympathetic but different orientation from the Buddha when he was out in the field dealing with people day in and day out and training them. The scholars who wrote the commentaries seem to be removed from that situation and are rather analyzing texts rather than teaching. They seem to be more like philosophers, whereas the Buddha seems more like a real teacher trying to reach people and communicate the way to let go, wake up and grasp the teachings in the moment, as well as the way to practice. This does not mean that the two don't have a powerfully close relationship but they don't seem to be the same thing. Did the Buddha consider such analysis "Abi-dhamma," higher teaching, or was that decision made by the analytic scholars of the councils after his death? It seems to me he was more interested in the human aspect of the teachings and that the scholars of the commentaries are more interested in consistent and detailed understanding of how the components fit together. And perhaps they would supply their own understanding and analysis to fill in many blanks where the Buddha hadn't specific in that kind of detail. And yet, those fill-ins might not really reflect the original intent at all times. > > =============== > > [RE:] The teachings are obviously a great cause for understanding and development, but it is not established that such intellectual understanding can create the path by itself. There is nowhere that Buddha says that right understanding by itself creates the path without practice, and just as he says that Dhamma is a great cause of understanding, he also says in many suttas that concrete practice is a great cause of development of the path as well. > > =============== > > J: Regarding your comment that the Buddha says that concrete practice is a great cause of development of the path. > > I think that's something that people read into the suttas (as you perhaps have done with the 'assurance of attainment' at the end of the Satipatthana Sutta). I would agree that such a reading is easy to give, but I think that fact reflects the general level of held views about what practice involves. If the suttas are approached from the perspective of the commentarial literature, a different message or emphasis emerges. The question then is whether the commentarial literature, written after the Buddha's death by scholars, is the main touchstone for understanding the teachings. Obviously that is a choice that one makes either by reason and study or by instinct, but it is not assured to be either the correct or incorrect choice in and of itself. It seems to me that the most fair test of whether one has the right approach to understanding the "Dhamma as a whole" as you have sometimes put it, is not whether the intepretation one has is true to the commentarial view, which has a different tone and tenor than the suttas, but whether the interpretation checks out in both directions, making sense of the commentaries and yet not violating the spirit of the original suttas. I think to do this one would have to keep a certain sense of the suttas as given intact and keep grounded there while reflecting on the commentaries, rather than give the interpretation to the commentaries only. I don't think any approach is perfect, but I'd want to be careful not to contradict the Buddha's words without really understanding why they are interpreted the way they are. Since the Buddha seems to embrace both a very specific view of dhammas at times, and a very conventional view of what is kusala at other times, I would be careful not to throw the latter aspect of the teachings away, or reduce them to something that is not what is stated. I guess this is a recurrent argument, but I think it's an important one. It's like saying in science that you have to account for all the data, not just the data that supports your hypothesis. In this case, the field of data has to include the many different types of teachings that the Buddha gives. There is no doubt that he sometimes talks very conventionally about not drinking liquor, having work that does not contradict the Dhamma, and not killing animals. These specifics are about conventional objects, not dhammas; so for me, unless you have a good reason for reducing dice ,liquor and animals to dhammas, we should follow both the conventional teachings and the paramatha ones. That is the best bet. We can say that drinking liquor is not the point - the point is what kind of akusala dhammas lead to drinking liquor and focus on the dhammas; but Buddha did not say that. He said to watch not only the mental phenomena, but also speech and action; so it is my view that whatever the commentaries may offer on the ultimate elements of reality, Buddha wanted us to also pay attention to how we behave in conventional reality as well, and it can be done: watch the akusala dhammas arise that makes you want to drink, and also watch the action and refrain from drinking. I think in "real life" you probably do practice that way. Sarah mentioned that you and she would never kill an insect, so it may be that we are in "practical" if not theoretical agreement on that. When it comes to meditation, that may be another matter, but we may be able to draw an analogy at some point. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #120648 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 6:44 am Subject: Re: Right Concentration of the NEP as the 4 jhanas epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > =============== > > [RE:] Obviously, certain factors like Right Livelihood would have to do with livelihood, as it says. That is not a meditation factor, but one that has to do with action in the world. Right Concentration and Right Mindfulness are described in the suttas as the fruit of meditative practice, however you interpret this. To me they are clearly developed through the practices described in the corresponding suttas, the anapanasati and satipatthana being the chief among them. > > =============== > > J: As we know, the suttas don't speak in terms of 'meditative practice', or 'action in the world', as part of the development of the path. You however read the suttas as alluding to those kind of activities. To you it is an obvious and natural interpretation. > > But there is a danger in ignoring an interpretation given by the ancient texts, in preference for something quite different but that seems obvious and natural to us. That danger is that our judgement is likely to be coloured by wrong view, and there's no way of discerning this except by reference to a more authoritative source than our own limited understanding. I don't see why the Buddha would talk about "livelihood" and "action" as mental factors. To say that "livelihood" does not refer to how you make a living does not make a lot of sense. I don't see how livelihood would live in the mind as a mental factor. Do you have an explanation for how some of these clearly conventional expressions that would ordinarily be interpreted as just what they say - making a living in a way that does not unbalance the mind or cause harm to others, etc. - is really a cetasika, a purely mental factor that has nothing to do with what the word denoted in ancient times and still denotes now? What is "Right Livelihood" as a purely mental factor? What is "Right Action" as a mental factor, rather than referring to kusala actions and akusala actions? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #120649 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 11/22/2011 1:25:32 P.M. Eastern Standard Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, just between.. you wrote: But I think I do understand the basis for your usage of 'rupakkhandha'. I think you use it as a category name rather than a collection name. From that perspective, one might say, as you do, that every visible object is rupakkhandha. But one could instead say, and much more clearly, IMO, that every visible object is rupa (or a kind of rupa), using 'rupa' as the category word. P. S. On another recent issue, I totally agree with you on not considering "concensus" to be a great value. There are a number of folks whom I know, folks from what some consider to be "the camp of evil doers" (LOL! My terminology), who are extremely uncomfortable unless agreement/concensus is reached. For me, that is an instance of anal-retentive clinging. There is no need for concensus. What IS very useful, essential even, however, is clear understanding of the perspectives of others. Without that understanding, no decent conversation can ensue, and there is no real chance of learning from others. D: well, you need a consensus about the use and the meaning of terms in order to understand eachother's perspective ,not to talk about accepting the Buddha Dhamma to be the teacher and judge in disputes within a framework of a Therava Buddhist list. ----------------------------------------- HCW: Well, a consensus as to "right" usage isn't an absolute requisite. All that is definitely needed is to know how other person uses language. But certainly a consensus on terminology sure does make conversation far easier!! ;-) ---------------------------------------- Do you mean , there is no need for a consensus in respect to each other's perspective? ------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, that is what I was referring to. ------------------------------------------ with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120650 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:05 am Subject: Re: Right Concentration of the NEP as the 4 jhanas epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > =============== > > > [RE:] Obviously, certain factors like Right Livelihood would have to do with livelihood, as it says. That is not a meditation factor, but one that has to do with action in the world. Right Concentration and Right Mindfulness are described in the suttas as the fruit of meditative practice, however you interpret this. To me they are clearly developed through the practices described in the corresponding suttas, the anapanasati and satipatthana being the chief among them. > > > =============== > > > > J: As we know, the suttas don't speak in terms of 'meditative practice', or 'action in the world', as part of the development of the path. You however read the suttas as alluding to those kind of activities. To you it is an obvious and natural interpretation. > > > > But there is a danger in ignoring an interpretation given by the ancient texts, in preference for something quite different but that seems obvious and natural to us. That danger is that our judgement is likely to be coloured by wrong view, and there's no way of discerning this except by reference to a more authoritative source than our own limited understanding. > > I don't see why the Buddha would talk about "livelihood" and "action" as mental factors. To say that "livelihood" does not refer to how you make a living does not make a lot of sense. I don't see how livelihood would live in the mind as a mental factor. Do you have an explanation for how some of these clearly conventional expressions that would ordinarily be interpreted as just what they say - making a living in a way that does not unbalance the mind or cause harm to others, etc. - is really a cetasika, a purely mental factor that has nothing to do with what the word denoted in ancient times and still denotes now? > > What is "Right Livelihood" as a purely mental factor? > What is "Right Action" as a mental factor, rather than referring to kusala actions and akusala actions? Just to clarify, I think it is very sensible to look at the analysis of mental factors and commentary to ask 'What mental factors would lead to the kamma-patha...?, [maybe not right term for this,] of physical right livelihood, or 'what mental factors would lead to 'right action?' I think that to see the conventional as the outcome and expression of the mental factors makes a lot of sense, but to say that there is no conventional expression of the path and that there are only mental factors does not make as much sense. Buddha outlined the three levels of kamma-patha, including mental factors, speech and actions, and to say that all three really only include the first category of mental factors does not seem to be an adequate representation of what the Buddha taught. In a similar way, it seems to me that it makes more sense to say that conventional objects 'break down' into paramatha dhammas, rather than saying they exist in two different universes. Abhidhammatha Sangaha talks about the dhammas seen in a distorted way, as if in darkness or silhouette, as I recall, and that the concepts or nimittas we experience are glossed conglomerates of individual dhammas. This makes more sense to me than to say that what we experience does not exist at all and is eventually replaced by paramatha dhammas out of whole cloth. It also makes more sense of the full range of the Buddha's teachings, and still leaves plenty of room for the paramatha view to coexist with the rest. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #120651 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" moellerdieter Hi Howard, you wrote: (D:D: well, you need a consensus about the use and the meaning of terms in order to understand eachother's perspective ,not to talk about accepting the Buddha Dhamma to be the teacher and judge in disputes within a framework of a Therava Buddhist list. 'HCW: Well, a consensus as to "right" usage isn't an absolute requisite. All that is definitely needed is to know how other person uses language. But certainly a consensus on terminology sure does make conversation far easier!! ;-) ---------------------------------------- D: how can we define the categories of cetasika (in daily life) , when not agreeing about its meanings, incl. agreement of a broad use depending on context (e.g. Dhamma) . The lack of clarification is a source of misunderstandings blocking possible consensus of eachother's perspectives , (Though still no guarantee for an easy conversation , but eventually coming closer towards it ..) (D: Do you mean , there is no need for a consensus in respect to each other's perspective? ) ------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, that is what I was referring to. ------------------------------------------ D: consensus! ... still , it would be nice , wouldn't it ;-) with Metta Dieter #120652 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:56 am Subject: RE: [dsg] dhammasaro Good friend Connie, Please forgive this old rascally Texican... I do not understand your response... [bummers] peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: nichicon@... <.....> dear Chuck, if we didn't ask them at the time, what's the point in our trying to figure it out now when they're not even here to explain their sides of the story? I will repeat what I thought was the important part of my "thesis": > My irritation is what's important. Of course, it was just dosa (not "mine"); but isn't my regularly paying more attention to 'the story' and 'them' than 'minding my own cittas' a sad practice! <....> #120653 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:38 am Subject: Cetasikas study corner, uddhacca. nilovg Dear Dieter, Lukas and all, This morning I heard Kh Sujin about uddhacca on a Thai recording. She was explaining about akusala cittas, some rooted in lobha, some in dosa, some in moha. There is uddhacca with each akusala citta, but one type of moha-muulacitta (citta rooted in ignorance) is called associated with uddhacca, uddhacca-sampayutta. The other type of moha- muulacitta is associated with doubt. There are countless akusala cittas arising in our life and when there is no lobha, no dosa, there are still moha-muulacittas, and when there is no doubt, there is moha- muulacitta associated with uddhacca. Moha-muulacittas are accompanied by indifferent feeling and they may seem harmless. We should see the danger of moha that is the foundation of akusala citta. She quoted from the Gradual Sayings (I, 198) , Those of other views. : "...lust is slightly to be blamed, but it is slow to change. Malice is much to be blamed but it is quick to change. Delusion is much to be blamed and it is slow to change..." Delusion, moha, is hard to eradicate. Moha does not see the danger of any defilement, it does not see the danger of lobha, dosa, doubt or restlessness, uddhacca. Uddhacca does not give as result an unhappy rebirth, but, when one commits akusala kamma patha such as stealing, there are also at such moments many akusala cittas that are rooted in moha, associated with uddhacca and these can produce unpleasant vipaaka in the course of life. ------- Nina. #120654 From: "connie" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 9:53 am Subject: Looks like hospital food, too nichiconn dear Dieter, Chuck, D: I felt not bothered at all , actually I enjoy our communication and hope you did and do likewise as well in future.. By all means continue to quote ... Dhamma sources are our treasure of truth... And please take it with a sense of humor , in case you may have provided an argument for an issue you intented to refute .. c: If I misjudged what I took to be your dismissal of Abhidhamma (and Commentary), I'm sorry. If not, you should be! Now that's funny. I think you and I have been saying similar sounding, but essentially very different things, Dieter. Chuck also pointed out (again) today, that he has trouble understanding me. I'll strive for more precision / less ambiguity in the future. But for now, let’s just ‘begin again’. connie #120655 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:29 pm Subject: Re: Looks like hospital food, too scottduncan2 connie, c: "If I misjudged what I took to be your dismissal of Abhidhamma (and Commentary), I'm sorry. If not, you should be! Now that's funny." Scott: Very. And, for the record, you are correct in your assessment as far as I'm concerned. Whatever. People can change, right? c: "I think you and I have been saying similar sounding, but essentially very different things, Dieter. Chuck also pointed out (again) today, that he has trouble understanding me. I'll strive for more precision / less ambiguity in the future. But for now, let’s just ‘begin again’." Scott: No, you are being clear. Not understanding as a debate style is just par for the course. A bit tiresome... Scott. #120656 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:26 pm Subject: Re: Fw: Still about cetasikas scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "...Nyanatiloka showed always great respect to Buddhagosa. B.T.W., he translated the Visuddhi Magga into German..." Scott: This is not an issue of whether or not Nyanatiloka showed respect to Buddhaghosa. Speaking German yourself, you have me at a disadvantage because I can't look at Nyanatiloka's translation to see where his own translatory opinions are made. Thanissaro does this all the time. Such a think is no guarantee of accuracy. Respect might rhyme with correct but I disagree with what Nyanatiloka said about having to learn the basics of the Dhamma before studying Abhidhamma. I think he is incorrect. That was obviously his own opinion and was not part of the quoted text written by Buddhaghosa in his commentary to Dhammasa"nganii at all. I said Abhidhamma *is* the basics of the Dhamma - both in the books and in daily life. Buddhaghosa wrote that the suttas only partially elaborate that which the Abhidhamma does in entirety. Is that clear? D: "Your interpretation of Buddhagosa's statement 'That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas).' means the other way round , i.e. in opposition to Nyanatiloka, is not sustainable..." Scott: This statement, unfortunately, isn't all that clearly worded, Dieter. I don't quite understand it. I agreed with Nyanatiloka when he said that only paramattha dhammas are the subject of the Abhidhamma - the ultimate realities citta, cetasika, ruupa, and Nibbaana. This is correct. I disagreed with his *opinion* about the need to have a prerequisite in order to study Abhidhamma. And, to be clear, that was his opinion. Buddhaghosa trumps the opinion of a modern any day. Read the textual quote again if you must - Buddhaghosa said nothing whatsoever about having to learn something else before learning Abhidhamma. Scott. Scott. #120657 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 5:53 am Subject: Re: Still about cetasikas moellerdieter Hi Scott, you wrote: (D: "...So , when Venerable Nyanatiloka , who is a highly respected Dhamma authority within the Theravada community , writes in his introduction to 'Guide through Abhidhamma ' writes: 'I wish to point out that the study of the Abhidhamma requires a previous thorough acquaintance with the fundamental teachings and ethical aims of Buddhism'...") Scott: Yeah, Buddhaghosa trumps Nyanatiloka everytime. I guess, if you agree with Nynanatiloka, I disagree with both of you. Since we don't have 'consensus' maybe you can say what it is that the quote means to you anyway. D: Nyanatiloka showed always great respect to Buddhagosa . B.T.W. , he translated the Visuddhi Magga into German . Your interpretation of Buddhagosa's statement "That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas)." means the other way round , i.e. in opposition to Nyanatiloka, is not sustainable . There may be a consensus among the members that we disagree with eachother ... As it was mentioned recently , there is no need for a consensus in different perspectives.. , however for a benefitial exchange and further discussion it is . with Metta Dieter , #120658 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:49 am Subject: Serene is Calm! bhikkhu5 Friends: Imperturbable Calm! The Blessed Buddha once said: Knowing that the other person is angry, The one who remains just aware and calm acts in and for his own best interest, and for the others' interest, too! Samyutta Nikâya I, 162 Exalted in mind, just open, and clearly aware, Is the recluse trained in the ways of the sages: One who is such, calmed and ever mindful, He has no sorrows! Udana IV, 7 Calm is his mind. Calm is his speech. Calm is his behaviour. So is the tranquillity of one freed by the insight of right understanding... Dhammapada 96 More on this sweetly silenced Tranquillity (Passaddhi): http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/Forest_Bliss.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/IV/Silenced.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Feeding_Tranquillity.htm http://What-Buddha-Said.net/drops/III/Tranquillity_Passaddhi.htm Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * http://What-Buddha-Said.net Serene is Calm! #120659 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 7:53 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Jon, Sarahm all, > > >J:In terms of the teachings on dhammas, 'tree' is a concept >(since >there's no dhamma that is 'tree'). > >===================================== > > A: Is there a dhamma called "anatta"? Is there a dhamma called "rise of citta", "persistence of citta", "fall of citta"? Is there dhamma called "samsara"? > =============== J: As I understand the Theravada texts, 'anatta' is a characteristic, or quality, of dhammas. It becomes known to panna as the understanding of dhammas (insight) is developed. So to answer your question, there is no dhamma called 'anatta'. But neither is anatta a concept, since it is an aspect of dhammas. The same would presumably apply as regards the 3 sub-moments of citta. There is no dhamma called "samsara". I would understand "samsara" to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO formulation). > =============== > >J:This word 'dhamma' is important. 'Dhammas' refers to those >phenomena that have a unique characteristic that can be directly >experienced (by panna). > >=============================================== > > A: Those people without panna cannot directly experience dhammas? What do they directly experience, concepts? > =============== J: I was using the expression 'directly experience' to refer to the experience of a dhamma by panna of the insight kind (or more correctly, by a citta that is accompanied by panna of that kind). So where panna of the insight kind is absent, dhammas cannot be 'directly experienced'. Of course, for everyone dhammas are object of consciousness: visible object as object of seeing consciousness, sound/audible object as object of hearing consciousness, etc. That is also a kind of experience, but not the kind being referred to. > =============== > >J:is unique to that dhamma and is the same for all time and for all >beings by whom any dhamma of that kind is experienced. > >==================================================== > > A: So the "kind of dhamma" has a tri-temporal, eternal existence? It exists in past, present and future" ? > =============== J: Dhammas are momentary in nature. But (momentary) visible object of today has the same characteristic as (momentary) visible object at the time of the Buddha. (Apologies if I've missed your point here.) Alex, to get back to the topic of your earlier post, I'd be interested to know what significance you attach to: - the teaching on dhammas, and their classification in various ways such as khandhas, elements, ayatanas, etc - the fact that whenever the Buddha spoke of anicca-dukkha-anatta, he did so in the context of dhammas. Jon #120660 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Music and Abhidhamma nilovg Dear Vince, Op 3-nov-2011, om 5:13 heeft Vince het volgende geschreven: > I have found this distinction of Narada Maha Thera in a manual > about "The > Arising of Material Phenomena (Rupasamutthana-Naya)", inside the > definition of > Sadda: > > "Sadda - Articulate sounds are caused by mind; inarticulate sounds > are caused by > utu. Musical notes caused by men are produced by utu, conditioned > by mind." > > He explain the utu is considered rupa in Abhidhamma and also > "sappaccayam", because it > is due to causes (together with kamma, citta and ahara). He says: > > "It is clear that the term utu has been used in the sense of tejo > which constitutes both > heat and cold. Strictly speaking, it is the internal and external > tejo elements which > produce rupa. It should be understood that rupas produced by > climatic conditions are > also included in the utuja class." ------- N: Temperature is one of the factors producing ruupas of the body, and it is the only factor producing external ruupas. ------- > > V: So I understand the musical notes are not just sounds like the > rest. I don't > understand the meaning of "conditioned by mind", although I suspect > it can be > referred to the activity of the will while producing music. ------- N: Again musical notes are a conventional idea, a concept. It is the same as what we call speech. We can speak by way of music, expressing sadness or joy. When someone is speaking, there are sounds and afterwards these are translated into meaning, by cittas arising in mind-door processes. Beauty: a concept. Just like world peace. We can think of it, that is all. ------- > > V: Do we like it because it's music, or it becomes music when we > like it? > Narada Thera says musical notes are different of other rupa sounds. ------- N: We can also say: speech sounds are different. There are many types of sound, but what they have in common: they can be heard. -------- > > V: Each person has different accumulations and everyone differs in > where they can > find beauty. However, the reality of the appreciation in itself > exists for everybody. ----- N: The appreciation, we can say: the liking, or the attachment. Lobha is a reality, not a concept. ------ > V: So I wonder if beauty already exists in a natural way, and the > akusala exists in > the attachment to the pursuing of that. Not to the beauty in itself > which maybe > can be an inherent characteristic (the "creativity of mind" cited > by Buddha). ------ N: We have to consider in what context this is used by the Buddha. But it is important to know the difference between concepts and ultimate realities which have an unalterable characteristic no matter how one names them. Sound is always sound, it can be heard. It does not matter how one names it. ------- Nina. > #120661 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:40 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >A: Development of direct understanding is an intentional activity >through the mind. > > .... > >S: What do you mean by this? > >============================== > >A: That cetasikas such as (cetana, chanda, adhimokkho, viriya, etc) are present and that wisdom doesn't just "fall on one's lap". .... S: The conditions for panna to arise are the previous hearing, wise considering and panna. When panna arises, all these other mental factors are wholesome. Panna, right understanding is the "forerunner" for them to arise. ... > > > >S:Let's talk about lobha (attachment). Lobha arises with particular >cittas and then falls away as those cittas fall away. In the >subsequent mind-door process, the characteristic of lobha (the >reality) can be the object of cittas accompanied by panna which >directly know the reality of lobha... > >=========================================== > >A: How does one know that what has just arisen and ceased is lobha and not something else that feels similar? It is one thing to read the menu and another thing to actually taste the food. ... S: The panna knows when it arises. It is the "taster". There is no other practice or tasting. When there is thinking and doubt, these are also realities now which can be known or "tasted" by panna. When panna arises, at such moments there's no wondering about whether it's this or that or how can it be known, etc. There's no thought of another way, another practice, another kind of tasting of the food. ... > > If one has never tasted a certain exotic food or anything similar to it, then no amount of textbook description about it would 100% explain it. One has to actually taste it. One's idea of the taste based on study of ingredients and the actual taste, can be very different. ... S: While there is the clinging to the idea that we actually have to do anything or that there must be cetana or effort first, there can be no understanding of dhammas now as anatta, no understanding of nama or rupa. I'm not recommending a textbook 'study of ingredients' but a direct understanding of the namas and rupas appearing now without any idea of 'me' doing anything or trying to know anything. Is there thinking and wondering now? Doubt now? Worry? Seeing? Visible object? This is the time for the direct study of such realities when they appear one at a time. Metta Sarah ===== #120662 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:50 pm Subject: Re: rupakhandha without rupa sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S: And what is "the present moment"? > >=========================== > > Momentary instance of namarupa. Thank you very much for the rest of the post. .... S: Thank you too. You wrote before that: "By "meditation" I mean the direct study of the present moment." So now we have "By 'meditation' I mean the direct study of momentary instance of namarupa." Next question: what do you mean by 'namarupa'? Metta Sarah ===== #120663 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:52 pm Subject: Re: rupakhandha without rupa sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > If absolutely all rupa everywhere disappears, would rupakhandha still exist? In what way? .... S: If there were no rupa, there'd be no rupa khandha either, but this is impossible. Metta Sarah ===== #120664 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:25 pm Subject: Philly Visit dhammasaro Good friend Howard, Please visit us soon, okay??? Philly is not that far away, yes??? I ask as I want to stay in Texas and/or Thailand forever.... Of course, you are again invited to visit us in PA . And, perhaps later, both in Texas and Thailand... You pay the airfare... I cover your food and lodging. Up to four of your family will be covered. I am very positive Howard. yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: upasaka@... <...> I think it is simply a case of "food poisoning." They have not decided yet... I will leave for the hospitable in another three hours... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck ===================================== I'm so sorry about this! I pray that all will be well for your partner and you. <...> #120665 From: "Ken H" Date: Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:58 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ------------------------- <. . . > > RK" The killer would have many processes of cittas rooted in extreme dosa, that is how he can load his gun, aim and pull the trigger. ------------------------- KH: It's like a play, isn't it? DSG has discussed this before: every citta in every citta-process is like a scene in a play. The curtains go up, the actors play their roles, and the curtains go down. When they go up for the next scene we recognise the characters but *in this play* there is an entirely new cast of actors. No actor can be blamed for what went on in a previous scene; he wasn't even there. And that's what I meant when I said satipatthana was for shooters and shovelers alike. Each of us, equally, is just an actor playing a role in one scene of a play. ----------------- > RK: Scott may have had cittas rooted in some mild dosa when he saw the. 'present' but later there were kusala cittas or at least not enough cittas with dosa to condition the act of killing. So while no one can detail every citta we know that there were none, in scottas case, as Rob. E. Explained that led to akusala kammapatha, right? ----------------- KH: It is right for the audience following the plot of the play, but does it help them to identify the actors? ------------------------ > RK: So conventional actions and situations are always related - even if we dont see the relation- with the actual realities that are present. ------------------------------ KH: There are moments when I think I am beginning to see what you (and others) are saying on this point. Visible object, for example, is experienced now because Ken H was born with eyes. Is that the sort of thing you mean? Ken H #120666 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:27 am Subject: Re: Fw: Still about cetasikas moellerdieter Hi Scott and Connie, you wrote: (D: "...Nyanatiloka showed always great respect to Buddhagosa. B.T.W., he translated the Visuddhi Magga into German...") Scott: This is not an issue of whether or not Nyanatiloka showed respect to Buddhaghosa. Speaking German yourself, you have me at a disadvantage because I can't look at Nyanatiloka's translation to see where his own translatory opinions are made. Thanissaro does this all the time. Such a think is no guarantee of accuracy. D: when only translations are available , it may be difficult to judge the translator.. B.T.W. Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary , which is offen used by DSG members incl. Nina and Sarah, is up to date not matched as a Dhamma manual . In case you haven't had a look before click http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm , it is very worthwhile S:Respect might rhyme with correct but I disagree with what Nyanatiloka said about having to learn the basics of the Dhamma before studying Abhidhamma. I think he is incorrect. That was obviously his own opinion and was not part of the quoted text written by Buddhaghosa in his commentary to Dhammasa"nganii at all. I said Abhidhamma *is* the basics of the Dhamma - both in the books and in daily life. Buddhaghosa wrote that the suttas only partially elaborate that which the Abhidhamma does in entirety. Is that clear? D: "Your interpretation of Buddhagosa's statement 'That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas).' means the other way round , i.e. in opposition to Nyanatiloka, is not sustainable..." Scott: This statement, unfortunately, isn't all that clearly worded, Dieter. I don't quite understand it. D: good, both of us are not clear .. so there is still hope we may be ;-) You state : 1.Buddhaghosa wrote that the suttas only partially elaborate that which the Abhidhamma does in entirety. and prove that by quoting 2.''That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas).' is this correct? But 2 is a different statement. The first indicate, that the suttas are incomplete , whereas the second speaks of extension different to the suttas . About this extension we are clear (paramatthas, dhammas etc..) S:I agreed with Nyanatiloka when he said that only paramattha dhammas are the subject of the Abhidhamma - the ultimate realities citta, cetasika, ruupa, and Nibbaana. This is correct. I disagreed with his *opinion* about the need to have a prerequisite in order to study Abhidhamma. And, to be clear, that was his opinion. Buddhaghosa trumps the opinion of a modern any day. Read the textual quote again if you must - Buddhaghosa said nothing whatsoever about having to learn something else before learning Abhidhamma. D: you seem to stick to the incompleteness of the Sutta (Vinaya) Pitaka , and I to completeness whithin the framework of the 4 Noble Truths which of course can even subtler explained . This assumed I do not get your point that what can be exceeded (i.e. the suttas) , must not be known first in order to understand the exceeding part... Buddhagosa said nothing like that because he would disputed , that the Buddha preached Abhidhamma only to a very exclusive circle (the devas and then only to Sariputta) , from whom he knew that they had already understood the fundamentals / basics of his teachings. with Metta Dieter. #120667 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:30 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 201 dhammas to be "directly known" truth_aerator Dear Sarah, >S: Next question: what do you mean by 'namarupa'? Rupa is what we perceive through 5 sense organs or a memory of previous perception of it, the perception itself is nama. Nama refers to mental content cognized through the mind. When you've said in #120661: >Is there thinking and wondering now? Doubt now? Worry? Seeing? >Visible >object? This is the time for the direct study of such >realities when >they appear one at a time.... >I'm not recommending a textbook 'study of ingredients' but a direct >understanding of the namas and rupas appearing now without any idea >of 'me' doing anything or trying to know >anything. >======================================== It does fit what I would call "meditation". With best wishes, Alex #120668 From: A T Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:54 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >J: As I understand the Theravada texts, 'anatta' is a >characteristic, or quality, of dhammas. It becomes known to panna >as the understanding of dhammas (insight) is developed. >...there is no dhamma called 'anatta'. >The same would presumably apply as regards the 3 sub-moments of >citta. >There is no dhamma called "samsara". >========================================================== The reason for my questions about "is anatta, samsara, citta rise & fall dhamma" is this: If something can function without be being a singular dhamma, then perhaps trees, and other conceptual objects do have a function as conglomeration of more basic rupas. Maybe trees as name + collection of many rupakalapas do exist. >J:Alex, to get back to the topic of your earlier post, I'd be >interested to know what significance you attach to: >the teaching on dhammas, and their classification in various >ways >such as khandhas, elements, ayatanas, etc >============================================== It seems to be precise analytic exposition against the idea of eternal and Indivisible Atman. However, the division is mental. Only mind can analyze or synthesize phenomena. >J:the fact that whenever the Buddha spoke of anicca-dukkha-anatta, >he did so in the context of dhammas. >========================================================= Not always. Check MN13 for example: ""Again, it is with sensuality for the reason, sensuality for the source... that (men), taking swords & shields and buckling on bows & quivers, charge into battle massed in double array while arrows & spears are flying and swords are flashing; and there they are wounded by arrows & spears, and their heads are cut off by swords, so that they incur death or deadly pain. Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason, sensuality for its source, sensuality for its cause, the reason being simply sensuality." http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.013.than.html Mass of stress = Dukkhakkhandha. And the sutta goes in much more Why can't all the teaching about corpses involve anicca? Precisely because something is made of parts, it can cease when the parts fall apart and disintegrate (dis-integrate). With best wishes, Alex #120669 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:05 am Subject: Re: Fw: Still about cetasikas scottduncan2 Dieter, D: "when only translations are available, it may be difficult to judge the translator..." Scott: The Paa.li is available, but I'm no scholar. I'd say, 'When only translations are available then one better be careful because of translators.' What, are they gods or something? D: "...B.T.W. Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary , which is offen used by DSG members..." Scott: No news here Mister Man. I've used it for years too. Link totally unnecessary - nice touch, though. But guess what? He's wrong sometimes! Yeah, for real. I'll read it but I'm not a hungry fish willing to take any bate. D: "good, both of us are not clear .. so there is still hope we may be ;-)..." Scott: What are you winking at me for? Am I supposed to take it that you don't mean what you say? D: "You state : 1.Buddhaghosa wrote that the suttas only partially elaborate that which the Abhidhamma does in entirety. and prove that by quoting 2.'That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas).' is this correct? But 2 is a different statement. The first indicate, that the suttas are incomplete, whereas the second speaks of extension different to the suttas. About this extension we are clear (paramatthas, dhammas etc..)..." Scott: Look, Dieter, here's the quote again: "...Herein what is meant by 'Abhidhamma'? That which exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma (the Suttas). The prefix 'Abhi,' like 'Ati,' is used in the sense of preponderance and distinction, as in such passages as, 'Severe pains overwhelm (abhikhamantii) me, brother; and do not abate'; and 'of eminent (abhikhantaa)beauty.'...Even so this 'dhamma' is called Abhidhamma, because it excels and is distinguished by several qualities from the other Dhamma [...the Suttanta]...But in this Abhidhamma there is a detailed classification of knowledge...*Thus it is to be understood that the Abhidhamma exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma," (The Expositor, pp.4-5)." Scott: See the conclusion (which, being a conclusion, subsumes the content of that which is being concluded, if you know what I mean): "...Thus it is to be understood that the Abhidhamma exceeds and is distinguished from the Dhamma." Scott: And that's what he is saying. I, of course, can't follow your 'extension different to the suttas' statement. Can you clarify this? It's not quite clear. D: "you seem to stick to the incompleteness of the Sutta (Vinaya) Pitaka, and I to completeness whithin the framework of the 4 Noble Truths which of course can even subtler explained." Scott: Now, Dieter, let's recall that I'm discussing your statement that, while you may be studying Abhidhamma now - and more power to you and all that - you really feel you don't need to because you've gotten it all already from the Suttanta. If I'm misreading you (or it you're amending your previous statement) let me know. So, no, I am not 'stick[ing] to the incompleteness of the Sutta (Vinaya) Pitaka' while you, stalwart upholder of truth, are sticking to some 'completeness' or other which is somehow better than my paltry view. I'm disagreeing with you or anyone who thinks that suttas alone and without Abhidhamma are enough. Without Abhidhamma one cannot make grandiose statements like, 'I understand the Four Noble Truths.' D: "...that the Buddha preached Abhidhamma only to a very exclusive circle (the devas and then only to Sariputta) , from whom he knew that they had already understood the fundamentals/basics of his teachings." Scott: Dieter that the Abhidhamma was taught in a deva realm was because the temporal attributes of that particular realm were conducive to a super-long recitation. We have no information to support your supposition that the Devas in attendance 'already understood the fundamentals.' Scott. #120670 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:25 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > A: Is there a dhamma called "anatta"? Is there a dhamma called "rise of citta", "persistence of citta", "fall of citta"? Is there dhamma called "samsara"? > > =============== > > J: As I understand the Theravada texts, 'anatta' is a characteristic, or quality, of dhammas. It becomes known to panna as the understanding of dhammas (insight) is developed. > > So to answer your question, there is no dhamma called 'anatta'. > > But neither is anatta a concept, since it is an aspect of dhammas. > > The same would presumably apply as regards the 3 sub-moments of citta. > > There is no dhamma called "samsara". I would understand "samsara" to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO formulation). Hi, jumping in. I agree on anatta being a quality of a dhamma, but I have a question about the above: If samsara is a concept, what is the reality that is referred to by samsara? Would samsara sort of apply to the birth and death cittas, or does it have a more extended "paramatha" meaning that can account for the continuity from life to life? If it turns out that samsara really is just a concept, is it a "right concept?" Does it reflect "right understanding?" What are the actual dhammas that reflect the understanding of the 4 noble truths, including the reality of kamma and rebirth, or are we dependent on "right concepts" to account for these larger issues that go beyond a single citta's purview of direct discernment? How does one see "directly" the reality of birth and death and the 4 noble truths as a general proposition, or is that not how they are realized? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #120671 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:50 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Dear Jon, R: "...If it turns out that samsara really is just a concept, is it a 'right concept?'..." Scott: Could you please offer an opinion on this notion of 'right concept' that has come into parlance over the past month or so? The way people use it implies that there is something correct about it. I don't recall that it was ever said to be the case that such a thing exists. Clarification would be nice. Scott. #120672 From: A T Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:23 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Hello Jon, all, >J:So to answer your question, there is no dhamma called 'anatta'. But >neither is anatta a concept, since it is an aspect of dhammas. There is >no dhamma called "samsara". I would understand "samsara" to be a >concept. >==================================================== You've said that anatta is an aspect of dhammas. Can we say that trees, forks, cars, people etc are aspect of dhammas (as functional combination of many dhammas)? Does samsara exist or not? If it exists, then it would mean that concepts also exist If samsara is a concept, and concepts don't have characteristic, then how can samsara ever cease? Concepts cannot cease! Also, is samsara distinct from Nibbana? If it is distinct, then concepts can have characteristics and be distinct from something. If samsara is not distinct from nibbana, then what does it mean? With metta, Alex #120673 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:56 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > R: "...If it turns out that samsara really is just a concept, is it a 'right concept?'..." > > Scott: Could you please offer an opinion on this notion of 'right concept' that has come into parlance over the past month or so? The way people use it implies that there is something correct about it. I don't recall that it was ever said to be the case that such a thing exists. Clarification would be nice. Hopefully Jon will be able to clarify better than me. I got the idea as a way of expressing 'right view' that does not yet discern directly, that some concepts are accurate in the way in which they describe realities and others are wrong views. It is related to the idea that is cited on some occasions that comes from the commentaries that talk about the different types of concepts and how far removed they are from what is actual, eg, concept of something unreal based on something real, or that which is unreal about something unreal, eg, "the King's son" is unreal-unreal, as neither King nor son exist, whereas "characteristic of a dhamma" is real-real as both dhamma and characteristic referred to are real. Maybe that will help. The idea came out of discussions with Sarah and others about right view and how concepts can be correct or incorrect, in context of pariyatti and the concepts that come from scripture, etc. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #120674 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:11 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Sarah, ------ <. . .> >> KH: (3) we could say rainbows, light refraction, ladders and pots of gold are all just concepts and all equally unreal. >> >> I like the third possibility. If a concept fits, wear it. If it doesn't fit, find another concept that does. >> >> It's only the dhammas that matter. > S: <. . .> Only dhammas that matter - kusala cittas are dhammas too, so when there is assisting one's mother or shovelling for one's neighbours *with kusala cittas*, it is to be commended and encouraged. > We all know that cittas change all the time, but this doesn't mean we don't assist and give when there are opportunities, does it? ------ KH: Remember that Scott, Phil and I (as somewhat like-minded Dhamma students) were trying to find some points of contention amongst ourselves. So when you say "this doesn't mean we don't assist and give when there are opportunities" I am a bit reluctant to just agree and leave it at that. I am inclined to add that it doesn't mean we *do* assist and give, either. Apart from that I don't know what to say. It's like the KK "Act of Dana" nightmare all over again. There is a subtle difference of understanding amongst us that I can't put my finger on. Until I can, it's probably best not to try too hard. (I think you might have told me that.) -------------- > S: Talking of giving, I loved the story about the 'worry beads' your friends gave you! So suitable!! As Sukin just said, always something to worry about. Now, if there had been some appreciation of their kind thoughts and gift instead of concern about *Ken* and how no one understood you, there wouldn't have been that disappointment written all over your face, would there? --------------- KH: Oh, how nice, worry beads! Just what I wanted, but not very much! But they have led to this Dhamma discussion, so what more could I want? :-) Ken H #120675 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:38 pm Subject: kamma and this moment sarahprocter... Dear Friends, We often say we don't know what kamma will bring what results at anytime and I've had a long day of reflecting on kamma. on the Uraga Jataka (#103906) which we often refer to and all the other helpful messages that have been written over the years on kamma, upekkha, mourning and so on. As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some shock.... but also some brief moments of equanimity. A friend (my age) who I've known for 30 years and who used to live in Hong Kong has been visiting from London this week with her husband. I was the first person she contacted - she just wanted to have a long hike, swim and lunch with me in this beautiful Hong Kong weather. We met early, walked along 'The Dragon's Back', catching up and enjoying the views. Sharon's a very strong and fit lady, so I always have trouble keeping up with her. At Shek O beach, we left our bags at a restaurant and went for our swim. My friend's a very strong swimmer too and she set off behind me to swim out to a buoy, which was not far away at all. The water was choppy, but not rough. Sharon didn't make it. I waited a little while and when I couldn't see her, I swam back to the beach and there, to my horror, were some other swimmers pulling her out of the water. Sharon was unconscious, frothing at the mouth. Swimmers and lifeguards gave her half an hour of cpr and used a fibrillation machine as well while we waited for the ambulance, but no pulse. It took us another 20 mins or so in the ambulance to reach the nearest hospital. I couldn't reach her husband, so for the first couple of hours or so, I sat there quietly, much of the time having no idea whether she was even alive. Occasionally a doctor would call me in to give me an update and to tell me to prepare for the worst. I also had to answer endless questions from police, medical personnel, lifeguards and others as I sat shivering in my bathing suit but with a blanket I was given. Sharon's now in an induced coma. The next 24 hours are critical. Because of the long time period without oxygen to the brain, the cardiac arrest, even if she survives, there will probably be permanent neurological damage. I was told to make every effort to contact her family members which I did. Eventually her husband arrived, but so far hasn't even been allowed to see her in I.C.U. Thoughts of feeling 'responsible' in some way, reflections on kamma, this moment, thinking, occasional moments of calm, 'just visible object', lots of worry and other kinds of dosa, even momentary concern about the press coverage - so many photographers when we arrived at the hospital. But none of that matters...... life is very, very short - just this moment. Thank goodness we've heard about the Dhamma. Now is the time for the understanding of the present reality we've heard so much about. Thanks for reading and 'listening'. Metta Sarah p.s I may not be replying to messages at this time, but then I may.....we never know. As Phil would say, thanks in advance for any replies. ===== #120676 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! nilovg Dear Sarah, Op 24-nov-2011, om 9:38 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some > shock.... but also some brief moments of equanimity. ------ N: I am touched very much by your story. Without the Dhamma we would be totally lost. A neighbbour of us has a very bad lung cancer and his daughter of about nine years does not know yet. She is such a sweet girl and we feel heartbroken about her. He is about twenty years younger than Lodewijk and we were also shaken by this story. And so many friends around us have passed away recently. What to do? There is seeing now, visible object now, Kh Sujin would say. We may expect another answer, but this is the best answer. As she said: just like now, and this is unforgettable, as it shocked us at first. We asked her about the cremation of a dear friend, just like now. ------- Nina. #120677 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 7:01 pm Subject: Friendship is the Greatest! bhikkhu5 Friends: Without Ego, Friendship can even be Infinite: The Blessed Buddha said of this beautiful Friendship (Kalyânamittatâ): By this following method, Ananda, it may be understood how the entire Holy & Noble Life is sole good friendship, good companionship, and good comradeship: By relying upon me as a good friend, Ananda, beings subject to birth are freed from birth, ageing beings are freed from their ageing, beings subject to disease are cured from illness, beings subject to death escape death, and beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, & desperate despair are freed from this grief, pain, frustration and endless Suffering! Therefore, Ananda it may be emphasized, how this entire Noble Life is all based on good friendship, beautiful amity, and benevolent harmony... Comments: Selfless friendship is the most deep, genuine, sincere and sweet! Why so? It is not limited or tainted by any egoistic self-interest, which otherwise interferes, as soon as an assumed 'self' suspects even minor overstepping of its perceived territorial 'my' domain.. If there is no self present, how can it ever be possessive? ") The Blessed Buddha often emphasized: Sabbe Dhammâ Anattâ... All states are selfless, egoless, ownerless, & void of any core "I"-dentity! <....> Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya 3(18): [I 88] http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html If animals despite differences can display so beautiful inter-species friendship so more should we humans be kind towards all beings! Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #120678 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:10 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > I would understand "samsara" to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO form _______' dear Rob e I dont see samsara as a concept(of course thinking about samsara is a concept though). As the visuddhimagga explains : the endless rebirths as pictured thus: The endless chain of aggregates, Of elements, of bases too, That carries on unbrokenly Is what is called "the round of births," Robert #120679 From: "Christine" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 8:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! christine_fo... Hello Sarah, We experienced the death of my beloved mother last Monday, with some of the family traumatised by the experience of being with her when it occurred. But this was timely and half expected. As you know, sudden unexpected life-threatening occurrences can shake us to the core. It is what we do with the experience that will make it beneficial or traumatic. For myself, I often consider the Pabbatopama Sutta: The Simile of the Mountains, to remind myself not to be complacent about myself or dear ones. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn03/sn03.025.than.html Thinking of you and holding you in my heart with metta. Chris #120680 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:14 pm Subject: Further Discussions in India, no 5. nilovg Dear friends (Lukas included), Further Discussions in India 5 . I am giving a recapitulation of the the three "rounds" or intertwining phasesof the understanding of the four noble TRuths. They are: understanding of the truth, sacca ñåùa, knowledge of the task to be performed, kicca ñåùa, which is the practice, and knowledge of the task that has been done, kata ñåùa. Acharn Sujin referred very often to these three "rounds" or phases and explained that without the first phase, the firm understanding of what the four noble Truths are, there cannot be the second phase, the performing of the task, that is, satipaììhåna, nor the third phase, the fruit of the practice, that is, the penetration of the true nature of realities. With regard to the first phase, she said that there should be the firm intellectual understanding of the first noble Truth, and that means understanding that there is dhamma at this moment, that everything that appears is dhamma. When we listen to the Dhamma and consider what we hear the intellectual understanding of realities, that is, the first phase, sacca ñåùa, gradually develops and then it can condition the arising of satipaììhåna. This means that the second phase, knowledge of the task, kicca ñåùa, begins to develop. The practice, paìipatti, is actually knowledge of the task that is to be performed, kicca ñåùa. -------- Kh Sujin: Pa~n~naa cannot realize the characteristics of realities without sacca ~naa.na. There must be sacca ~naa.na first before there can be kicca ~naa.na, which means the Path factors that are working their way to have more understanding of the reality that is appearing now. Jon: One may ask, what can we do? Kh. S.: That is just theoretical. One knows for oneself to what extent one begins to understand the moment with awareness and the moment without awareness. Before his passing away, the Buddha went from Vesali to Kusinara and taught satipa.t.thaana. Why would he have developed pa~n~naa in order to become a Sammaasambuddha if he could not help anyone to become enlightened? When we talk about visible object we do not forget that it arises and falls away so fast. Whenever there is a little understanding of it, it is gone. At the moment of a glimpse of understanding of it that it is just a reality we will not cling to it. There can be more moments of understanding. ------- Nina. #120681 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment moellerdieter Dear Sarah, what a terrible experience! Certainly the Dhamma can be of great support to overcome the shock and help to restore moments of equanimity . I hope very much that your friend may survive with the least possible damage. And yes, you are right, life is very short and we never know what the next moment has in store for us. with Metta and Garuna Dieter eince ----- Original Message ----- From: sarah abbott To: dsg Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2011 9:38 AM Subject: [dsg] kamma and this moment Dear Friends, We often say we don't know what kamma will bring what results at anytime and I've had a long day of reflecting on kamma. on the Uraga Jataka (#103906) which we often refer to and all the other helpful messages that have been written over the years on kamma, upekkha, mourning and so on. As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some shock.... but also some brief moments of equanimity. A friend (my age) who I've known for 30 years and who used to live in Hong Kong has been visiting from London this week with her husband. I was the first person she contacted - she just wanted to have a long hike, swim and lunch with me in this beautiful Hong Kong weather. We met early, walked along 'The Dragon's Back', catching up and enjoying the views. Sharon's a very strong and fit lady, so I always have trouble keeping up with her. At Shek O beach, we left our bags at a restaurant and went for our swim. My friend's a very strong swimmer too and she set off behind me to swim out to a buoy, which was not far away at all. The water was choppy, but not rough. Sharon didn't make it. I waited a little while and when I couldn't see her, I swam back to the beach and there, to my horror, were some other swimmers pulling her out of the water. Sharon was unconscious, frothing at the mouth. Swimmers and lifeguards gave her half an hour of cpr and used a fibrillation machine as well while we waited for the ambulance, but no pulse. It took us another 20 mins or so in the ambulance to reach the nearest hospital. I couldn't reach her husband, so for the first couple of hours or so, I sat there quietly, much of the time having no idea whether she was even alive. Occasionally a doctor would call me in to give me an update and to tell me to prepare for the worst. I also had to answer endless questions from police, medical personnel, lifeguards and others as I sat shivering in my bathing suit but with a blanket I was given. Sharon's now in an induced coma. The next 24 hours are critical. Because of the long time period without oxygen to the brain, the cardiac arrest, even if she survives, there will probably be permanent neurological damage. I was told to make every effort to contact her family members which I did. Eventually her husband arrived, but so far hasn't even been allowed to see her in I.C.U. Thoughts of feeling 'responsible' in some way, reflections on kamma, this moment, thinking, occasional moments of calm, 'just visible object', lots of worry and other kinds of dosa, even momentary concern about the press coverage - so many photographers when we arrived at the hospital. But none of that matters...... life is very, very short - just this moment. Thank goodness we've heard about the Dhamma. Now is the time for the understanding of the present reality we've heard so much about. Thanks for reading and 'listening'. Metta Sarah p.s I may not be replying to messages at this time, but then I may.....we never know. As Phil would say, thanks in advance for any replies. ===== #120682 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:05 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism rjkjp1 In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > . The curtains go up, the actors play their roles, and the curtains go down. When they go up for the next scene we recognise the characters but *in this play* there is an entirely new cast of actors. No actor can be blamed for what went on in a previous scene; he wasn't even there. > Dear Ken There is no one to blame or be blamed but the cittas and cetasikas include cetana, and they include vipaka. The vipaka that arises later, after akusala cittaas is of a different characteristic to that that arises after kusala citta. The visuddhimagga: ""Ignorance is an outstanding cause of kamma that leads to unhappy destinies. Why? Because, just as when a cow to be slaughtered is in the grip of the torment of burning with fire and belabouring with cudgels, and being crazed with torment, she drinks the hot water although it gives no satisfaction and does her harm, so the ordinary man who is in the grip of ignorance performs kamma of the various kinds beginning with killing living things that leads to unhappy destinies, although it gives no satisfaction because of the burning of defilements and does him harm because it casts him into an unhappy destiny." And 43. And that arising in one who undergoes flogging, imprisonment, etc., at the hands of others is the suffering rooted in others' violence. So this birth is the basis for all this suffering. Hence this is said: Now, were no being born in hell again The pain unbearable of scorching fires And all the rest would then no footing gain; Therefore the Sage pronounced that birth is pain. Many the sorts of pain that beasts endure When they are flogged with whips and sticks and goads, A hellish tomb of excrement—would never come about Without rebirth: that birth is pain there is no room for doubt."" No need to get confused by conventional usage after all: ""The two together: since any given states are produced without interrupting the [cause-fruit] continuity of any given combination of conditions, the whole expression "dependent origination" (paþicca-samuppáda) represents the middle way, which rejects the doctrines, "He who acts is he who reaps" and "One acts while another reaps" (S II 20), and which is the proper way described thus, "Not insisting on local language and NOT overriding normal usage" (M III 234)."" and "" the word "origination" (samuppáda) indicates the arising of the states, since these occur when their conditions combine, and it shows how to prevent annihilationism, etc., thus preventing the various doctrines of annihilation [of a soul], nihilism, ["there is no use in giving," etc.,] and moral-inefficacy-ofaction, ["there is no other world," etc.]; for when states [are seen to] arise again and again, each conditioned by its predecessor, how can the doctrines of annihilationism, nihilism, and moral-inefficacy-of-action be maintained"" > > ------------------------ > > RK: So conventional actions and situations are always related - even if we dont see the relation- with the actual realities that are present. > ------------------------------ > > KH: There are moments when I think I am beginning to see what you (and others) are saying on this point. > > Visible object, for example, is experienced now because Ken H was born with eyes. Is that the sort of thing you mean? Maybe : ""127. Firstly, in one who has been reborn by means of either profitable-result or unprofitable result: according as his faculties mature, so the five profitableresultant eye-, etc., consciousnesses occur accomplishing the respective functions of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching ((d)–(h)), contingent respectively upon a desirable or desirable-neutral visible datum, etc., as object that has come into the focus of the eye, etc., and having the sensitivity of the eye, etc., as [material] support. And likewise the five unprofitable-resultant consciousnesses; the only difference being this, that the visible data, etc., as object for these are undesirable or undesirable-neutral. And these ten are invariable as to their door, object, physical basis, and position [in the cognitive series], and invariable as to their functions. 128. After that, next to the profitable-resultant eye-, etc., consciousness, the profitable-resultant mind element (39) occurs accomplishing the function of receiving (i), contingent upon the same object ++++++++ The thing to keep in mind is CONTINUITY, the dhammas that arsise now are different from the past but are related ""And with a stream of continuity there is neither identity nor otherness. For if there were absolute identity in a stream of continuity, there would be no forming of curd from milk. And yet if there were absolute otherness, the curd would not be derived from the milk. And so too with all causally arisen things. And if that were so there would be an end to all worldly usage, which is hardly desirable. So neither absolute identity nor absolute otherness should be assumed here. [555]"" soo.. ""Here it might be asked: "If no transmigration is manifested, then after the cessation of the aggregates in this human person, that fruit could be another person's or due to other [kamma], since the kamma that is the condition for the fruit does not pass on there [to where the fruit is]? And whose is the fruit since there is no experiencer? Therefore this formulation seems to be unsatisfactory." 169. Here is the reply: towards the place of rebirth-linking. The `conascent formations' are the volitions conascent with the impulsion consciousness next to death. Or they are all those that begin with contact. They fling consciousness on to that place of rebirth-linking, which is the object of the kamma and so on. The meaning is that they occur as the cause for the establishment of consciousness on the object by rebirth-linking as though flinging it there" (Vism-mhþ 617). 170. When a fruit arises in a single continuity, it is neither another's nor from other [kamma] because absolute identity and absolute otherness are excluded32 there. The formative processes of seeds establish the meaning of this. For once the formative processes of a mango seed, etc., have been set afoot, when the particular fruit arises in the continuity of the seed's [growth], later on owing to the obtaining of conditions, it does so neither as the fruit of other seeds nor from other formative processes as condition; and those seeds or formative processes do not themselves pass on to the place where the fruit is. This is the analogy here. And the meaning can also be understood from the fact that the arts, crafts, medicine, etc., learnt in youth give their fruit later on in maturity. 171. Now, it was also asked, "Whose is the fruit, since there is no experiencer?" Herein: "Experiencer" is a convention For mere arising of the fruit; They say "It fruits" as a convention, When on a tree appears its fruit. 172. Just as it is simply owing to the arising of tree fruits, which are one part of the phenomena called a tree, that it is said "The tree fruits" or "The tree has fruited," so it is simply owing to the arising of the fruit consisting of the pleasure and pain called experience, which is one part of the aggregates called "deities" and "human beings," that it is said "A deity or a human being experiences or feels pleasure or pain." There is therefore no need at all here for a superfluous experiencer."" Please let me know if all these quotes from the VM make sense. I hope they do. Robert #120683 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:40 am Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - My God! Sarah, I'm so sorry about this!! I pray for your friend (and for some peace of mind for you.) With metta, Howard In a message dated 11/24/2011 3:38:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sara hprocterabbott@... writes: Dear Friends, We often say we don't know what kamma will bring what results at anytime and I've had a long day of reflecting on kamma. on the Uraga Jataka (#103906) which we often refer to and all the other helpful messages that have been written over the years on kamma, upekkha, mourning and so on. As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some shock.... but also some brief moments of equanimity. A friend (my age) who I've known for 30 years and who used to live in Hong Kong has been visiting from London this week with her husband. I was the first person she contacted - she just wanted to have a long hike, swim and lunch with me in this beautiful Hong Kong weather. We met early, walked along 'The Dragon's Back', catching up and enjoying the views. Sharon's a very strong and fit lady, so I always have trouble keeping up with her. At Shek O beach, we left our bags at a restaurant and went for our swim. My friend's a very strong swimmer too and she set off behind me to swim out to a buoy, which was not far away at all. The water was choppy, but not rough. Sharon didn't make it. I waited a little while and when I couldn't see her, I swam back to the beach and there, to my horror, were some other swimmers pulling her out of the water. Sharon was unconscious, frothing at the mouth. Swimmers and lifeguards gave her half an hour of cpr and used a fibrillation machine as well while we waited for the ambulance, but no pulse. It took us another 20 mins or so in the ambulance to reach the nearest hospital. I couldn't reach her husband, so for the first couple of hours or so, I sat there quietly, much of the time having no idea whether she was even alive. Occasionally a doctor would call me in to give me an update and to tell me to prepare for the worst. I also had to answer endless questions from police, medical personnel, lifeguards and others as I sat shivering in my bathing suit but with a blanket I was given. Sharon's now in an induced coma. The next 24 hours are critical. Because of the long time period without oxygen to the brain, the cardiac arrest, even if she survives, there will probably be permanent neurological damage. I was told to make every effort to contact her family members which I did. Eventually her husband arrived, but so far hasn't even been allowed to see her in I.C.U. Thoughts of feeling 'responsible' in some way, reflections on kamma, this moment, thinking, occasional moments of calm, 'just visible object', lots of worry and other kinds of dosa, even momentary concern about the press coverage - so many photographers when we arrived at the hospital. But none of that matters...... life is very, very short - just this moment. Thank goodness we've heard about the Dhamma. Now is the time for the understanding of the present reality we've heard so much about. Thanks for reading and 'listening'. Metta Sarah p.s I may not be replying to messages at this time, but then I may.....we never know. As Phil would say, thanks in advance for any replies. #120684 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:52 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I got the idea as a way of expressing 'right view' that does not yet discern directly...in context of pariyatti and the concepts that come from scripture, etc." Scott: Oh. Nina already gave you this (Message #109910): "...The Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (Book 8)...(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. Avijamanena 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." Scott: Which one of these six categories contains your concept 'right concept?' The problem with making up a term such as 'right concepts' is that you are still attempting to make a 'conceptual bridge' between one thing that exists - i.e. the realities that are the objects of satipa.t.thaana, and things that don't exist - i.e. concepts. Trying to make conceptual bridges serves some purpose. Pariyatti is not reading in books. There are no entities that are partially conceptual and partially 'real' at the same time. The above are all concepts. Conventional speech is only about ultimate realities. The question being asked seems simply to be, 'Am I right in the way I think about this?' I guess this is okay. If the question is, 'How can I find a way to justify my own thinking about this or that,' then forget it. Given that the only realities are the paramattha dhammaa, concepts that refer to these will be 'correct' but not 'right' in the sense of, say, 'right view' because 'right view' is pa~n~naa and is not conceptual. Right view, being pa~n~naa, does 'discern directly' and when it does the thoughts about that can be correct based on that discernment. Until then, just making stuff up. Let's wait to hear from Jon. Scott. #120685 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:20 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Hello Robert K, all, >RK:I dont see samsara as a concept(of course thinking about samsara is a >concept though). >============================================== If it is not a concept, then why isn't it dhamma? Does samsara exist? Yes. If so, it is possible for something to exist without being a singular dhamma. Right? With best wishes, Alex #120686 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:23 am Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism scottduncan2 Ken H., Sarah, KH: "...Remember that Scott, Phil and I (as somewhat like-minded Dhamma students) were trying to find some points of contention amongst ourselves. So when you say 'this doesn't mean we don't assist and give when there are opportunities' I am a bit reluctant to just agree and leave it at that. I am inclined to add that it doesn't mean we *do* assist and give, either..." Scott: Agreed. If there is a rule that exists which states that all Dhamma discussion must be for assisting and giving and no discussion can proceed unless it is for these purposes, then no discussion would proceed. Sarah: "...Now, if there had been some appreciation of their kind thoughts and gift instead of concern about *Ken* and how no one understood you, there wouldn't have been that disappointment written all over your face, would there?" Scott: I find this a bit troublesome since the reality was that there were other dhammas that arose at the time. As Ken alludes to, are you suggesting, Sarah, that Ken should have faked his response or that his response was somehow 'wrong' in the response that came up? What is it: we can control our responses, or there is no control? Scott. #120687 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:25 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "If it is not a concept, then why isn't it dhamma? Does samsara exist? Yes. If so, it is possible for something to exist without being a singular dhamma. Right?" Scott: Wrong. Is samsaara a tree? Scott. #120688 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:29 am Subject: Is "sati" conceptual? How does it exist? truth_aerator Dear All, Is eye, color, eye-consciousness, ear, sound, ear-consciousness, nose, smell, nose-consciousness, tongue, taste, tongue-consciousness, body, tangible object, and body-consciousness, - sati? It doesn't seem to objectively exist in 5 sense organs, + 5 sense objects + 5 sense consciousness. So isn't sati conceptual then, known only by the mind and without any objective basis? How to distinguish it from mere imagination? With best wishes, Alex #120689 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" nilovg Dear Alex, just butting in since I am thinking of samsara, after reading Sarah's post about the sorrowful happenings she had to experience. Op 24-nov-2011, om 15:25 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > A: "If it is not a concept, then why isn't it dhamma? Does samsara > exist? Yes. If so, it is possible for something to exist without > being a singular dhamma. Right?" > > Scott: Wrong. Is samsaara a tree? ------- N: I find it very helpful to remember that seeing now is part of samsara, that samsara is not a theory we can read about. This makes the Dhamma so relevant to our daily life now. There is seeing, and then attachment, aversion, sometimes a moment of understanding. All moments of samsara are arising and falling away, very fleeting trivial moments. They go on and on, until there will finally be liberation. But only one way: understanding of this moment now. That is satipa.t.thaana, that is the development of the eightfold Path. Viva.t.ta (out of the cycle) instead of va.t.ta (the cycle). ------ Nina. #120690 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is "sati" conceptual? How does it exist? nilovg Op 24-nov-2011, om 15:29 heeft A T het volgende geschreven: > Is eye, color, eye-consciousness, ear, sound, ear-consciousness, > nose, smell, nose-consciousness, tongue, taste, tongue- > consciousness, body, tangible object, and body-consciousness, - sati? ------ N: Sati is a sobhana cetasika arising with sobhana citta. It is non- forgetful of what is kusala and there are several levels: of daana, of siila, of bhaavanaa. ------- > > A: It doesn't seem to objectively exist in 5 sense organs, + 5 > sense objects + 5 sense consciousness. So isn't sati conceptual > then, known only by the mind and without any objective basis? How > to distinguish it from mere imagination? ------ N: when it arises you know. ----- Nina. #120691 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:15 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Scott, >A:"If it is not a concept, then why isn't it dhamma? Does samsara exist? >Yes.If so, it is possible for something to exist without being a >singular >dhamma. Right?" > >Scott: Wrong. >========================================================== Please explain why it is wrong. With best wishes, Alex #120692 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is "sati" conceptual? How does it exist? truth_aerator Dear Nina, Thank you for reply. I do wonder the difference between sati, and lets say, imagination. Both are mental, and have no objective referent. >N: when it arises you know. >================================ Same could be said about imagination and conceptualizing. With best wishes, Alex #120693 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Is "sati" conceptual? How does it exist? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 24-nov-2011, om 16:20 heeft A T het volgende geschreven: > N: when it arises you know. > >================================ > > Same could be said about imagination and conceptualizing. ------ N: When sati arises only one reality, such as sound is known at a time. When several objects seem to appear at a time, such as sound and also knowing the meaning of the sound, then you can know that a concept is cognized. There is a mixture of different things at such moments, and we all do this. No sati. We are lost in thoughts, thinking about situations, persons: concepts are the object, no sati. But at another moment just hardness appears and is known as only a ruupa, no thing or person. This is different from knowing hardness through body-consciousness. That is not sati. Sati accompanies kusala citta and if we try there is lobha, no sati. Mostly there is lobha, and that is why it is not easy to understand what sammaa-sati is. ----- Nina. #120694 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:44 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Dear Nina, (Alex), Regarding the exchange you are commenting on: A: "If it is not a concept, then why isn't it dhamma? Does samsara exist? Yes. If so, it is possible for something to exist without being a singular dhamma. Right?" Me: "Wrong. Is samsaara a tree?" N: "I find it very helpful to remember that seeing now is part of samsara, that samsara is not a theory we can read about. This makes the Dhamma so relevant to our daily life now. There is seeing, and then attachment, aversion, sometimes a moment of understanding. All moments of samsara are arising and falling away, very fleeting trivial moments. They go on and on, until there will finally be liberation. But only one way: understanding of this moment now. That is satipa.t.thaana, that is the development of the eightfold Path. Viva.t.ta (out of the cycle) instead of va.t.ta (the cycle)." Scott: We know that samsaara is 'round of rebirth' or, as the famous Nyanatiloka also notes, literally 'perpetual wandering.' As a word denoting these things, samsaara *is* a concept *from that perspective*. This is why I equate 'samsaara' and 'tree' when responding to Alex's 'question.' We know that he thinks a tree is a dhamma. We can see that he needs to be told that while a moment of consciousness consists of conascent dhammaa, and that the falling away of one moment of consciousness conditions the arising of the next. He needs to be clearly told that while one speaks conceptually of a series, this 'series' is not a reality in and of itself. This 'series' thus spoken of is a concept. This goes for samsaara and for trees. You note that 'seeing now is part of samsaara' but don't go far enough to state the the only reality referred to in that statement is seeing - samsaara is a concept, seeing is an element. Scott. #120695 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:55 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Please explain why it is wrong." Scott: I did, Alex, with the rhetorical question: Is samsaara a tree? Scott. #120696 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:10 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Hi Scott, >Scott: He needs to be clearly told that while one speaks conceptually of a >series, this 'series' is not a reality in and of itself. This 'series' >thus spoken of is a concept. This goes for samsaara and for trees. >==================================== So samsara, which is series of citta/cetasika/rupas is not a reality in and of itself? Is it different from Nibbana or not? If Samsara is a concept, then can it rise and fall? With metta, Alex #120697 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:15 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Scott, >A: "Please explain why it is wrong." >Scott: I did, Alex, with the rhetorical question: Is samsaara a tree? >======================================================= Is "samsara" distinguishable from a "tree"? Does samsara have different functions than a tree? Is samsara different from Nibbana? With best wishes, Alex #120698 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "So samsara, which is series of citta/cetasika/rupas is not a reality in and of itself?" Scott: No. A: "Is it different from Nibbana or not?" Scott: Yes. A: "If Samsara is a concept, then can it rise and fall?" Scott: It is a concept, no 'if' about it. And no, the concept neither arises nor falls away. Each moment consists of realities arising and falling away - naama and ruupa. The designation for this, when the content of the thought or concept is 'lifetime' or 'world' or 'series' or 'stream' or 'round of rebirth' or whatever, is samsaara. Samsaara is a designation. Samsaara is not *a* reality. Samsaara does not arise, nor does it fall away. The 'round of rebirth' is a concept desrcibing the myriad complexity of *realities* arising and falling away, conditioned and conditioning. Scott. Scott. #120699 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:42 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "Is 'samsara' distinguishable from a 'tree'?" Scott: No. Both are concepts. A: "Does samsara have different functions than a tree?" Scott: Neither samsaara nor trees have functions. Concepts are not realities. Concepts have no characteristics. Concepts have no function. Concepts are the content of thought. A: "Is samsara different from Nibbana?" Scott: Yes. Scott. #120700 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:03 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Hi Scott, >A: "If Samsara is a concept, then can it rise and fall?" >Scott: It is a concept, no 'if' about it. And no, the concept neither >arises nor falls away. >================================================== So it is not possible to escape samsara because it does not fall away? If samsara does have a function opposite of Nibbana, then how can it exist separately from Nibbana? If by samsara we mean just the process of citta/cetasika/rupas, then why can't we in the same way affirm the conditioned existence of things that are made up of parts? How can you say that "Concepts have no characteristics" and that samsara is concept, and yet maintain that it is different from Nibbana. There seems to be a double standard when it comes to Samsara and other concepts. With best wishes, Alex #120701 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "So it is not possible to escape samsara because it does not fall away?" Scott: Thanks for getting to the punch-line with relative speed and efficiency. And, in keeping with the spirit of your above statement: Of course, Alex, that is exactly right. Here, discussing Dhamma, we agree that it is not possible to escape samsaara. Try not to let the fact that you don't understand what I'm saying get in the way. And, yeah, because it's because samsaara does not fall away. I think you've finally gotten it. A: "If samsara does have a function opposite of Nibbana, then how can it exist separately from Nibbana?" Scott: Samsaara, as a concept, has no function. Samsaara is a concept. Nibbaana is a reality. It is the Unconditioned Dhamma. It is not a concept. Concepts and realities differ. The former are not real; the latter are real. Nibbaana is real; samsaara is a concept. A: "If by samsara we mean just the process of citta/cetasika/rupas, then why can't we in the same way affirm the conditioned existence of things that are made up of parts? A: "How can you say that 'Concepts have no characteristics' and that samsara is concept, and yet maintain that it is different from Nibbana." Scott: A concept differs from a reality. 'Samsaara' is a concept. Nibbaana is a reality. A: "There seems to be a double standard when it comes to Samsara and other concepts." Scott: Does there Alex? Not at all. Samsaara is as good a concept as any other. No need to worry about that. Scott. #120702 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Scott, >Scott: Here, discussing Dhamma, we agree that it is not possible to >escape >samsaara. >========================================== I believe there is a way out of Samsara and it is called Noble Eightfold Path. It is strange to claim that "it is not possible to escape samsara". What's the point in developing understanding if escape is not possible? What is the point of studying Dhamma if it doesn't lead to escape from samsara? >Scott: Samsaara, as a concept, has no function. So it is not different from Nibbana? Difference from Nibbana is difference, a characteristic. >Scott: A concept differs from a reality. So concept has a characteristic of being different from reality. Its characteristics are different. Alex #120703 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:55 am Subject: Re: kamma and this moment kenhowardau Dear Sarah, I think we all know what you must be going through. Not only are you worried about your friend, there are additional traumas for you. The fact you were there means you will inevitably be plagued by useless thoughts of "if only." "If only we had stayed at the restaurant, if only we had decided to sit on the beach a little longer" and so on. None of us expects you to be a saint and unaffected by the trauma. But we do know there will be peaceful moments when you understand it's only conditioned dhammas, and no self. As Nina says, "Just like now." Ken H #120704 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:02 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "I believe there is a way out of Samsara and it is called Noble Eightfold Path. It is strange to claim that 'it is not possible to escape samsara'. What's the point in developing understanding if escape is not possible? What is the point of studying Dhamma if it doesn't lead to escape from samsara?" Scott: Good, Alex. Way to totally get the irony. Or are you actually kidding about the not getting the irony. If you are not kidding, and totally did not get the irony then I don't actually know what to do with that. Good one. A: "So it is not different from Nibbana? Difference from Nibbana is difference, a characteristic." Scott: What the hell? What is not different from Nibbaana? Samsaara? When did I say that? Samsaara is a concept and Nibbaana is not. What's the big revelation? Of course you are actually trying to split some hair here, aren't you? You're like, 'well samsaara is a concept and differs from Nibbaana because Nibbaana is a reality and so this difference - between a concept and a reality - this difference denotes a characteristic.' That seriously takes the cake, Alex. I find this to be a fatuous and even ludicrous attempt at an argument. A: "So concept has a characteristic of being different from reality. Its characteristics are different." Scott: OMG. That is just silly. Scott. #120705 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:21 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Scott, >Scott: what is not different from Nibbaana? Samsara from the way you define it. If samsara is a concept, and concepts have no characteristics, then according to what characteristic is samsara different from Nibbana? Two things need to have different characteristics to be different, otherwise how can they be different? With best wishes, Alex #120706 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, Me: "what is not different from Nibbaana?" A: "Samsara from the way you define it..." Scott: Now, pay attention, Alex. Samsaara is a concept. Nibbaana is a reality. Samsaara, as a concept, is not a reality. Nibbaana, as a reality, is not a concept. I am saying that samsaara and Nibbaana *are* different. They are different. They differ. That is to say that they are not the same, and hence are different. A: "If samsara is a concept, and concepts have no characteristics, then according to what characteristic is samsara different from Nibbana?" Scott: Alex, it is enough to say that concepts differ from realities. A: "Two things need to have different characteristics to be different, otherwise how can they be different?" Scott: A categorical difference is not a characteristic. Only paramattha dhammaa have characteristics - including Nibbaana. Concepts do not. Let's see what happens to all this as it goes through your mill. Scott. #120707 From: "azita" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:39 am Subject: Re: kamma and this moment gazita2002 Hallo Sarah, What a traumatic event! Gosh, we jst never know what will occur in the next moment. Even when we have heard the dhamma for a long time, until kilesa are completely eradicated we will continue to be devastated by such an event. Only by taking the 'bitter medicine' over and over again, can we see that 'our lives' are only momentary arisings and fallings, wonderful times, terrible times here and gone so briefly. We feel dosa because there are conditions for it to arise, not me, not mine, not myself. Patience, courage and good cheer. azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > We often say we don't know what kamma will bring what results at anytime and I've had a long day of reflecting on kamma. on the Uraga Jataka (#103906) which we often refer to and all the other helpful messages that have been written over the years on kamma, upekkha, mourning and so on. > > As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some shock.... but also some brief moments of equanimity. > #120708 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:05 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Scott, In order for two phenomena to be different, they need to have different characteristics. Otherwise there is no characteristic, no definition by which they would be different. If Samsara is different from Nibbana, it means that it has different characteristics and different definition from Nibbana. Otherwise it wouldn't differ from Nibbana. So if Samsara is different from something (Nibbana), and Samsara is a concept, it means that at least some concepts do have difference. You eat the soup, not the table. Soup has one set of characteristics and functions, table has another set of characteristics and functions. So concepts do have characteristics and functions. With best wishes, Alex #120710 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:37 am Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ---------- <. . .> > RK: There is no one to blame or be blamed but the cittas and cetasikas include cetana, and they include vipaka. ---------- KH: I would prefer to say the above using the word `and' where you have used the word `but.' I don't see the world of kamma and vipaka as being half way between the world of self and the world of no self. I am sure you don't see it that way either, but what is the significance of `but' instead of `and' in your sentence? ----------------- > RK: The vipaka that arises later, after akusala cittaas is of a different characteristic to that that arises after kusala citta. ----------------- KH: Yes, and in either case vipaka is just a citta; there is no person who has it. ----------- > RK: The visuddhimagga: <. . .> >Please let me know if all these quotes from the VM make sense. I hope they do. ------------- KH: They make sense to me. They make me want to put conventional reality aside, and concentrate entirely on ultimate realities. Talk about Scott's doing the right thing by his neighbour, for example, seems like an unnecessary distraction. I think Scott was making that point when he named the thread `Looks like Buddhism.' Ken H #120711 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:04 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Scott and Sarah, ----- <. . .> > Scott: I find this a bit troublesome since the reality was that there were other dhammas that arose at the time. ----- KH: I am a bit miffed by talk in this thread about different dhammas at different times. I would have thought we had all accepted that, and we were trying to take this particular conversation to another level. ------------- > Scott: As Ken alludes to, are you suggesting, Sarah, that Ken should have faked his response or that his response was somehow 'wrong' in the response that came up? What is it: we can control our responses, or there is no control? ------------- KH: I think your question is silly and, at the same time, profound. It is silly because we all know Sarah did not mean there was control. She meant that panna knew the advantages of kusala and the disadvantages of akusala. Talk of my (Ken H's) knowing the same thing was just Sarah's use of conventional language to describe something non-conventional. At the same time your question gets to the crux of this thread. Panna might know an urgent, fire-on-the-head need to overcome akusala, but so what? Panna and the others are only dhammas, rolling on by conditions, so who cares? There is no control. Conventional reality might depict us as heinous criminals, murdering our neighbours and paving the way to hell, but so what? How is that ultimately different from being mister nice guy? I think conventional reality is of no ultimately real relevance whatsoever. But isn't that what we are all supposed to think? Isn't that the Dhamma? Why do you and I (or I, at least) suspect there is a slight difference of opinion somewhere amongst us no-controllers? Ken H PS: Perhaps we could split into the "so what?" no-controllers and the "yes, but even so!" no controllers. :-) #120712 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:07 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "In order for two phenomena to be different, they need to have different characteristics. Otherwise there is no characteristic, no definition by which they would be different." Scott: Alex, seriously this is verging on the ridiculous. Concepts have no characteristics. If you think they do, then you are making up your own stuff. I'm not going to dispute that. More power to you. Of course, you no doubt are working up to say something like, 'Nibbaana is the only reality and it emerges from samsaara' or some such nonsense. Please just come to the point. A: "If Samsara is different from Nibbana, it means that it has different characteristics and different definition from Nibbana. Otherwise it wouldn't differ from Nibbana." Scott: Pay attention, Alex. Samsaara *is* different from Nibbaana. Samsaara is a concept. Nibbaana is a reality. The characteristic of Nibbaana is that it is the unconditioned element. A concept has no characteristic. A: "So if Samsara is different from something (Nibbana), and Samsara is a concept, it means that at least some concepts do have difference." Scott: Concepts differ from realities. A: "You eat the soup, not the table. Soup has one set of characteristics and functions, table has another set of characteristics and functions." Scott: OMG. A: "So concepts do have characteristics and functions." Scott: Brilliant. Alex the Neocommentator Extraordinaire. Someone with patience please take over. Scott. #120713 From: A T Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 12:58 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Scott, >S: Of course, you no doubt are working up to say something like, >'Nibbaana >is the only reality and it emerges from samsaara' or some >such nonsense. >Please just come to the point. >============================================ You didn't get me. The point is that forks have different characteristics and functions than a car for example. Another point is that something (like samsara) can be made up of many smaller dhammas, and this functional conglomeration of dhammas does have a new function not inherent in sum of its parts. >Scott: Samsaara *is* different from Nibbaana. Samsaara is a concept. >Scott: Concepts differ from realities. >================================= So concept can be different from something. Its characteristic is different. Samsara is dukkha, while nibbana is the highest happiness. Opposite qualities. With metta, Alex #120714 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:19 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "You didn't get me..." Scott: Yeah, I did. Catch you later... Scott. #120715 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:50 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism scottduncan2 Hey Ken H., KH: "I am a bit miffed by talk in this thread about different dhammas at different times. I would have thought we had all accepted that, and we were trying to take this particular conversation to another level." Scott: Well, it seemed as if the message was that there *should* have been different dhammas at the time than the ones which actually seemed to arise - given the story right? But, as you suggest later, stories are so very misleading given that the dhammas are gone already but the story goes on. KH: "I think your question is silly and, at the same time, profound. It is silly because we all know Sarah did not mean there was control. She meant that panna knew the advantages of kusala and the disadvantages of akusala. Talk of my (Ken H's) knowing the same thing was just Sarah's use of conventional language to describe something non-conventional." Scott: I don't know why Sarah thought to suggest that it would have been better if... You reacted as you did because you did. Conventionally speaking. And, apparently, it didn't look like buddhism. Conventionally speaking. K : "At the same time your question gets to the crux of this thread. Panna might know an urgent, fire-on-the-head need to overcome akusala, but so what? Panna and the others are only dhammas, rolling on by conditions, so who cares?" Scott: Or, since it's over, who cares now? K: "There is no control. Conventional reality might depict us as heinous criminals, murdering our neighbours and paving the way to hell, but so what? How is that ultimately different from being mister nice guy?" Scott: The conventional story can only refer to dhammas. K: "I think conventional reality is of no ultimately real relevance whatsoever. But isn't that what we are all supposed to think? Isn't that the Dhamma? Why do you and I (or I, at least) suspect there is a slight difference of opinion somewhere amongst us no-controllers? PS: Perhaps we could split into the 'so what?' no-controllers and the 'yes, but even so!' no controllers..." Scott: A conventionally expressed narrative can refer to realities - just consider the suttas. Study of dhammas now is not in my control, right? Thoughts about actions are way too diffuse to be of much use. We do differ on various things, we 'no-controllers.' I say, 'so what' to that except that I like to discuss stuff anyway because I'm deprived socially. Ha ha. I guess I'm a 'no-controller' who like to engage in fun, erudite discussion until I'm out of patience with it. Scott. #120716 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:39 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Rob K. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > > I would understand "samsara" to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO form > _______' > dear Rob e > I dont see samsara as a concept(of course thinking about samsara is a concept though). > > As the visuddhimagga explains : > > the endless rebirths as pictured thus: > The endless chain of aggregates, > Of elements, of bases too, > That carries on unbrokenly > Is what is called "the round of births," Thanks, Rob, that's a good explanation, and a good quote. Just a note: the quote above I believe is from Jon, not me, and then I commented on it after that, and asked the question about it. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #120717 From: "philip" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:52 pm Subject: Re: kamma and this moment philofillet Hi Sarah and Christine > As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some shock.... but also some brief moments of equanimity. Sorry to hear your stories, sorry for your loss, Christine, and best wishes for Sharon's recovery, Sarah. And sorry that you had to go through that. I appreciate that Chrstine noted that it was a traumatic incidcent for some of the people who were with her mother when she passed away, that is so true, her mother was not traumatized for all we know, it always comes back to I, me and mine, except for a few rare openings in that dome. It's difficult for some to accept that mourning the loss of a loved one is dosa, but it is, it's all about our lobha and the dosa that arises from the loss. Except, again, for those few rare moments of deep understanding and compassion (which can never be accompanied by unpleasant mental feeling, so must be so rare...) Anyways, sorry. Phil #120718 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:02 am Subject: Sweet is Silence! bhikkhu5 Friends: Sweet is Verbal, Bodily and Mental Silence! The Blessed Buddha once said: Kâyamunim vâcâmunim, manomunimanâsavam, munim moneyyasampannam. Âhu ninhâtapâpakam. Silent in body, silent in speech, silent in mind, without agitation, blessed with silence is the sage. Such One is truly washed of evil. Itivuttaka 3.67 SILENCED If silent as a broken bell, such one is close to Nibbana, and far away from arrogance. Dhammapada 134 <...> Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #120719 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:50 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism epsteinrob Hi Rob K. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > . The curtains go up, the actors play their roles, and the curtains go down. When they go up for the next scene we recognise the characters but *in this play* there is an entirely new cast of actors. No actor can be blamed for what went on in a previous scene; he wasn't even there. > > > Dear Ken > There is no one to blame or be blamed but the cittas and cetasikas include cetana, and they include vipaka. The vipaka that arises later, after akusala cittaas is of a different characteristic to that that arises after kusala citta. > > The visuddhimagga: > ""Ignorance is an outstanding cause of kamma that leads to unhappy > destinies. Why? Because, just as when a cow to be slaughtered is in the grip of > the torment of burning with fire and belabouring with cudgels, and being crazed > with torment, she drinks the hot water although it gives no satisfaction and does > her harm, so the ordinary man who is in the grip of ignorance performs kamma > of the various kinds beginning with killing living things that leads to unhappy > destinies, although it gives no satisfaction because of the burning of defilements > and does him harm because it casts him into an unhappy destiny." > > And > > 43. And that arising in one who undergoes flogging, imprisonment, etc., at > the hands of others is the suffering rooted in others' violence. > So this birth is the basis for all this suffering. Hence this is said: > Now, were no being born in hell again > The pain unbearable of scorching fires > And all the rest would then no footing gain; > Therefore the Sage pronounced that birth is pain. > Many the sorts of pain that beasts endure > When they are flogged with whips and sticks and goads, > A hellish tomb of excrement—would never come about > Without rebirth: that birth is pain there is no room for doubt."" > > No need to get confused by conventional usage after all: > > > ""The two together: since any given states are produced without interrupting > the [cause-fruit] continuity of any given combination of conditions, the whole > expression "dependent origination" (paþicca-samuppáda) represents the middle > way, which rejects the doctrines, "He who acts is he who reaps" and "One acts > while another reaps" (S II 20), and which is the proper way described thus, "Not > insisting on local language and NOT overriding normal usage" (M III 234)."" > > and > > "" the word "origination" (samuppáda) indicates the arising of the > states, since these occur when their conditions combine, and it shows how to > prevent annihilationism, etc., thus preventing the various doctrines of annihilation > [of a soul], nihilism, ["there is no use in giving," etc.,] and moral-inefficacy-ofaction, > ["there is no other world," etc.]; for when states [are seen to] arise again > and again, each conditioned by its predecessor, how can the doctrines of > annihilationism, nihilism, and moral-inefficacy-of-action be maintained"" > > > > > ------------------------ > > > RK: So conventional actions and situations are always related - even if we dont see the relation- with the actual realities that are present. > > ------------------------------ > > > > KH: There are moments when I think I am beginning to see what you (and others) are saying on this point. > > > > Visible object, for example, is experienced now because Ken H was born with eyes. Is that the sort of thing you mean? > > Maybe : > ""127. Firstly, in one who has been reborn by means of either profitable-result or > unprofitable result: according as his faculties mature, so the five profitableresultant > eye-, etc., consciousnesses occur accomplishing the respective functions > of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching ((d)–(h)), contingent respectively > upon a desirable or desirable-neutral visible datum, etc., as object that has come > into the focus of the eye, etc., and having the sensitivity of the eye, etc., as [material] > support. And likewise the five unprofitable-resultant consciousnesses; the only > difference being this, that the visible data, etc., as object for these are undesirable > or undesirable-neutral. And these ten are invariable as to their door, object, > physical basis, and position [in the cognitive series], and invariable as to their > functions. > 128. After that, next to the profitable-resultant eye-, etc., consciousness, the > profitable-resultant mind element (39) occurs accomplishing the function of > receiving (i), contingent upon the same object > ++++++++ > The thing to keep in mind is CONTINUITY, the dhammas that arsise now are different from the past but are related > > ""And with a stream of continuity there is neither identity nor otherness. > For if there were absolute identity in a stream of continuity, there would be no > forming of curd from milk. And yet if there were absolute otherness, the curd > would not be derived from the milk. And so too with all causally arisen things. > And if that were so there would be an end to all worldly usage, which is hardly > desirable. So neither absolute identity nor absolute otherness should be assumed > here. [555]"" > > soo.. > ""Here it might be asked: "If no transmigration is manifested, then after the > cessation of the aggregates in this human person, that fruit could be another > person's or due to other [kamma], since the kamma that is the condition for the > fruit does not pass on there [to where the fruit is]? And whose is the fruit since > there is no experiencer? Therefore this formulation seems to be unsatisfactory." > 169. Here is the reply: > towards the place of rebirth-linking. The `conascent formations' are the volitions conascent > with the impulsion consciousness next to death. Or they are all those that begin with > contact. They fling consciousness on to that place of rebirth-linking, which is the > object of the kamma and so on. The meaning is that they occur as the cause for the > establishment of consciousness on the object by rebirth-linking as though flinging it > there" (Vism-mhþ 617). > > > 170. When a fruit arises in a single continuity, it is neither another's nor from > other [kamma] because absolute identity and absolute otherness are excluded32 > there. The formative processes of seeds establish the meaning of this. For once > the formative processes of a mango seed, etc., have been set afoot, when the > particular fruit arises in the continuity of the seed's [growth], later on owing to > the obtaining of conditions, it does so neither as the fruit of other seeds nor from > other formative processes as condition; and those seeds or formative processes > do not themselves pass on to the place where the fruit is. This is the analogy > here. And the meaning can also be understood from the fact that the arts, crafts, > medicine, etc., learnt in youth give their fruit later on in maturity. > 171. Now, it was also asked, "Whose is the fruit, since there is no experiencer?" > Herein: > "Experiencer" is a convention > For mere arising of the fruit; > They say "It fruits" as a convention, > When on a tree appears its fruit. > 172. Just as it is simply owing to the arising of tree fruits, which are one part of > the phenomena called a tree, that it is said "The tree fruits" or "The tree has > fruited," so it is simply owing to the arising of the fruit consisting of the pleasure > and pain called experience, which is one part of the aggregates called "deities" > and "human beings," that it is said "A deity or a human being experiences or > feels pleasure or pain." There is therefore no need at all here for a superfluous > experiencer."" > > Please let me know if all these quotes from the VM make sense. I hope they do. Just wanted to say that I find the quotes extremely valuable, particularly on the subject of continuity, which I think is often a misunderstood and undervalued aspect of the progression of dhammas, since single cittas and their cessation is often the point of emphasis. Your quotes explain very well how continuity takes place from one dhamma to the next and how this understanding keeps one clear of annihilationism, as well as eternalism, if it is understood correctly. I will look at these a few more times to try to get the specifics more clearly. Thanks, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #120720 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 3:58 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment epsteinrob Dear Sarah, So sorry to hear about this terrible event. In some way I am thinking that if your friend had to go through this, that it was good that she was able to see you beforehand and have those moments with you. Maybe that is something positive for both of your paths. But I am very sorry for the pain and shock you are feeling, and hope for your friend's recovery. Best Regards, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > In a message dated 11/24/2011 3:38:45 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sara > hprocterabbott@... writes: > > Dear Friends, > > We often say we don't know what kamma will bring what results at anytime > and I've had a long day of reflecting on kamma. on the Uraga Jataka > (#103906) which we often refer to and all the other helpful messages that have been > written over the years on kamma, upekkha, mourning and so on. > > As I write now, I'm still shivering and shaking and in some shock.... but > also some brief moments of equanimity. > > A friend (my age) who I've known for 30 years and who used to live in Hong > Kong has been visiting from London this week with her husband. I was the > first person she contacted - she just wanted to have a long hike, swim and > lunch with me in this beautiful Hong Kong weather. > > We met early, walked along 'The Dragon's Back', catching up and enjoying > the views. Sharon's a very strong and fit lady, so I always have trouble > keeping up with her. At Shek O beach, we left our bags at a restaurant and > went for our swim. My friend's a very strong swimmer too and she set off > behind me to swim out to a buoy, which was not far away at all. The water was > choppy, but not rough. Sharon didn't make it. > > I waited a little while and when I couldn't see her, I swam back to the > beach and there, to my horror, were some other swimmers pulling her out of > the water. Sharon was unconscious, frothing at the mouth. Swimmers and > lifeguards gave her half an hour of cpr and used a fibrillation machine as well > while we waited for the ambulance, but no pulse. It took us another 20 mins > or so in the ambulance to reach the nearest hospital. > > I couldn't reach her husband, so for the first couple of hours or so, I > sat there quietly, much of the time having no idea whether she was even > alive. Occasionally a doctor would call me in to give me an update and to tell > me to prepare for the worst. I also had to answer endless questions from > police, medical personnel, lifeguards and others as I sat shivering in my > bathing suit but with a blanket I was given. > > Sharon's now in an induced coma. The next 24 hours are critical. Because > of the long time period without oxygen to the brain, the cardiac arrest, > even if she survives, there will probably be permanent neurological damage. I > was told to make every effort to contact her family members which I did. > Eventually her husband arrived, but so far hasn't even been allowed to see > her in I.C.U. > > Thoughts of feeling 'responsible' in some way, reflections on kamma, this > moment, thinking, occasional moments of calm, 'just visible object', lots > of worry and other kinds of dosa, even momentary concern about the press > coverage - so many photographers when we arrived at the hospital. But none of > that matters...... life is very, very short - just this moment. > > Thank goodness we've heard about the Dhamma. Now is the time for the > understanding of the present reality we've heard so much about. > > Thanks for reading and 'listening'. > > Metta > > Sarah > p.s I may not be replying to messages at this time, but then I may.....we > never know. As Phil would say, thanks in advance for any replies. #120721 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 4:12 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Rob E., > > R: "...I got the idea as a way of expressing 'right view' that does not yet discern directly...in context of pariyatti and the concepts that come from scripture, etc." > > Scott: Oh. > > Nina already gave you this (Message #109910): "...The Abhidhammattha Vibhavani (Book 8)...(see Visuddhimagga VIII, note 11). ... > Scott: Which one of these six categories contains your concept 'right concept?' I'm not talking about anything different than the conceptual categories defined above from the Abhidhammatha Vihavani that you quoted. They all start with: "Concepts that make known..." and the term "right concepts" simply refers to concepts that are correct about what is real, such as the concepts in Dhamma. All 'hearing, discussing and wisely considering' Dhamma is conceptual. Then when one discerns something the prior understanding -- via concepts -- becomes direct knowledge. I don't think that is a foreign idea. Again, I believe that I did not make up this term, but got it or the close equivalent language in discussions on dsg. I agree, let's see what Jon says. ... > Pariyatti is not reading in books. There are no entities that are partially conceptual and partially 'real' at the same time. The above are all concepts. Agreed. Still, all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual. There are either concepts understood that reflect reality or ones that don't. > Conventional speech is only about ultimate realities. Is this what you meant to say? Doesn't make sense. > The question being asked seems simply to be, 'Am I right in the way I think about this?' That is the gist of it. Is a concept useful in understanding realities; does it point in the right direct towards discerning realities, etc. The concept of "dhammas arising" and "anatta" if understood correctly are concepts that lead towards correct understanding. That is all I mean to suggest. ...Given that the only realities are the paramattha dhammaa, concepts that refer to these will be 'correct' but not 'right' in the sense of, say, 'right view' because 'right view' is pa~n~naa and is not conceptual. Well my understanding of pariyatti is that it is understanding realities not yet directly discerned. This will necessarily be conceptual, but will be about present realities and their characteristics. When it becomes non-conceptual direct discernment of one level or another, then it is patipatti. Here's what it says on an arbitrary website :-) : Patipatti: Pali Buddhist Buddhism Dictionary on Patipatti patipatti (pa.tipatti): The practice of Dhamma, as opposed to mere theoretical knowledge (pariyatti). > Right view, being pa~n~naa, does 'discern directly' and when it does the thoughts about that can be correct based on that discernment. Until then, just making stuff up. Not if it's correctly understood concepts of Dhamma, that is not making stuff up, but is the set of understandings that allow for pariyatti, taken from Dhamma, not made up. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #120722 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 5:57 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! ptaus1 Hi Chris and Sarah, Sorry for your loss. Sometimes in situation like that at work I remember Sarah saying "what is the citta now"? Though the other stuff like "what if", regrets, etc, can't be helped either. Best wishes pt --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > Hello Sarah, > > We experienced the death of my beloved mother last Monday, with some of the family traumatised by the experience of being with her when it occurred. But this was timely and half expected. > > As you know, sudden unexpected life-threatening occurrences can shake us to the core. It is what we do with the experience that will make it beneficial or traumatic. > > For myself, I often consider the Pabbatopama Sutta: The Simile of the Mountains, to remind myself not to be complacent about myself or dear ones. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn03/sn03.025.than.html > > Thinking of you and holding you in my heart with metta. > > Chris > #120723 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:21 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! sarahprocter... Dear Friends, Thank you for all your kind messages - I look forward to replying to them individually and reflecting on the helpful Dhamma points together next week when I have more time. I've appreciated them all a lot, including all the regular discussions. Last night I told Jon the only thing I felt like was listening to him reading out all the posts and reflecting on the Dhamma. Chris, my sympathies to you and your family. I know your mother has lived a good, long life and been poorly for quite sometime, but as you say, it can still come as a shock. Again we're so fortunate to have a wealth of Dhamma reminders to reflect on and I'm sure you were able to give your other family members strength and wise reminders. More later.... Kamma and the 'situations', 'if onlys' and so on...... Kamma is really understood when we truly begin to appreciate now that there really are no people - no 'good friend', 'no mother', no 'poor me' - just different kinds of dhammas - kusala, akusala, vipaka and kiriya....That's truly it! Hearing a siren just now and immediately thoughts of rushing across town inside the one yesterday, rolling around as the police interviewed me in my bathing suit with my lifeless friend in front of me...... As discussed with Antony a long time ago in Sydney, actually, just the hearing of sound and immediately, long, long stories about people and things. Actually, just hearing, just sound, just thinking and no one or thing in it! Back to the 'correct' conventional story - my friend is still in critical condition and we've been told she has permanent brain damage for sure. Anything can happen any time ...more dhammas, just like now!! Thank you all again - what a wonderfully supportive group! Metta Sarah ===== #120724 From: "philip" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:28 pm Subject: Re: kamma and this moment philofillet Hi again, Christine, Sarah and all > I appreciate that Christine noted that it was a traumatic incidcent for some of the people who were with her mother when she passed away, that is so true, her mother was not traumatized for all we know.. Christine, please forgive me for profiting from your loss in order to reflect on Abhidhamma, but I think the above should be revised to say no possibility that a loved one is traumatized at the very moment of her own death, because it's just one citta that rises and falls away, then the rebirth citta. Any trauma would be for those at the bedside, because of clinging. Sarah might be haunted by the memory of Sharon frothing at the mouth and assume there was anguish involved for Sharon, but again that's speculation rooted in one's own ignorance, no way to know what cittas were playing out in Sharon's mind, may have been childhood memories of playing happily in the sea for all we know. By the way, Sarah, you suggested or agreed to the suggestion a swim with a strong swimmer, to a reasonable goal, no regret about that, please. Phil #120725 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 6:47 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! jonoabb Dear Chris Very sorry to hear about the loss of your mother. Best regards Jon PS Thanks for the sutta reminder. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Christine" wrote: > > Hello Sarah, > > We experienced the death of my beloved mother last Monday, with some of the family traumatised by the experience of being with her when it occurred. But this was timely and half expected. > > As you know, sudden unexpected life-threatening occurrences can shake us to the core. It is what we do with the experience that will make it beneficial or traumatic. > > For myself, I often consider the Pabbatopama Sutta: The Simile of the Mountains, to remind myself not to be complacent about myself or dear ones. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn03/sn03.025.than.html > > Thinking of you and holding you in my heart with metta. > > Chris > #120726 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:00 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Alex, all --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi Alex > ... > > A: Is there a dhamma called "anatta"? Is there a dhamma called "rise of citta", "persistence of citta", "fall of citta"? Is there dhamma called "samsara"? > > =============== > > J: As I understand the Theravada texts, 'anatta' is a characteristic, or quality, of dhammas. It becomes known to panna as the understanding of dhammas (insight) is developed. > > So to answer your question, there is no dhamma called 'anatta'. > > But neither is anatta a concept, since it is an aspect of dhammas. > > The same would presumably apply as regards the 3 sub-moments of citta. > > There is no dhamma called "samsara". I would understand "samsara" to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO formulation). > =============== J: Regarding that last paragraph, on further reflection I think I would like to put it a little differently, as follows: There is no dhamma called "samsara". I understand "samsara" to refer to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly, as reflected in the DO formulation (anuloma section), unless enlightenment is attained. So, as with the other expressions you have asked about, it is an aspect of dhammas that comes to be known with the development of insight. Jon #120727 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:10 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Scott --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > R: "...If it turns out that samsara really is just a concept, is it a 'right concept?'..." > > Scott: Could you please offer an opinion on this notion of 'right concept' that has come into parlance over the past month or so? The way people use it implies that there is something correct about it. I don't recall that it was ever said to be the case that such a thing exists. Clarification would be nice. > =============== I've not come across the expression "right concept" before. I'm not sure I understand what it's intended to mean. Perhaps it will become clearer as the discussion with Rob E proceeds. Jon #120728 From: "philip" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:58 pm Subject: An apology to follow? philofillet Hi all The impressive sutta posted by Christine conditioned a moment of wanting to aplogize for harsh words I have used to people here. Then came a lot of wondering about why I wanted to do that. The moment of kusala intent had passed. But I find this in The Expositor, p.102: "As regards Vinaya exposition, when such words as 'I will give this, I will do this' are spoken, it amounts to a gift by this characteristic of spoken words. But as regards Abhidhamma exposition, a moral thought arises from the time when there is thinking in the mind of giving an existing object. It is said in in the Great Commentary that afterwards by act or speech he will do what is necessary." In other words, strong possibility of an apology from me, stay posted. In the meantime, I am so enthralled by The Big Ex that I should remain lurking for awhile, no doubt I'll call someone an idiot for not studying it with reverence. Phil #120729 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:13 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" jonoabb Hi Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > ... > >J:Alex, to get back to the topic of your earlier post, I'd be >interested to know what significance you attach to: > >the teaching on dhammas, and their classification in various >ways >such as khandhas, elements, ayatanas, etc > >============================================== > > [A:] It seems to be precise analytic exposition against the idea of eternal and Indivisible Atman. > =============== J: It is that. But why dhammas, and what makes a dhamma a dhamma? If we don't know what it means to be a 'dhamma', it's difficult to understand the significance of the teachings about dhammas. For example, a definition of dhammas as "those things the understanding of which leads to the eradication of the idea of an eternal and indivisible self", while containing a statement that is correct in itself, does not help to understand how those things came to be counted as dhammas, or why the understanding of them leads to that outcome. > =============== > [A:] However, the division is mental. Only mind can analyze or synthesize phenomena. > =============== J: Yes, the classification of dhammas in various ways is for instructional purposes. But dhammas themselves are not just 'mental'. According to the texts, they are phenomena that bear a unique characteristic, capable of being known by panna. > ===============> > >J:the fact that whenever the Buddha spoke of anicca-dukkha-anatta, >he did so in the context of dhammas. > >========================================================= > > [A:] Not always. Check MN13 for example: > > ""Again, it is with sensuality for the reason, sensuality for the source... that (men), taking swords & shields and buckling on bows & quivers, charge into battle massed in double array while arrows & spears are flying and swords are flashing; and there they are wounded by arrows & spears, and their heads are cut off by swords, so that they incur death or deadly pain. Now this drawback too in the case of sensuality, this mass of stress visible here & now, has sensuality for its reason, sensuality for its source, sensuality for its cause, the reason being simply sensuality." > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.013.than.html > Mass of stress = Dukkhakkhandha. > And the sutta goes in much more > =============== J: Thanks for the sutta passage. However, this does not refer to the 3 characteristics of anicca-dukkha-anatta as earlier referenced (by you). Again, we need to have a clear intellectual understanding of the significance of the 3 characterstics if they are to be directly understood. > =============== > [A:] Why can't all the teaching about corpses involve anicca? Precisely because something is made of parts, it can cease when the parts fall apart and disintegrate (dis-integrate). > =============== J: I think you're saying that only something that is not made of parts can involve 'anicca'. However, I'm not sure I get the point you're making. Would you mind giving some examples of things that are not made of parts? Thanks. Jon #120730 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:27 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" jonoabb Hi Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > > >J: As I understand the Theravada texts, 'anatta' is a >characteristic, or quality, of dhammas. It becomes known to panna >as the understanding of dhammas (insight) is developed. > >...there is no dhamma called 'anatta'. > >The same would presumably apply as regards the 3 sub-moments of >citta. > >There is no dhamma called "samsara". > >========================================================== > > The reason for my questions about "is anatta, samsara, citta rise & fall dhamma" is this: > > If something can function without be being a singular dhamma, then perhaps trees, and other conceptual objects do have a function as conglomeration of more basic rupas. Maybe trees as name + collection of many rupakalapas do exist. > =============== J: First, thanks for setting out your thinking on this. It gives a good basis for an interesting and useful discussion (unlike a one-way interrogation!:-)) Regarding the first part of your statement ("If something can function without be being a singular dhamma"), I would not see 'anatta', etc as being something that 'can function'. These are aspects of dhammas to be known by developed panna. Regarding your suggestion that the same might apply as regards trees and cars, I think this is rather speculative, by which I mean that it's not something that is suggested in the texts and there's no obvious connection between the 2 sets of terms (i.e., between anatta, etc and trees, etc). Also, it's not clear to me why we should try to make this particluar connection. Should not our interest lie with the dhammas that are so frequently and directly spoken of by the Buddha? Jon #120731 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 8:42 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Alex Thanks for the comments. I think I've covered most in the other messages just posted, so will keep this one short. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > Hello Jon, all, > ... > [A:] You've said that anatta is an aspect of dhammas. Can we say that trees, forks, cars, people etc are aspect of dhammas (as functional combination of many dhammas)? > =============== J: I don't understand the Buddha's teaching on dhammas to be, or to imply, that conventional objects are a 'functional combination of many dhammas'. The characteristic of anatta becomes known as insight into the true nature of dhammas is developed. There is no parallel to this to be drawn in respect of conventional objects. > =============== > [A:] Does samsara exist or not? If it exists, then it would mean that concepts also exist > =============== J: The idea of 'existence' does not apply as regards anatta or to samsara. > =============== > [A:] If samsara is a concept, and concepts don't have characteristic, then how can samsara ever cease? Concepts cannot cease! > =============== J: Agreed that concepts do not arise and do not cease! :-)) > =============== > [A:] Also, is samsara distinct from Nibbana? If it is distinct, then concepts can have characteristics and be distinct from something. If samsara is not distinct from nibbana, then what does it mean? > =============== J: Nibbana is a dhamma (it is the one and only unconditioned dhamma). As I said, keeping these answers brief so as to avoid repetition. Please feel free to say if I've not made myself clear. Jon PS Liking your new style of discussion. Hoping it will continue :-)) #120732 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" nilovg Dear Scott, Alex, Jon. Op 24-nov-2011, om 16:44 heeft scottduncan2 het volgende geschreven: > You note that 'seeing now is part of samsaara' but don't go far > enough to state the the only reality referred to in that statement > is seeing - samsaara is a concept, seeing is an element. ------ N: From a theoretical point of view you are correct. I would like to be reminded of the present moment and see realities under that aspect. There is seeing now, and that means that I am still in the cycle. This will help me to understand that seeing is dukkha. When wondering: what is conceptual and what not, no, this is not helpful for me personally. Let us talk about the present moment only. Let us look at Jon's post: Jon: J: Regarding that last paragraph, on further reflection I think I would like to put it a little differently, as follows: There is no dhamma called "samsara". I understand "samsara" to refer to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly, as reflected in the DO formulation (anuloma section), unless enlightenment is attained. So, as with the other expressions you have asked about, it is an aspect of dhammas that comes to be known with the development of insight. ------- N: An aspect of dhammas. In the same way as Jon stated about anattaa. There is anattaa now, while seeing, nobody can control it. -------- Nina. #120733 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:21 pm Subject: A loss. nilovg Dear Christine, Our heartfelt condoleances with the loss of your mother. I liked the sutta quote you gave , death threatening from all sides. I heard on a recording Kh Sujin referring to the Dispeller of Delusion that dying is a basis for dukkha. She said that nobody likes to think of death. I found Azita's mail very helpful: Nina. #120734 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: kamma and this moment nilovg Dear Sarah and Ken, Op 24-nov-2011, om 21:55 heeft Ken H het volgende geschreven: > None of us expects you to be a saint and unaffected by the trauma. > But we do know there will be peaceful moments when you understand > it's only conditioned dhammas, and no self. As Nina says, "Just > like now." ------ N As to just like now, not everybody is ready for this. I repeated this to Lodewijk and he is not ready for this, he started yelling and saying that this is a very cold-hearted remark. I sent him Azita's mail and perhaps this will appeal more to him. Additional explanations are needed for some, wheas others, like Sarah, understand immediately. Nina. #120735 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 9:33 pm Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism rjkjp1 Dear Ken What is your take on these quotes: > > > ""The two together: since any given states are produced without interrupting > the [cause-fruit] continuity of any given combination of conditions, the whole > expression "dependent origination" (paþicca-samuppáda) represents the middle > way, which rejects the doctrines, "He who acts is he who reaps" and "One acts > while another reaps" (S II 20), and which is the proper way described thus, "Not > insisting on local language and NOT overriding normal usage" (M III 234)."" --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert K, > > ---------- > <. . .> > > RK: There is no one to blame or be blamed but the cittas and cetasikas include cetana, and they include vipaka. > ---------- > > KH: I would prefer to say the above using the word `and' where you have used the word `but.' I don't see the world of kamma and vipaka as being half way between the world of self and the world of no self. I am sure you don't see it that way either, but what is the significance of `but' instead of `and' in your sentence? > > ----------------- > > RK: The vipaka that arises later, after akusala cittaas is of a different characteristic to that that arises after kusala citta. > ----------------- > > KH: Yes, and in either case vipaka is just a citta; there is no person who has it. > > ----------- > > RK: The visuddhimagga: > > <. . .> > > >Please let me know if all these quotes from the VM make sense. I hope they do. > ------------- > > KH: They make sense to me. They make me want to put conventional reality aside, and concentrate entirely on ultimate realities. > > Talk about Scott's doing the right thing by his neighbour, for example, seems like an unnecessary distraction. I think Scott was making that point when he named the thread `Looks like Buddhism.' > > Ken H > #120736 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 11/25/2011 2:22:03 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Back to the 'correct' conventional story - my friend is still in critical condition and we've been told she has permanent brain damage for sure. ========================== I'm so sorry, Sarah. It may well be that the damage is permanent, but there are cases of remarkable improvement (as in the circumstance of the U.S. congresswoman Gabrelle Giffords who is recovering amazingly well from an assassination attempt that put a bullet straight through one hemisphere of her brain.) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #120737 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 12:22 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "I'm not talking about anything different than the conceptual categories defined above from the Abhidhammatha Vihavani that you quoted. They all start with: 'Concepts that make known...' and the term 'right concepts simply refers to concepts that are correct about what is real, such as the concepts in Dhamma." Scott: I'd refrain from coining new terms. I'd stick to established usage, with the proviso being that these established terms ought to be understood correctly. You equate 'what is real' with 'concepts in Dhamma' and it's a slippery slope to believing everything you think about Dhamma because these concepts have to be 'real.' R: "All 'hearing, discussing and wisely considering' Dhamma is conceptual. Then when one discerns something the prior understanding -- via concepts -- becomes direct knowledge. I don't think that is a foreign idea..." Scott: I don't think this is correct. You imply a stage-theory, a step-wise process, which is simplistic - a linear, one-way system. This ignores accumulation of pa~n~naa which can only have been due to the past development of pa~n~naa. The development of pa~n~naa proceeds in relation to dhammas - to realities - and is not conceptual. Any conceptual aspect that is correct would be correct in relation to the development of pa~n~naa, which depends on dhammas not concepts. The Buddha penetrated all dhammas first before using concepts to describe them. There may be instances wherein a person encounters a conceptual aspect of the Dhamma (the teaching) hitherto unencountered in a present lifetime or any other which leads to the subsequent development of pa~n~naa in relation to a given dhamma. The 'hitherto unencountered' aspect would not be known to an individual. It may also be the case that the hearing of a portion of the Dhamma, seemingly for the 'first time' from the so-called experiential or 'conscious' sense of the individual hearing it (conceptually) who has no 'conscious' recollection of any past life, leads to the experience of a correct conceptual understanding - the ability to be correct conceptually as you are perhaps trying to say. This would still have to have some basis in the function of pa~n~naa in relation to dhammaa. Me: "Pariyatti is not reading in books. There are no entities that are partially conceptual and partially 'real' at the same time. The above are all concepts." R: "Agreed. Still, all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual. There are either concepts understood that reflect reality or ones that don't." Scott: We are not 'agreed.' If we were you'd have not needed the clause beginning with 'still.' I said that pariyatti is not reading in books and then you agree and say that 'all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual.' I don't agree that 'all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual.' It is 'hearing the Dhamma' that is a condition for pa~n~naa, true, but this 'hearing the Dhamma' doesn't equate at all with the statement 'all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual.' Me: "Conventional speech is only about ultimate realities." R: "Is this what you meant to say? Doesn't make sense." Scott: Ask Alex then. He'll set you straight and tell you that trees and samsaara are real. R: "...Is a concept useful in understanding realities; does it point in the right direct towards discerning realities, etc. The concept of 'dhammas arising' and 'anatta' if understood correctly are concepts that lead towards correct understanding. That is all I mean to suggest." Scott: No. Your idea of 'useful' is wrong. Concepts cannot be used. Who uses them? A concept is a concept. It either refers to a reality or to that which is not real. R: "Well my understanding of pariyatti is that it is understanding realities not yet directly discerned..." Scott: No, pariyatti is not an intellectual process. It may refer to less-developed pa~n~naa of a mundane (lokiya) - i.e. not lokuttara - but still in relation to realities and not concepts. These two differ and are not to be literally bridged, as I believe you, like Alex, are attempting to do - at least conceptually. I think this attempt is in order to establish a link to 'deliberate practice' as previously discussed (and *not* to be rehashed, thank you very much). Scott. #120738 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 12:51 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Dear Jon, Regarding: J: "...There is no dhamma called 'samsara'. I would understand 'samsara' to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO formulation)...I would like to put it a little differently, as follows: There is no dhamma called 'samsara'. I understand 'samsara' to refer to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly, as reflected in the DO formulation (anuloma section), unless enlightenment is attained. So, as with the other expressions you have asked about, it is an aspect of dhammas that comes to be known with the development of insight." Scott: I'd take care here. Are you retracting your view that samsaara is a concept? If so, it's not clear why. If not, it would be good to reiterate that the designation 'samsaara' is a concept. An 'aspect of dhammas' (with dhammas being plural) is a bit problematic. By 'aspect' do you mean 'characteristic?' I'd think not. One, 'characteristic' is in relation to a single dhamma. Two, it is in the nature of dhammas to arise conascently and to condition the arising of the next dhammas by falling away; but this is about a 'process' or a 'stream' and these ideas are concepts. It may be *in the nature* of dhammas (plural, read 'process' or 'continuity') to function within these parameters but this is different from what I think to be true about 'samsaara': a term denoting a 'continuity' hence a concept. Can you clarify? Scott. #120739 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:48 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Jon and Alex, From The Expositor (p. 13): "...Now to understand the depth of the Abhidhamma, it must be understood that there are four oceans: the ocean of repeated births, the ocean of waters, the ocean of method, and the ocean of knowledge. Of these, ...'The unbroken line of organs, elements, And aggregates - sa.msaara is its name.' This is the ocean of repeated births. Inasmuch as the ultimate start in birth of these beings is not apparent - whether it was a hundred or a thousand, or a hundred thousand years, or a hundred or a thousand or a hundred thousand cosmic periods ago prior to which they were not, or whether they were born in the time of a certain king or a certain Buddha - prior to which they were not, no limit can be set. 'The ultimate starting point, bhikkhus, of ignorance before which it did not exist, but after which it came into being is not revealed,' (S ii 178, iii 149)..." Scott. #120740 From: "connie" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 2:30 am Subject: kamma and this moment nichiconn Dear Sarah, Thank you for sharing your own hospital blanket. While I hope I'd never wish your nightmarish story on anyone, I'll be the first to take advantage of it to wiggle out of having to write my own post on "the reminder on the hospital blanket tags" from when my mom was in the hospital earlier this year. I really doubt the manufacturer meant to be prompting moments of considering "what's real now" / just visible object, etc when I’d be lost in storylands instead... or imagined that image would still pop into my head at odd moments after all this time. I hope Dhamma reminders will still pop into your friend's. best wishes, connie Occasionally a doctor would call me in to give me an update and to tell me to prepare for the worst. I also had to answer endless questions from police, medical personnel, lifeguards and others as I sat shivering in my bathing suit but with a blanket I was given. But none of that matters...... life is very, very short - just this moment. #120741 From: "glenjohnann" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 2:55 am Subject: Re: Knowing vipaka from kamma (transcript, kalkutta.2, India 2004) glenjohnann Dear Nina (and Dieter) Just making sure I understand here: -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > I quote from my study: < In the context of the Dependent > Origination: with consciousness as condition, mentality-materiality', > mentality or naama is here the khandhas of feeling, of sa~n~naa and > of formations. These khandhas include all cetasikas. > > We have to keep in mind that these cetasikas are vipaaka, including > volition. > ------ You say that in the context of DO, the cetaskias referred to are vipaaka. Is this because they arise with vipaaka citta (seeing, hearing etc,)? I am surprised that cetasna (volition) is part of this? Perhaps I am incorrect, but I thought that cetanna arose only with javanna cittas. Ann #120742 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Knowing vipaka from kamma (transcript, kalkutta.2, India 2004) moellerdieter Dear Ann and Nina, you wrote ( N: I quote from my study: < In the context of the Dependent > Origination: with consciousness as condition, mentality-materiality', > mentality or naama is here the khandhas of feeling, of sa~n~naa and > of formations. These khandhas include all cetasikas. > > We have to keep in mind that these cetasikas are vipaaka, including > volition. > ------ You say that in the context of DO, the cetaskias referred to are vipaaka. Is this because they arise with vipaaka citta (seeing, hearing etc,)? I am surprised that cetasna (volition) is part of this? Perhaps I am incorrect, but I thought that cetanna arose only with javanna cittas. D: good question, Ann! I had to look for javana citta first ;-) : ( Nina in 'wisdom libary' :When we like what we see there are javana-cittas which are lobha-mula-cittas (cittas rooted in attachment) and these may be accompanied by pleasant feeling or by indifferent feeling.) as I understand D.O. , old kamma (vipaka)and new kamma meets( future vipaka), i.e. old kamma = what we see (vipaka citta) and new kamma ,what arises due to the seen ( the choice , the like, i.e. the cetasikas of mental formation ), In such way Vipaka citta associates with javana citta, doesn't it? This may fit to S.N. 35, 145 Monks, I will teach you about new kamma and old kamma, about the ceasing of kamma and the path that leads to the ceasing of kamma. Listen well, pay close attention and I will speak. "What, monks, is old kamma?"The eye [ear, nose tongue, body (touch), mind],[1] monks, is to be regarded as old kamma, brought into existence and created by volition,[2] forming a basis for feeling.[3] This, monks, is called 'old kamma.'"And what, monks, is new kamma? "The action[4] one performs now by body, speech and mind. This monks, is called 'new kamma.'"When, monks, by ceasing actions of body, speech and mind, one touches liberation,[5] this, monks, is called 'the ceasing of kamma.' "And what, monks, is the path that leads to the ceasing of kamma? "It is the Noble Eightfold Path Now , that is my version and not necessarily shared by Nina , but I would appreciate an explanation fitting to above extract. with Metta Dieter #120743 From: A T Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 5:01 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" truth_aerator Hello Jon, Thank you for all your replies. The thing is that if we accept samsara to exist even though it is not a singular dhamma, then by the same logic we would have to accept trees and other conceptual objects based on functional conglomeration of dhammas to exist in some way. If trees, etc, didn't exist at all, then we would not be talking about them in the first place and it would be impossible to run into one (even if running into a tree would be a certain type of dhamma processess happening. It still occurs, you can try it out if you want. But I don't recommend it). With best wishes, Alex #120744 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 7:49 am Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Robert K, ----- > RK: What is your take on these quotes: ""The two together: since any given states are produced without interrupting > the [cause-fruit] continuity of any given combination of conditions, the whole > expression "dependent origination" (paþicca-samuppáda) represents the middle > way, which rejects the doctrines, "He who acts is he who reaps" and "One acts > while another reaps" (S II 20), and which is the proper way described thus, "Not > insisting on local language and NOT overriding normal usage" (M III 234)."" ----- KH: I am baffled by the wording of the first quote. The only part of it I do understand is the part that says the middle way rejects two doctrines. Both of those doctrines represent atta belief – one eternity based and the other annihilation. Had the two doctrines been referring to dhammas rather than to atta, both of them would have been correct in their ways. The first would have been saying mere dhammas acted and mere dhammas reaped. The second would have been saying the dhamma that acted was not the dhamma that reaped. The second quote is also a bit unclear to me, but I assume it to be saying the middle way is *unconnected* with the conventionally known world. The middle way has absolutely no relevance to concepts, neither affirming nor denying their conventional validity. What's your take on those quotes? Ken H #120745 From: "colette_aube" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 3:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! colette_aube Hi Sarah, What is all this about? What has happened to you since I have been away? Could you point me to the message number where I can begin catching up on this major point of focus that people have had. I would believe that there are a lot of PEARLS OF WISDOM from readers and from the Dharma, held in this string during this moment of STRESS for you and the readers here. I hope everything is okay now and that you are not in any danger or ill health (ill health is only worthy of confirmed REPUBLICANS here in the USA since the phallic worshipper of the Republicans, with his big "woodie", dictate to THE HOUSE OF ILL REPUTE, ruled over by a Boner). toodles colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Dear Friends, > > Thank you for all your kind messages - I look forward to replying to them individually and reflecting on the helpful Dhamma points together next week when I have more time. I've appreciated them all a lot, including all the regular discussions. Last night I told Jon the only thing I felt like was listening to him reading out all the posts and reflecting on the Dhamma. <....> #120746 From: "philip" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 10:05 am Subject: ORe: Dhamma Discussion in Bhutan, no 7. philofillet Dear all I think the following is a wonderful appreciation of the depth of Dhamma, even something which seems so commonplace as seeing, without the Buddha we wouldn't understand it at all, we would believe we can choose what to see. Maybe we still do? > Khun Sujin: Nobody can condition seeing, it is conditioned by many > factors. Without the previous moment there can never be seeing. When > the object is pleasant who could condition seeing to experience that? > It is past kusala kamma. When it is not the right time for kusala > vipaaka that person cannot see a pleasant object. Many conditions are > necessary for the arising of any reality in split seconds. Each > reality is conditioned by more than one factor. Thus, one comes to > understand the Buddha's wisdom and compassion to teach others to > understand reality. Some people have accumulated confidence, saddhaa > and pa~n~naa so that they see the value of the understanding of the > teachings. Understanding can eliminate attachment to all objects > which are experienced through the six doorways. Attachment arises all > the time, so fast, without one knowing it. > > The idea of "I will do something to gain nibbaana" is useless. > There is no "person" who experiences nibbaana. Only the highly > developed pa~n~naa which can understand realities at any time will be > able to experience nibbaana. Listening and considering the Dhamma can > be a condition for direct awareness. Seeing at this moment is not the > previous moment and when the next moment arises this moment is past > again. > > It is precious to understand the depth of the teachings. When one > understands the teachings one sees the Buddha. Otherwise one just > sees the statue of the Buddha. The teachings are not the statue. Each > word of the teachings is truth, such as the word dhamma. > > (conclusion) > > ****** > > Nina. > > > > > > #120747 From: "Christine" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 11:33 am Subject: Re: A loss. christine_fo... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Christine, > > Our heartfelt condoleances with the loss of your mother. I liked the > sutta quote you gave , death threatening from all sides. I heard on a > recording Kh Sujin referring to the Dispeller of Delusion that dying > is a basis for dukkha. She said that nobody likes to think of death. > I found Azita's mail very helpful: medicine' over and over again, can we see that 'our lives' are only > momentary arisings and fallings, wonderful times, terrible times here > and gone so briefly. We feel dosa because there are conditions for it > to arise, not me, not mine, not myself.> > > Nina. > > > > Thank you Nina - the Dhamma Teachings have been a great support to me. with metta Chris #120748 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:58 am Subject: The inevitably Decay... bhikkhu5 Friends: All is by Nature inherently & inevitably Decaying & Vanishing! At Savatthi the Blessed Buddha said: Bhikkhus, All is by nature subject to birth... All is by nature subject to ageing... All is by nature subject to decay & sickness... All is by nature subject to death... All is by nature subject to trouble... All is by nature subject to corruption... All is by nature subject to destruction... All is by nature subject to vanishing... All that is by nature subject to emergence, is also by nature subject to ceasing... And what, Bhikkhus, is this All, that is by nature subject to birth, ageing, decay, sickness, death, trouble, corruption, destruction, vanishing, ever arising & ceasing ? The Eye ... Forms ... Eye-consciousness ... Eye-contact... Whatever feeling arised caused by eye-contact, that is by nature subject to ever arising and ceasing... The Ear ... Sounds ... Auditory-consciousness ... Ear-contact... The Nose ... Smells ... Olfactory-consciousness ... Nose-contact... The Tongue ... Tastes ... Gustatory-consciousness ... Tongue-contact... The Body ... Touches ... Tactile-consciousness ... Body-contact... The Mind ... Thoughts ... Mental-consciousness ... Mind-contact... & whatever feeling arised caused any contact, that is by nature subject to ever arising and ceasing... Understanding this, the intelligent noble disciple becomes disgusted with this All ... Being thus disgusted produces disillusion... This disillusion induces a mental release! When detached, the mind remains unagitated! Being utterly imperturbable one attains Awakening right there & then instantly understands: This mind is irreversibly freed! Repeated rebirth is ended, this Noble Life is completed, done is what should be done, there is no state beyond, ever after or even surpassing this ... <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta NikÄya. Book IV 27-28 The 6 senses section 35. Thread on Birth: JÄti Sutta (33-4) http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄhita _/\_ * <...> #120749 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:50 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > R: "Agreed. Still, all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual. There are either concepts understood that reflect reality or ones that don't." > > Scott: We are not 'agreed.' If we were you'd have not needed the clause beginning with 'still.' I said that pariyatti is not reading in books and then you agree and say that 'all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual.' I don't agree that 'all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual.' It is 'hearing the Dhamma' that is a condition for pa~n~naa, true, but this 'hearing the Dhamma' doesn't equate at all with the statement 'all Dhamma learning is originally conceptual.' What does it equate with? Isn't hearing Dhamma conceptual, leaving aside the actual dhammas of hearing, etc., which I don't think you're claiming are what the "hearing of Dhamma" is meant to signify? > Me: "Conventional speech is only about ultimate realities." > > R: "Is this what you meant to say? Doesn't make sense." > > Scott: Ask Alex then. He'll set you straight and tell you that trees and samsaara are real. I still don't understand what that statement means. If you don't want to explain it, well, whatever... > R: "...Is a concept useful in understanding realities; does it point in the right direct towards discerning realities, etc. The concept of 'dhammas arising' and 'anatta' if understood correctly are concepts that lead towards correct understanding. That is all I mean to suggest." > > Scott: No. Your idea of 'useful' is wrong. Concepts cannot be used. Who uses them? A concept is a concept. It either refers to a reality or to that which is not real. That's what I said; you're rephrasing me without any difference, nitpicking like a mad monkey. "It either refers to a reality or to that which is not real" is exactly what I've said 7 different ways to try to communicate to you, but you're paranoid and convinced that I'm up to something else... Well, so be it. Keep an eye on me, because of course I'm not to be trusted... You know, if you said to me "Mustard is not ketchup," and I said, "No! That is not correct! Mustard and ketchup are both condiments but they are not the same thing!" you would think I was stupid wouldn't you? Oh well... > R: "Well my understanding of pariyatti is that it is understanding realities not yet directly discerned..." > > Scott: No, pariyatti is not an intellectual process. It may refer to less-developed pa~n~naa of a mundane (lokiya) - i.e. not lokuttara - but still in relation to realities and not concepts. So, just explain to me what this means so I can get it clear. I've read and heard about pariyatti many times now, but I keep getting two contradictory messages about it. One is that it is correct conceptual understanding in relation to present dhammas. In other words, we can talk about what the reality of the moment consists of, even though we don't discern them directly right now, which would be patipatti. The other is that pariyatti is not conceptual understanding at all, but is "lesser panna" of direct discernment. I don't understand what the latter means. In that case pariyatti is weak patipatti, but not really a different type of knowing. Is it direct but cloudy? Is it delayed but accurate? Is it nimitta? What is the diff. between pariyatti and patipatti in that case? > These two differ and are not to be literally bridged, as I believe you, like Alex, are attempting to do - at least conceptually. I never said or implied that pariyatti was "in relation" to concepts, ie, "about houses, trees and people." I said that it was a "correct conceptual understanding of dhammas." So please don't put incorrect words in my mouth that make a false case against me, thank you much. By the way, as convenient as it might be to think of us all together as one idiotic group, I am not Alex or Howard, and my views though they may coincidentally remind you of someone else's may be taken on their own merits, and for what they actually say. > I think this attempt is in order to establish a link to 'deliberate practice' as previously discussed (and *not* to be rehashed, thank you very much). I'm sure you do think that, since you are a paranoid Abhidhammika who thinks the meditators are "out to get you," but trust me, I am actually talking about this topic in its own right, in order to understand it. Don't let your accumulated conceptual framework of the past unduly influence the present discussion. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120750 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 5:24 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Rob E (and Scott) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Scott. > ... > > [S:] The question being asked seems simply to be, 'Am I right in the way I think about this?' > > [RE:] That is the gist of it. Is a concept useful in understanding realities; does it point in the right direct towards discerning realities, etc. The concept of "dhammas arising" and "anatta" if understood correctly are concepts that lead towards correct understanding. That is all I mean to suggest. > =============== J: You pose the question: "Is a concept useful in understanding realities; does it point in the right direction towards discerning realities, etc.?" I think the short answer is, "No". As I see it, it's the (accumulated/developed) understanding of realities, and hearing more about the teachings, that leads towards further discernment of the way things are. (It goes without saying that concepts are indispensable to this, but their role has nothing to do with pointing.) Regarding your statement, "The concept of "dhammas arising" and "anatta" if understood correctly are concepts that lead towards correct understanding", I think the same applies. I would say it's the correct (accumulated/developed) understanding that leads towards the (further) development of correct understanding. If you are alluding to the fact that the further development of understanding at the experiential level must be preceded by an understanding at the intellectual (conceptual) level, then fine but I wouldn't see the expression "right concept" as being a particularly apt label for such an idea, since it carries the implication of some meaning lying within the expression/thought. Just my thoughts. Jon #120751 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Nov 26, 2011 5:37 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > If you are alluding to the fact that the further development of understanding at the experiential level must be preceded by an understanding at the intellectual (conceptual) level, then fine Well, I guess the question is, how does that conceptual/intellecutal understanding "precede" the "further development of understanding at the experiential level?" That's what I really think is pertinent. I may be saying it the wrong way, but that implies that the experiential understanding is somehow based on the intellectual understanding, so it must play some role. What role does it play, and how does this lead to further development? >...but I wouldn't see the expression "right concept" as being a particularly apt label for such an idea, since it carries the implication of some meaning lying within the expression/thought. Well what is it about a conceptual understanding that is "intellectually correct" that leads to direct discernment? Is it not something of the content involved, which would be "within the expression/thought," as you put it? If I understand intellectually to whatever extent that "a single citta arises and then completely falls away," isn't it that 'thought-content' that allows me to recognize cittas arising and falling away at whatever point the accumulations and conditions allow that? It seems that quite a few people -- well, at least you and Scott -- balk at the idea that the correct intellectual formulation, which I called "right concept" for short [given my understanding that part of right view was correct conceptual understanding,] "paves the way," or "points in the right direction," or somehow clears the stage for direct discernment, but if that is not the correct way to look at it, then what *does* correct intellectual understanding of Dhamma do on the path? If hearing Dhamma, and "wise consideration" of Dhamma, and correct understanding of Dhamma, do lead to direct discernment, what is their role? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120752 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] kamma and this moment, just like now! nilovg Dear Colette, read message: 120675 kamma and this moment kamma and this moment sarah abbott sarahprocter... Nov 24, 2011 8:38 am Nina. Op 25-nov-2011, om 17:28 heeft colette_aube het volgende geschreven: > Hi Sarah, > > What is all this about? What has happened to you since I have been > away? #120753 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Knowing vipaka from kamma . nilovg Dear Ann, Op 25-nov-2011, om 16:55 heeft glenjohnann het volgende geschreven: > Just making sure I understand here: > > -- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom > wrote: > > > I quote from my study: < In the context of the Dependent > > Origination: with consciousness as condition, mentality- > materiality', > > mentality or naama is here the khandhas of feeling, of sa~n~naa and > > of formations. These khandhas include all cetasikas. > > > We have to keep in mind that these cetasikas are vipaaka, including > > volition. > > ------ > > You say that in the context of DO, the cetaskias referred to are > vipaaka. Is this because they arise with vipaaka citta (seeing, > hearing etc,)? > --------- N: Vipaakacitta which is produced by kamma as rebirth-consciousness and as vipaakacitta arising in the course of life, conditions the accompanying cetasikas by way of conascence-condition. These cetasikas are also vipaaka. In order to understand D.O. we also have to know about the different types of conditions. ----- A: > I am surprised that cetana (volition) is part of this? Perhaps I am > incorrect, but I thought that cetana arose only with javana cittas. > ------ N: Cetanaa is a universal, it accompanies each citta. It's task is coordinating the tasks of the accompanying dhammas and when it accompanies kusala citta and akusala citta it 'wills' kusala and akusala. Then it has a double task like a chief carpenter: overseeing the work of the accompanying cetasikas and doing its own task. ------ Nina. > #120754 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:12 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Knowing vipaka from kamma (transcript, kalkutta.2, India 2004) nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 25-nov-2011, om 18:33 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > > D: good question, Ann! > I had to look for javana citta first ;-) : ( Nina in 'wisdom > libary' :When we like what we see there are javana-cittas which are > lobha-mula-cittas (cittas rooted in attachment) and these may be > accompanied by pleasant feeling or by indifferent feeling.) > > as I understand D.O. , old kamma (vipaka)and new kamma meets > ( future vipaka), i.e. old kamma = what we see (vipaka citta) and > new kamma ,what arises due to the seen ( the choice , the like, > i.e. the cetasikas of mental formation ), In such way Vipaka citta > associates with javana citta, doesn't it? > -------- N: I would not use the word associate, since there is only one citta at a time. Moreover: vipaaka is the result of kamma, old kamma or new kamma. You write: new kamma, what arises due to the seen. Perhaps you are thinking here of the triple round: seeing is vipaaka and on account of it defilements arise and these can motivate kamma again, and this kamma produces again vipaaka, then defilements again, and so it goes on and on. The triple round spin forever as explained in the Visuddhimagga. Like a vicious circle, and it occurs also now. ------- > > This may fit to S.N. 35, 145 > Monks, I will teach you about new kamma and old kamma, about the > ceasing of kamma and the path that leads to the ceasing of kamma. > Listen well, pay close attention and I will speak. > "What, monks, is old kamma?"The eye [ear, nose tongue, body > (touch), mind],[1] monks, is to be regarded as old kamma, brought > into existence and created by volition,[2] forming a basis for > feeling.[3] This, monks, is called 'old kamma.'"And what, monks, is > new kamma? > > "The action[4] one performs now by body, speech and mind. This > monks, is called 'new kamma.'"When, monks, by ceasing actions of > body, speech and mind, one touches liberation,[5] this, monks, is > called 'the ceasing of kamma.' "And what, monks, is the path that > leads to the ceasing of kamma? "It is the Noble Eightfold Path > > Now , that is my version and not necessarily shared by Nina , but I > would appreciate an explanation fitting to above extract. > ------ N: The Buddha had many different ways to explain being in the cycle and being freed from the cycle. All such texts should not 'stay in the book', but they are to be applied to our life just now. Otherwise our studying and reading would be useless. ------- Nina. > #120755 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:24 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Scott --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > Regarding: > > J: "...There is no dhamma called 'samsara'. I would understand 'samsara' to be a concept, referring to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly unless enlightenment is attained (this scenario being reflected in the DO formulation)...I would like to put it a little differently, as follows: There is no dhamma called 'samsara'. I understand 'samsara' to refer to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly, as reflected in the DO formulation (anuloma section), unless enlightenment is attained. So, as with the other expressions you have asked about, it is an aspect of dhammas that comes to be known with the development of insight." > > Scott: I'd take care here. Are you retracting your view that samsaara is a concept? > =============== J: I think I am. On this basis. Anything that comes to be known by panna during the development of the understanding of dhammas is not to be classified as a concept. It is an aspect of the way things truly are. Included here would be, for example, the 3 characteristics of dhammas, the law of kamma, DO and conditions generally (and samsara). > =============== > Scott: If so, it's not clear why. If not, it would be good to reiterate that the designation 'samsaara' is a concept. An 'aspect of dhammas' (with dhammas being plural) is a bit problematic. By 'aspect' do you mean 'characteristic?' I'd think not. > > One, 'characteristic' is in relation to a single dhamma. Two, it is in the nature of dhammas to arise conascently and to condition the arising of the next dhammas by falling away; but this is about a 'process' or a 'stream' and these ideas are concepts. It may be *in the nature* of dhammas (plural, read 'process' or 'continuity') to function within these parameters but this is different from what I think to be true about 'samsaara': a term denoting a 'continuity' hence a concept. > =============== J: Agreed that 'process' and 'continuity' are concepts but, for reasons given above, I don't see that as the whole picture here. I understand 'samsaara' to denote a direct understanding of the fact that the conditions for future rebirth are being accumulated all the while except when and to the extent that satipatthana/insight is being developed. This understanding is 'direct', I believe, in that it comes to be through the development of awareness/insight into the true nature of (individual) dhammas. > =============== > Can you clarify? > =============== J: Hoping I've managed to do that. Jon #120756 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:39 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Scott Many thanks for the passage from The Expositor. Very pertinent. I like the 'ocean of repeated births'. Very sobering! I notice that the verse is the same as that quoted by RobK from the Vism (the reference for that, btw, is Ch. XVII, 115). Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Jon and Alex, > > From The Expositor (p. 13): > > "...Now to understand the depth of the Abhidhamma, it must be understood that there are four oceans: the ocean of repeated births, the ocean of waters, the ocean of method, and the ocean of knowledge. Of these, > > ...'The unbroken line of organs, elements, > And aggregates - sa.msaara is its name.' > > This is the ocean of repeated births. Inasmuch as the ultimate start in birth of these beings is not apparent - whether it was a hundred or a thousand, or a hundred thousand years, or a hundred or a thousand or a hundred thousand cosmic periods ago prior to which they were not, or whether they were born in the time of a certain king or a certain Buddha - prior to which they were not, no limit can be set. 'The ultimate starting point, bhikkhus, of ignorance before which it did not exist, but after which it came into being is not revealed,' (S ii 178, iii 149)..." > > Scott. > #120757 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 1:55 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" jonoabb Hi Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > Hello Jon, > > Thank you for all your replies. The thing is that if we accept samsara to exist even though it is not a singular dhamma, then by the same logic we would have to accept trees and other conceptual objects based on functional conglomeration of dhammas to exist in some way. > =============== J: To my understanding, samsaara is not something that 'exists'. Samsaara connotes the fact that there is no end to continued rebirth, other than the escape taught by the Buddha (and when we talk about escaping *from* samsaara, that is a reference to escape from a state of affairs rather than to escape from a place that 'exists'). > =============== If trees, etc, didn't exist at all, then we would not be talking about them in the first place and it would be impossible to run into one (even if running into a tree would be a certain type of dhamma processess happening. It still occurs, you can try it out if you want. But I don't recommend it). > =============== J: Trees do exist in the conventional sense of the word. However, in the world of dhammas spoken of by the Buddha, the situation is otherwise: there is no dhamma called 'tree'. In the teachings, it is the world of dhammas that is to be fully understood, rather than the world of conventional objects. Knowledge of the latter, even if highly developed, does not lead to escape from samsaara. Jon #120758 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:11 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi RobE --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > If you are alluding to the fact that the further development of understanding at the experiential level must be preceded by an understanding at the intellectual (conceptual) level, then fine > > [RE:] Well, I guess the question is, how does that conceptual/intellecutal understanding "precede" the "further development of understanding at the experiential level?" That's what I really think is pertinent. I may be saying it the wrong way, but that implies that the experiential understanding is somehow based on the intellectual understanding, so it must play some role. What role does it play, and how does this lead to further development? > =============== J: Yes, the experiential understanding grows out of (is a development of) the intellectual understanding. For example, there could not be awareness of a dhamma without there first being a correct intellectual understanding of what dhammas are what awareness is, why an understanding of dhammas is important, and so on. But given that correct intellectual understanding, and an appreciation of the significance of the present moment, awareness may arise. > =============== > [RE:] Well what is it about a conceptual understanding that is "intellectually correct" that leads to direct discernment? Is it not something of the content involved, which would be "within the expression/thought," as you put it? If I understand intellectually to whatever extent that "a single citta arises and then completely falls away," isn't it that 'thought-content' that allows me to recognize cittas arising and falling away at whatever point the accumulations and conditions allow that? > =============== J: Perhaps the term 'right conceptualising' would be better than 'right concepts' :-)). In other words, it's the thinking with understanding, rather than the objects of such thinking, that are relevant. > =============== > [RE:] If hearing Dhamma, and "wise consideration" of Dhamma, and correct understanding of Dhamma, do lead to direct discernment, what is their role? > =============== J: Their role is to awaken us to the world of dhammas. Jon #120759 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 2:54 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Dear Jon, Regarding: J: "...There is no dhamma called 'samsara'. I understand 'samsara' to refer to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly, as reflected in the DO formulation (anuloma section), unless enlightenment is attained. So, as with the other expressions you have asked about, it is an aspect of dhammas that comes to be known with the development of insight." And: J: "I think I am. On this basis. Anything that comes to be known by panna during the development of the understanding of dhammas is not to be classified as a concept. It is an aspect of the way things truly are." Scott: Okay. We agree that the *designation* 'samsaara' is a concept - at least I think we agree. You show that the realities being referred to by the designation 'samsaara' are those which contribute to 'the fact that rebirth continues endlessly...until enlightenment is attained.' You note that it is pa~n~naa that comes to know 'the fact that rebirth continues endlessly. J: "Included here would be, for example, the 3 characteristics of dhammas, the law of kamma, DO and conditions generally (and samsara)." Scott: To clarify then: Each of these 'aspects' can only be known by pa~n~naa in the course of pa~n~naa having dhammas as objects; and this because these 'higher-order aspects' (my coinage; not meant to be a new term) are real aspects of dhammas. J: "...I understand 'samsaara' to denote a direct understanding of the fact that the conditions for future rebirth are being accumulated all the while except when and to the extent that satipatthana/insight is being developed." Scott: I take it that 'the fact' is not the object of direct understanding but rather the objects would be the dhammas and the conditions that are specific to the arising of 'future rebirth' - since this 'event' involves specific dhammas under specific conditions (and is designated 'rebirth'). This then, if I'm following you, would be akin to developed pa~n~naa knowing, for example, 'rise and fall.' The designation 'rise and fall,' as the designation 'samsaara,' referring to dhammas and conditions and conditioning forces relevant to, as you say, certain aspects of dhammas in their natural course. In this way one speaks of 'the Path' since the Path is meant to denote the functional series of specific dhammas which, in a naturally conditioned 'process' lead out of samsaara. J: "This understanding is 'direct', I believe, in that it comes to be through the development of awareness/insight into the true nature of (individual) dhammas." Scott: Again, much like direct understanding of, say, 'rise and fall' which is another aspect of the 'true nature of (individual) dhammas.' What about this one: Samsaara is to tree as one specific aspect of the true nature of (individual) dhammas is to another. Scott. #120760 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:04 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Jon, J: "...I like the 'ocean of repeated births'..." Scott: Me too. J: "I notice that the verse is the same as that quoted by RobK from the Vism (the reference for that, btw, is Ch. XVII, 115)." Scott: Yes. Note: "The endless chain of aggregates, Of elements, of bases too..." Scott: Compared to: "...'The unbroken line of organs, elements, And aggregates..." Scott: I'd been looking into the Paa.li to find out what on earth 'organs' was a translation of. "...''Khandhaana~nca pa.tipaa.ti, dhaatuaayatanaana ca;..." Scott: It's 'ayatanaa' so 'bases' so much clearer that 'organs.' I see that 'unbroken line' and 'endless chain' seems to be 'pa.tipaa.ti.' Scott. #120761 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:11 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: Perhaps the term 'right conceptualising' would be better than 'right concepts' :-)). In other words, it's the thinking with understanding, rather than the objects of such thinking, that are relevant. This is a little bit thorny for me. If I am thinking with "right understanding," and the concept that is the object of thinking is the idea that "dhammas arise for a single moment and then fall away completely, one at a time," isn't the concept relevant, not just the right understanding? If I have right understanding of an irrelevant concept, let's say that "if I cross the street I may get hit by a car," that is not going to set any groundwork for direct understanding of realities. It is the concept that is rightly understood *about dhammas* that makes it a concept that creates right understanding for dhammas, is that not correct? So it seems to me that the content of the concept, ie, the "object of correct understanding" is equally relevant. Just to state it again for clarity, it seems to me that one must have a correct concept and correct thinking or correct understanding of that concept in order to have "right understanding," or "right conceptualizing." Is that not correct? Most of the Dhamma in written form, such as suttas and Abhidhamma, are indeed collections of concepts, which become objects of misunderstanding or objects of correct understanding, ie, objects of thinking. If the concepts, the objects of thinking, were irrelevant, the Dhamma wouldn't be necessary or helpful to developing understanding. Have I somehow misunderstood what you were getting at? > > =============== > > [RE:] If hearing Dhamma, and "wise consideration" of Dhamma, and correct understanding of Dhamma, do lead to direct discernment, what is their role? > > =============== > > J: Their role is to awaken us to the world of dhammas. Thank you, that is clear and helpful. And nicely put. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #120762 From: "Ken H" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:27 am Subject: Re: Looks like Buddhism kenhowardau Hi Scott (Phil and Sarah), ---------- <. . .> > S: A conventionally expressed narrative can refer to realities - just consider the suttas. ---------- KH: Yes, exactly, I am glad to hear you say that. The suttas describe the world of presently arisen conditioned dhammas. They do not describe the world of concepts. It is so easy to forget that! And so we find ourselves thinking the suttas describe two parallel worlds. They don't. There is only one world, so why would the suttas describe two? Of course, this is nothing new to DSG. It is the same thing we discuss every day.(And forget every day.) Remember, for example, when Phil was experiencing extramarital temptations and insisted we teach him ordinary, conventionally morality instead of talking about anatta. Eventually Sarah agreed and said, "Don't do it, Phil!" but that was as a last resort. :-) ----------------------- > S: Study of dhammas now is not in my control, right? Thoughts about actions are way too diffuse to be of much use. We do differ on various things, we 'no-controllers.' I say, 'so what' to that except that I like to discuss stuff anyway because I'm deprived socially. Ha ha. I guess I'm a 'no-controller' who like to engage in fun, erudite discussion until I'm out of patience with it. ---------------------- KH: And at the same time you do no such thing. There is no `you' so how could you do, or be, anything? If you like, you can tell me which dhammas might be described as "liking to engage in fun, erudite discussion" but why would you single-out those particular dhammas for discussion? Is it because they remind you of `you'? :-) Ken H PS: Please notice, both eyes open; I wouldn't dare wink! :-) #120763 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:30 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > Regarding: > > J: "...There is no dhamma called 'samsara'. I understand 'samsara' to refer to the fact that rebirth continues endlessly, as reflected in the DO formulation (anuloma section), unless enlightenment is attained. So, as with the other expressions you have asked about, it is an aspect of dhammas that comes to be known with the development of insight." > > And: > > J: "I think I am. On this basis. Anything that comes to be known by panna during the development of the understanding of dhammas is not to be classified as a concept. It is an aspect of the way things truly are." > > Scott: Okay. We agree that the *designation* 'samsaara' is a concept - at least I think we agree. You show that the realities being referred to by the designation 'samsaara' are those which contribute to 'the fact that rebirth continues endlessly...until enlightenment is attained.' You note that it is pa~n~naa that comes to know 'the fact that rebirth continues endlessly. > > J: "Included here would be, for example, the 3 characteristics of dhammas, the law of kamma, DO and conditions generally (and samsara)." > > Scott: To clarify then: Each of these 'aspects' can only be known by pa~n~naa in the course of pa~n~naa having dhammas as objects; and this because these 'higher-order aspects' (my coinage; not meant to be a new term) are real aspects of dhammas. > > J: "...I understand 'samsaara' to denote a direct understanding of the fact that the conditions for future rebirth are being accumulated all the while except when and to the extent that satipatthana/insight is being developed." > > Scott: I take it that 'the fact' is not the object of direct understanding but rather the objects would be the dhammas and the conditions that are specific to the arising of 'future rebirth' - since this 'event' involves specific dhammas under specific conditions (and is designated 'rebirth'). This then, if I'm following you, would be akin to developed pa~n~naa knowing, for example, 'rise and fall.' The designation 'rise and fall,' as the designation 'samsaara,' referring to dhammas and conditions and conditioning forces relevant to, as you say, certain aspects of dhammas in their natural course. > > In this way one speaks of 'the Path' since the Path is meant to denote the functional series of specific dhammas which, in a naturally conditioned 'process' lead out of samsaara. Jumping in, if you don't mind. Seems like the understanding of samsara and Path and such, as general constructs that have a number of aspects, is necessarily conceptual but that it is based on direct knowing of the dhammas that are involved. I would expect the arahat to be able to move back and forth between direct knowing of the objects involved in a "process," and the correct intellectual understanding of how all those dhammas involved create the "process." Would that seem correct to you? Some of what you are saying about the difference between knowing a property of dhammas, such as "rise and fall," and what we call it, is also very interesting. If citta knows "rise and fall," I assume that a different citta will know "fall" from the one that experiences "rise," and that there is some form of concept to put those together to understand that "dhammas rise and fall," or even that "this present dhamma rises and falls." Do you see this sort of going back and forth between direct experience and a correct conceptual understanding as being the way that understanding works? Or am I off-base? And is panna present for both processes, or only for the non-conceptual aspect? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #120764 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:38 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > One, 'characteristic' is in relation to a single dhamma. Two, it is in the nature of dhammas to arise conascently and to condition the arising of the next dhammas by falling away; but this is about a 'process' or a 'stream' and these ideas are concepts. It may be *in the nature* of dhammas (plural, read 'process' or 'continuity') to function within these parameters but this is different from what I think to be true about 'samsaara': a term denoting a 'continuity' hence a concept. I would like to ask you what you think would be understood or known at any given moment if all concepts had been put aside and the only understanding was the direct understanding, one moment at a time, of panna and its object. Would citta in a given moment be able to understand the existence of the Path, the existence of path factors, the 4 noble truths, or any of the other formulations that involve propositions or processes? It seems to me that without concepts panna would only know the direct characteristics of its object, experience it rise and fall away, and then the next. It would be able to directly know anicca, anatta and dukkha, because those are inherent characteristics of every arising dhamma, and it would be able to know the cetasikas that appear at a given moment and to see their functions take place, but all the general propositions of the path and Dhamma I think would be gone. Path factors or path consciousness would also just know their objects and reach a liberated state and then cessation, but they would no longer know the path, just the enlightened awareness of each dhamma at the moment as they appear. Would you agree that under those conditions, there is enlightened awareness, enlightened understanding, and the object of citta known clearly at that moment, but no path, no knowledge of DO, and no 4 Noble Truths or Eightfold Path as "wholes" that would be known as such? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120765 From: "philip" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:12 am Subject: No seeing without door arising first (was Re: Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. philofillet Hi all Another very good post on the anataness and complexity of the seemingly simple seeing. Thanks to Scott for the transcript Phil > Here's a bit from the audio (2007-01-09-bmp.3). I thought it a propos: > > Kh Sujin: "...If there is no understanding of any characteristic right now, it's impossible to understand dhaatu...Let's say that we don't know anything right now. Is there something [that appears] right now? Is there anything that appears right now?" > > Q: "Dhamma..." > > Kh. Sujin: "Don't say that it's dhamma. What appears?" > > Q: "Some experience..." > > Kh. Sujin: "What is it?" > > Q: "Seeing." > > Kh. Sujin: "Seeing? So, seeing is real. We start here. Seeing is real. Do we know anything about seeing? Not yet, but it's here. Can we have seeing at will? Can we condition to have seeing? No, so can we understand - " > > Q: "No, well, wait - we can - because in the big story we think, 'Oh well, I'll shut my eyes and I can't see' but when you do take it to that moment-by-moment, you can't control what you see at all - " > > Kh. Sujin: "Okay, can you have the eye-base at will? So can you have seeing at will? We have to come deeper and deeper to the source of seeing, that it's conditioned. Without the eye-base it's impossible. Even [though] there is eye-base conditioned by kamma arising and falling away, without the visible object which contacts at that very moment there cannot be seeing - nothing can appear. So we see that just that - the eye-base - only that ruupa can condition the visible object to appear. It's like the taste or the flavour. It's in the kalaapa. The ruupa hardness and softness is there. But without the tongue-base, can the taste appear? So we can see that they are all dhammaa. No self. No one at all. If we think and understand, but if we take it for granted it seems like we can do anything. We're born with eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body, and mind but who conditions all these realities to arise? Some [don't] have eye-base, some [don't] have ear-base. Why? And we have different [thinking]. Why do we have such different thoughts? According to each moment which is accumulated long, long, long, long time ago up to this moment. We don't know what will be out next thinking - kusala or akusala. So why do we fear anything to arise because there are conditions for it's arising anytime." > > Sincerely, > > Scott. > #120766 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:03 am Subject: What is the Cause of Mental Purity bhikkhu5 Friends: What is the Cause of Defilement & Purification? Venerable Mahâli once asked the Buddha: But, Venerable Sir, what is the causing condition of mental defilement? By what reason, do beings become mentally defiled and degraded? The Buddha then explained: If, Mahali, this form, this feeling, this perception, this construction and this consciousness were exclusively suffering, immersed only in frustration, soaked solely in trouble and if it were not also sometimes soaked in pleasure, beings would not become enamoured with it. But since this form, this feeling, perception, construction & this consciousness is also occasionally pleasurable, immersed now and then in pleasure, soaked momentarily in delight & it is not soaked only & always in pain, beings become enamoured & enthralled with it! By being enamoured with it, they are captivated by it and obsessed with it... By being captivated by it and obsessed with it, they are defiled & degraded! This, Mahali, is the causing condition for the mental defilement of beings... By this reason, do beings become mentally defiled & detrimentally degraded! Mental Defilement veils the light of the mind by obscuring it! But, Venerable Sir, what is the causing condition of mental purification? By what reason, do beings become mentally purified & released? The Buddha then explained: If, Mahali, this form, this feeling, this perception, this construction & this consciousness were exclusively pleasurable, immersed only in pleasure, soaked solely in satisfaction, and if it were not also quite soaked in suffering, beings would not become disgusted with it. But because form, feeling, perception, construction & consciousness is also pain, immersed in distress, soaked in agony, and it is not soaked only in pleasure, beings are disgusted with it. Being disgusted, they experience disillusion and through this disillusion, they are mentally purified! This, Mahali, is the causing condition for the mental purification of beings... By this reason, do beings become mentally purified and happily released! <...> Source: The Grouped Sayings by the Buddha. Samyutta Nikâya III 69-71 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=948507 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/samyutta/index.html Buddha said: Naturally the mind is pure and luminous all around! http://What-Buddha-Said.net/Canon/Sutta/AN/AN.I.8-10.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminous_mind Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu Samâhita _/\_ * <...> #120767 From: "philip" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:21 am Subject: No seeing without door arising first (was Re: Vipassanaa, Survey Ch 34, no. 12. philofillet Hi again I note that "door" I put in title is not synonymous with the "base" that A. Sujin refers to in the talk. Bhikkhu Bodhi note from CMA, p.144: "A base is not identical with a door, since it plays a different role in the origination of consciousness. A door is a channel through which the cittas and cetasikas of a cognitive process gain access to the object; a base is a physical support for the occurence of cittas and cetasikas." Phil #120768 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 11:46 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...Seems like the understanding of samsara and Path and such, as general constructs that have a number of aspects, is necessarily conceptual but that it is based on direct knowing of the dhammas that are involved. I would expect the arahat to be able to move back and forth between direct knowing of the objects involved in a 'process,' and the correct intellectual understanding of how all those dhammas involved create the 'process.' Would that seem correct to you?" Scott: No, I find myself unable to agree. The direction of these suppositions seems wrong. When the phrase 'understanding of sa.msaara and the Path' is used, it seems to refer only to thoughts about these things. I don't find it helpful in the least to try to fantasize about the experience of the Arahat. Trying to imagine the experience of the Arahat is self - imagining 'my' experience. The arahat wouldn't be 'moving back and forth' between anything. My fantasy about the arahat has him or her with thoughts about the conventional world like anyone else - thoughts, though, structured by the absolute absence of kilesas. Pa~n~naa and pa~n~naa alone 'understands,' not an arahat, not thinking. I don't find that you use 'process' in the same way that I understand the term, and therefore find it a distraction. The Path is simply the arising of a certain level of pa~n~naa, with Nibbaana as object. There is no thinking about anything in the instant the Path arises. After the Path arises, and enlightenment is attained, all subsequent thinking would simply be in line with that. 'Thoughts' for sure don't factor in, since we are, in this thread, beginning to see the difference between 'thinking' as a reality, and 'thoughts' as inactive, non-functional concepts. R: "Some of what you are saying about the difference between knowing a property of dhammas, such as 'rise and fall,' and what we call it, is also very interesting. If citta knows 'rise and fall,' I assume that a different citta will know 'fall' from the one that experiences 'rise,' and that there is some form of concept to put those together to understand that 'dhammas rise and fall,' or even that 'this present dhamma rises and falls.' Do you see this sort of going back and forth between direct experience and a correct conceptual understanding as being the way that understanding works? Or am I off-base? And is panna present for both processes, or only for the non-conceptual aspect?" Scott: I think you are off-base. I was referring to udayabbaya ~naa.na, the fourth stage of vipassanaa-~naa.na merely as an example. And *only* as an example. Technically, this is not 'citta' that is being referred to as much as pa~n~naa at a given level of development. I think that your speculations about which citta knows 'rise' and which one knows 'fall' are not to the point at all. It is pa~n~naa - a conascent cetasika and not citta - that is being referred to, pa~n~naa of a given level of development such that the succession of naama and ruupa as they arise and fall away are known. Appararently, this level of pa~n~naa is able to know rise and fall - to encompass rise and fall in the natural course of real dhammas and understand it. This will *not* be an intellectual process at all, of that I'm sure. This is what you seem to be describing. I don't see a 'going back and forth between direct experience and conceptual understanding' to be what is meant by 'insight' or 'understanding' in the Dhamma sense of the function of pa~n~naa at all. I see that as a fantasy about someone thinking their way to enlightenment. Impersonal pa~n~naa is the only operative factor. First dhammas and then Nibbaana are the objects. I have no idea what the thoughts that come after any stage of enlightenment might be. I don't think they matter much. Scott. Scott. #120769 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 12:15 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "I would like to ask you what you think would be understood or known at any given moment if all concepts had been put aside and the only understanding was the direct understanding, one moment at a time, of panna and its object..." Scott: Your hypothetical, to me, describes the reality. There are no concepts at the moment of understanding - that is, 'understanding' that is pa~n~naa. R: "...Would citta in a given moment be able to understand the existence of the Path, the existence of path factors, the 4 noble truths, or any of the other formulations that involve propositions or processes?" Scott: It is not the characteristic or function of citta to understand. Understanding is the characteristic of pa~n~naa. Since pa~n~naa is not thinking, then understanding is all that happens. This is a completely non-intellectual event. Pa~n~naa is said to understand things that seem like 'processes' - 'rise and fall,' for example - but this is not thoughts about it. I do not see 'process' as you do. Each dhamma that is 'part of a process' falls away completely prior to the next dhamma in the so-called 'process.' R: "It seems to me that without concepts panna would only know the direct characteristics of its object, experience it rise and fall away, and then the next. It would be able to directly know anicca, anatta and dukkha, because those are inherent characteristics of every arising dhamma, and it would be able to know the cetasikas that appear at a given moment and to see their functions take place, but all the general propositions of the path and Dhamma I think would be gone..." Scott: Pa~n~naa does not deal in any way with concepts. Forget concepts and the above statement, more or less, is a paraphrase of the characteristic of pa~n~naa. R: "...Path factors or path consciousness would also just know their objects and reach a liberated state and then cessation..." Scott: Again, this *is* the characteristic and function of pa~n~naa *at the level of the Path.* There is no literal path. The Path is the lokuttara dhammas that arise and have Nibbaana as their object. R: "...but they would no longer know the path, just the enlightened awareness of each dhamma at the moment as they appear..." Scott: The Path is not some collection of concepts. There is no literal path. R: "...Would you agree that under those conditions, there is enlightened awareness, enlightened understanding, and the object of citta known clearly at that moment, but no path, no knowledge of DO, and no 4 Noble Truths or Eightfold Path as 'wholes' that would be known as such?" Scott: No concepts at all. Just dhammas. Since I see you as thinking about things like noble truths and eightfold paths as conceptual entities and not dhammas, I see you as missing the point. The Path *is* the dhammas which comprise it. Scott. #120770 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:40 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: No concepts at all. Just dhammas. Since I see you as thinking about things like noble truths and eightfold paths as conceptual entities and not dhammas, I see you as missing the point. The Path *is* the dhammas which comprise it. I think you are also missing my point. I am asking if there is any understanding of the full process that is pertinent to the Path. Your answer seems to be "no," that all that matters is the knowledge by panna of the individual cittas at the time each arises. So panna does not know the "process," only the individual cittas, is what I hear you saying. Correct? This poses a problem for me, since I see enlightened cittas as being able to understand the whole picture. Surely the Buddha knew about the round of birth and death, etc., not just the individual cittas at the time the cittas arise, so the conclusion is that such knowledge that is broader than a single citta must be conceptual - correct intellectual understanding. Would you agree with this or not? I'm not arguing, just trying to figure out what the role of the intellect is. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #120771 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:00 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...I am asking if there is any understanding of the full process that is pertinent to the Path. Your answer seems to be 'no,' that all that matters is the knowledge by panna of the individual cittas at the time each arises. So panna does not know the 'process,' only the individual cittas, is what I hear you saying..." Scott: Listen, Rob. I don't know any other way to put it. Jon is suggesting that 'sa.msaara' is like 'anatta' or 'rise and fall' or any other 'aspects' of dhammas - and pa~n~naa penetrates these, or knows these. I'm still thinking about it. Aspects or characteristics or 'processes' such as rebirth (a specific and natural order of dhammas) are said to be the range of pa~n~naa. Paramattha dhammaa and Nibbaana are the objects of pa~n~naa. If by 'process' you mean natural succession of relevant dhammaa, then pa~n~naa is apparently said to have a capacity to know these. 'Process' has nothing to do with sequences of events or experiences or whatever else one can imagine. R: "...This poses a problem for me, since I see enlightened cittas as being able to understand the whole picture. Surely the Buddha knew about the round of birth and death, etc., not just the individual cittas at the time the cittas arise, so the conclusion is that such knowledge that is broader than a single citta must be conceptual - correct intellectual understanding. Would you agree with this or not?..." Scott: I definitely would not agree. You over-value thoughts about things. I think you imagine things about the experience of an enlightened person, about the thoughts and perceptions of an enlightened person. 'Enlightened cittas' makes no sense. This merely describes a person. The Buddha *did* penetrate the whole thing, right? He was a Buddha. Then he struggled with the idea of teaching the whole complicated thing to people like us, decided to do so, and we've been misunderstanding it ever since. Consider the following: Visudhimagga XXII, 6: "Now at times of penetrating to the truths each one of the four [path] knowledges is said to exercise four functions in a single moment. These are full-understanding, abandoning, realizing, and developing; and each one of them ought to be recognized according to it's individual essence. For this is said by the Ancients: 'Just as a lamp performs four functions simultaneously in a single moment - it burns the wick, dispels the darkness, makes light appear, and uses up the oil -, so too, path knowledge penetrates to the four truths simultaneously in a single moment - it penetrates to suffering by penetrating to ti with full-understanding, penetrates to origination by penetrating to it with abandoning, penetrates to the path by penetrating to it with developing, and penetrates to cessation by penetrating to it with realizing'...What is meant? By making cessation its object it reaches, sees, and pierces the four truths.'" Scott: And that's it. In a moment. No time to think then. Afterwards, who knows? I don't wonder what an arahat thinks about. How would I know? They seemed to walk and talk and sleep and use chairs and eat and stuff, so that says something, I guess. A Buddha seems to think about the things we read that he taught. Scott. #120772 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:19 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Scott Thanks for the below. I think it's 'yes' to everything you've said in your re-statement and/or elaboration of what I said in my message. And there's nothing further I could add :-)) Regarding: > [Scott:] What about this one: Samsaara is to tree as one specific aspect of the true nature of (individual) dhammas is to another. 'Fraid I don't get this one, so will have to pass at this stage. Thanks again. Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > J: "Anything that comes to be known by panna during the development of the understanding of dhammas is not to be classified as a concept. It is an aspect of the way things truly are." > > Scott: Okay. We agree that the *designation* 'samsaara' is a concept - at least I think we agree. You show that the realities being referred to by the designation 'samsaara' are those which contribute to 'the fact that rebirth continues endlessly...until enlightenment is attained.' You note that it is pa~n~naa that comes to know 'the fact that rebirth continues endlessly. > > J: "Included here would be, for example, the 3 characteristics of dhammas, the law of kamma, DO and conditions generally (and samsara)." > > Scott: To clarify then: Each of these 'aspects' can only be known by pa~n~naa in the course of pa~n~naa having dhammas as objects; and this because these 'higher-order aspects' (my coinage; not meant to be a new term) are real aspects of dhammas. > > J: "...I understand 'samsaara' to denote a direct understanding of the fact that the conditions for future rebirth are being accumulated all the while except when and to the extent that satipatthana/insight is being developed." > > Scott: I take it that 'the fact' is not the object of direct understanding but rather the objects would be the dhammas and the conditions that are specific to the arising of 'future rebirth' - since this 'event' involves specific dhammas under specific conditions (and is designated 'rebirth'). This then, if I'm following you, would be akin to developed pa~n~naa knowing, for example, 'rise and fall.' The designation 'rise and fall,' as the designation 'samsaara,' referring to dhammas and conditions and conditioning forces relevant to, as you say, certain aspects of dhammas in their natural course. > > In this way one speaks of 'the Path' since the Path is meant to denote the functional series of specific dhammas which, in a naturally conditioned 'process' lead out of samsaara. > > J: "This understanding is 'direct', I believe, in that it comes to be through the development of awareness/insight into the true nature of (individual) dhammas." > > Scott: Again, much like direct understanding of, say, 'rise and fall' which is another aspect of the 'true nature of (individual) dhammas.' > > What about this one: Samsaara is to tree as one specific aspect of the true nature of (individual) dhammas is to another. > > Scott. #120773 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:23 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Scott --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Jon, > > J: "...I like the 'ocean of repeated births'..." > > Scott: Me too. > > J: "I notice that the verse is the same as that quoted by RobK from the Vism (the reference for that, btw, is Ch. XVII, 115)." > > Scott: Yes. Note: > > "The endless chain of aggregates, > Of elements, of bases too..." > > Scott: Compared to: > > "...'The unbroken line of organs, elements, > And aggregates..." > > Scott: I'd been looking into the Paa.li to find out what on earth 'organs' was a translation of. > > "...''Khandhaana~nca pa.tipaa.ti, dhaatuaayatanaana ca;..." > > Scott: It's 'ayatanaa' so 'bases' so much clearer that 'organs.' > =============== J: Yes, agreed. > =============== I see that 'unbroken line' and 'endless chain' seems to be 'pa.tipaa.ti.' > =============== J: Would be interesting to get a breakdown of that term, if you come across it some time. Jon #120774 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 6:46 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" jonoabb Hi Rob E --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > J: Perhaps the term 'right conceptualising' would be better than 'right concepts' :-)). In other words, it's the thinking with understanding, rather than the objects of such thinking, that are relevant. > > [RE:] This is a little bit thorny for me. If I am thinking with "right understanding," and the concept that is the object of thinking is the idea that "dhammas arise for a single moment and then fall away completely, one at a time," isn't the concept relevant, not just the right understanding? > =============== J: I would say it is the right understanding that makes the moment a 'right' one. There is no concept within the teachings of 'right concept'. > =============== > [RE:] If I have right understanding of an irrelevant concept, let's say that "if I cross the street I may get hit by a car," that is not going to set any groundwork for direct understanding of realities. It is the concept that is rightly understood *about dhammas* that makes it a concept that creates right understanding for dhammas, is that not correct? > =============== J: Concepts do not 'create right understanding for dhammas'. Right understanding is conditioned by hearing the teachings, understanding what has been heard, and wisely reflecting on what is thus understood. > =============== > [RE:] So it seems to me that the content of the concept, ie, the "object of correct understanding" is equally relevant. Just to state it again for clarity, it seems to me that one must have a correct concept and correct thinking or correct understanding of that concept in order to have "right understanding," or "right conceptualizing." Is that not correct? > =============== J: Perhaps you could explain what you mean by 'one must have a correct concept'. As far as I can see, the correctness of any thinking is a function of the understanding that accompanies the thinking. > =============== > [RE:] Most of the Dhamma in written form, such as suttas and Abhidhamma, are indeed collections of concepts, which become objects of misunderstanding or objects of correct understanding, ie, objects of thinking. If the concepts, the objects of thinking, were irrelevant, the Dhamma wouldn't be necessary or helpful to developing understanding. Have I somehow misunderstood what you were getting at? > =============== J: Reading/hearing about the teachings involves communication by means of concepts. The concepts being 'sent' may or may not represent the expression of right view. However, if they do represent right view on the part of the sender, for the receiver it's still a matter of how they are understood by the receiver. Jon #120775 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:02 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" epsteinrob Hi Scott. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > Scott: And that's it. In a moment. No time to think then. Afterwards, who knows? I don't wonder what an arahat thinks about. How would I know? They seemed to walk and talk and sleep and use chairs and eat and stuff, so that says something, I guess. A Buddha seems to think about the things we read that he taught. Well, that's all I was saying. I don't think it's too complicated, and reflects a lot of what has been said by advanced folks around here, that thinking is a natural part of what we do, even though it is not direct. It makes sense that Buddha would understand that which he had experienced with correct understandings, and be able to express it in words. What I'm imagining is someone who has discerned directly and whose thoughts are backed up by direct knowledge, that's all. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #120776 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Nov 27, 2011 9:50 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" nilovg Dear Phil and all, your quote is very important: Kh Sujin: "...If there is no understanding of any characteristic right now, it's impossible to understand dhaatu...Let's say that we don't know anything right now. Is there something [that appears] right now? Is there anything that appears right now?" ----- This goes also for the texts about samsara, quoted by Rob K and Scott. As Rob K said: > > is a concept though). > > As the visuddhimagga explains : (CH XVII< 115) > > the endless rebirths as pictured thus: > The endless chain of aggregates, > Of elements, of bases (N: aayatanas) too, > That carries on unbrokenly > Is what is called "the round of births,"> ------- N: I would like to add: these khandhas, dhaatus, aayatanas occur right now. They are part of the cycle. The text is a warning not to be mistaken as to an idea that a lasting being is in the cycle. Vis. Ch XVII, 115 and Tiika: Text vis.: 115. When he is confused about the round of rebirths, instead of taking the round of rebirths as pictured thus: The endless chain of aggregates, Of elements, of bases too, That carries on unbrokenly Is what is called 'the round of births', he figures that it is a lasting being that goes from this world to another world, that comes from another world to this world. --------- N: The Tiika states with regards to the expression: a lasting being (aya.m satto), that this means that he believes: this is myself, I am the owner, I am existing, I am the doer, and I am a person who feels. This also means that a (lasting) being dies and is reborn. The Tiika explains that the expression and so on (aadi) that is added in the text, summarizes his belief that he is created by a lord creator or by Brahma. ---------- Conclusion: As we read in the text, the cycle of birth and death is an endless chain of aggregates, of elements (dhaatu), and bases (ayaatana). Naama and ruupa can be classified as khandhas, as elements and as ayaatanas. The ayaatanas are the sense objects, the sense organs, mindbase which is all cittas, and the realities which are dhammaayatanas to be experienced through the mind-door. This section and the former ones emphasize the danger of clinging to the belief in a lasting being, a self. Wrong view is deeply rooted and it is hard to give up the idea that past lives, the present life and future lives belong to a self. .... Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 116. Intro: The foregoing sections and also this section expound again the danger and disadvantage of ignorance. As we have read, ignorance conceals the danger of the cycle of birth and death. It is the condition that one sees rebirth as happiness. Ignorance conditions the wrong view that a lasting being dies and is reborn. Because of ignorance one fails to see that at each moment there is birth and death of the khandhas, of naama and ruupa. We are reminded of the danger of clinging to the view of ‘ this is myself, I am the owner, I am existing, I am the doer, and I am a person who feels’. -------- N: All these texts relate to this moment, to our life now, which is only one moment. There is seeing now and if there would not be ignorance, seeing would not arise. -------- Nina. #120777 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:02 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...It makes sense that Buddha would understand that which he had experienced with correct understandings, and be able to express it in words..." Scott: What are 'correct understandings?' Scott. #120778 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:39 am Subject: Further Discussions in India, no 6. nilovg Dear Lukas and friends, Further Discussions in India, no 6. There can be less attachment to the outward appearance (nimitta) and details (anuvya~ncana) of things, not merely by thinking “I do not have clinging”, but this is at the moment of awareness. At that moment a characteristic of a reality appears to sati and how could there be nimitta and anuvya~ncana? One will more and more become familiar with the characteristics of realities that are not as they formerly seemed to be. Each reality is conditioned and goes away so fast, all the time. It is a hindrance to keep on thinking of stages of insight because one speculates about it. One can know the difference between moments with sati and without sati, not by thinking or speculating. At the moment of understanding there is no room for lobha to come in. Nobody can stop lobha, it arises very often. But pa~n~naa can know and see it as a reality, so that there will be less agitation about akusala. It takes time to really understand dhammas at this moment. We keep on talking about cetasikas, but at this very moment contact, feeling, sa~n~naa or cetanaa do not appear to sati, they just arise and fall away instantly. But whenever sati arises, it begins to see the characteristic that is not ruupa, that is naama. This must be clearly understood. Understanding can gradually become clearer. Q: What is suitable for satipa.t.thaana? Kh. S: In the beginning one may think: I am too tired, but sati of satipa.t.thaana does not mind. There can be detachment from the idea of what is suitable, or what one thinks are suitable places. ******** Nina. #120779 From: "philip" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:56 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" philofillet Hi Nina (Scott, Rob E, Jon, all) > your quote is very important: > Kh Sujin: "...If there is no understanding of any characteristic > right now, it's impossible to understand dhaatu...Let's say that we > don't know anything right now. Is there something [that appears] > right now? Is there anything that appears right now?" Ph: These days everything feels stripped down to seeing and visible object. I feel a lot of cobfidence about how knowing nama from rupa, not only is it so impirtant but it's sonethung tgat can be studied this monent, every monent. Well technically not every monent, there are so many monents of thinking ob what was seen, and some monents of hearing, moments of hardness, and of course so many coyntless bhavangas in there. But so many opportunities arising to study the characteristic of visual object, and seeing. I find it fascinating to read about too. I was rude about cetasikas, but I find knowing nama from rupa more interesting than knowing this cetasika from tgat cetasika. These days again and again I hear A Sujin say that we must know nama from rupa first, and I don't know why but I feel YES!!! that's right. Re the above, I heard A Sujin say tgat without realities arising know concepts, and the better we understand realities, the better we ynderstanding concepts. My previous belief was that perfectly understood conceprs coyld somehow be stripped down to reveal realities, or something like that but no, it starts with patiently considering the very irdinary seeming realities of this miment, especially seeing and visible object. Right now it feels I will never get bored of this topic, but we will see. Tomorrow I will provide transcript with the above, A Sujin saying we myst understand realities to ynderstand concepts. It is Feb 4, 2006, in the morning part 1, if I rwcall correctly. Phil > ----- > This goes also for the texts about samsara, quoted by Rob K and > Scott. As Rob K said: > > > > > is a concept though). > > > > As the visuddhimagga explains : (CH XVII< 115) > > > > the endless rebirths as pictured thus: > > The endless chain of aggregates, > > Of elements, of bases (N: aayatanas) too, > > That carries on unbrokenly > > Is what is called "the round of births,"> > ------- > N: I would like to add: these khandhas, dhaatus, aayatanas occur > right now. They are part of the cycle. > The text is a warning not to be mistaken as to an idea that a lasting > being is in the cycle. > Vis. Ch XVII, 115 and Tiika: > Text vis.: 115. When he is confused about the round of rebirths, > instead of taking > the round of rebirths as pictured thus: > The endless chain of aggregates, > Of elements, of bases too, > That carries on unbrokenly > Is what is called 'the round of births', > he figures that it is a lasting being that goes from this world to > another world, that comes from another world to this world. > --------- > N: The Tiika states with regards to the expression: a lasting being > (aya.m satto), that this means that he believes: this is myself, I > am the owner, I am existing, I am the doer, and I am a person who feels. > This also means that a (lasting) being dies and is reborn. > The Tiika explains that the expression and so on (aadi) that is added > in the text, summarizes his belief that he is created by a lord > creator or by Brahma. > > ---------- > Conclusion: As we read in the text, the cycle of birth and death is > an endless chain of aggregates, of elements (dhaatu), and bases > (ayaatana). Naama and ruupa can be classified as khandhas, as > elements and as ayaatanas. The ayaatanas are the sense objects, the > sense organs, mindbase which is all cittas, and the realities which > are dhammaayatanas to be experienced through the mind-door. > This section and the former ones emphasize the danger of clinging to > the belief in a lasting being, a self. Wrong view is deeply rooted > and it is hard to give up the idea that past lives, the present life > and future lives belong to a self. .... > > Visuddhimagga Ch XVII, 116. > Intro: The foregoing sections and also this section expound again the > danger and disadvantage of ignorance. As we have read, ignorance > conceals the danger of the cycle of birth and death. It is the > condition that one sees rebirth as happiness. Ignorance conditions > the wrong view that a lasting being dies and is reborn. Because of > ignorance one fails to see that at each moment there is birth and > death of the khandhas, of naama and ruupa. We are reminded of the > danger of clinging to the view of ` this is myself, I am the owner, I > am existing, I am the doer, and I am a person who feels'. > -------- > N: All these texts relate to this moment, to our life now, which is > only one moment. There is seeing now and if there would not be > ignorance, seeing would not arise. > > -------- > Nina. > > > > > > #120780 From: "philip" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:03 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" philofillet Hi again > > Tomorrow I will provide transcript with the above, A Sujin saying we myst understand realities to ynderstand concepts. It is Feb 4, 2006, in the morning part 1, if I rwcall correctly. Correction, Feb 6, if anyone wants to listen, lots on nimitta... Phil #120781 From: "philip" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:21 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" philofillet Hi again One of the following was a typo, the other one was intended: "Without realities no concepts." "Without realities know concepts." Phil #120782 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:01 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" nilovg Dear Phil and all, Op 27-nov-2011, om 14:56 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Re the above, I heard A Sujin say that without realities arising no > concepts, and the better we understand realities, the better we are > understanding concepts. ------- N: We cannot understand what DO is, what samsara means when we do not understand dhatu now, khandha now aayatana now. There were discussions: is samsara a concept or a reality? It depends from what angle one looks at it, whether one sees it according to the suttanta method or to the abhidhamma method. "Dispeller of Delusion", Abhidhamma division: ----- Nina. #120783 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:44 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Rob E., R: "...It makes sense that Buddha would understand that which he had experienced with correct understandings, and be able to express it in words..." Scott: What are 'correct understandings?' From Dhammasa'nga.nii (I've used Khine's translation this time; parenthetical comments below are not in the Paa.li, and may be Khine's opinions, reader discretion is advised): 16. What at that time is the faculty of wisdom? That which at that time is wisdom, thorough understanding, scrutiny (of impermanence, etc. of phenomena), comprehensive scrutiny, investigative knowledge of the dhamma (i.e. the Four Ariya Truths), right observation (of impermanence, etc.), close observation, direct observation, erudition, proficiency, refinement in knowledge, discriminative knowledge, reflection (on impermanence, etc.), comparative examination, breadth of knowledge, wisdom that destroys defilements, penetrative wisdom, insight, clear comprehension, wisdom like a guiding goad, wisdom as the faculty of wisdom, power of wisdom, wisdom like a sword (for destroying defilements), wisdom like a tower, wisdom like light, wisdom like radiance, wisdom like a torch, wisdom like a jewel, non-bewilderment, investigative knowledge of the dhamma, right view - this at that time is the faculty of wisdom." "16. Katama.m tasmi.m samaye pa~n~nindriya.m hoti? Yaa tasmi.m samaye pa~n~naa pajaananaa vicayo pavicayo dhammavicayo sallakkha.naa upalakkha.naa paccupalakkha.naa pa.n.dicca.m kosalla.m nepu~n~na.m vebhabyaa cintaa upaparikkhaa bhuurii medhaa pari.naayikaa vipassanaa sampaja~n~na.m patodo pa~n~naa pa~n~nindriya.m pa~n~naabala.m pa~n~naasattha.m pa~n~naapaasaado pa~n~naaaaloko pa~n~naaobhaaso pa~n~naapajjoto pa~n~naaratana.m amoho dhammavicayo sammaadi.t.thi – ida.m tasmi.m samaye pa~n~nindriya.m hoti." Scott: Remember, 'that which at that time is wisdom...' (Yaa tasmi.m samaye pa~n~naa...), refers to a moment of consciousness. These are the functions of pa~n~naa 'at that time' - the time of it's arising and before it falls away. Quicker than thoughts. Scott. #120784 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:04 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Phil, P: "...My previous belief was that perfectly understood concepts could somehow be stripped down to reveal realities, or something like that but no, it starts with patiently considering the very ordinary seeming realities of this moment, especially seeing and visible object..." Scott: The consensus is that an expressive and/or cognitive comprehension of Dhamma is founded on - begins with, is supported by, is based on, is secondary to, stems from - the function of pa~n~naa in relation to dhammaa; wherein 'Dhamma' is the teaching and 'dhammaa' are the realities. First penetration of realities (non-intellectual) then teaching (involved with concepts). There is no thinking one's way to enlightenment. And daydreaming about how the world might appear to me if I were enlightened is pointless - that's what acid is for (ha ha)... Scott. #120785 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Knowing vipaka from kamma (transcript, kalkutta.2, India 2004) moellerdieter Dear Nina (and Ann), you wrote: 'D: as I understand D.O. , old kamma (vipaka)and new kamma meets > ( future vipaka), i.e. old kamma = what we see (vipaka citta) and > new kamma ,what arises due to the seen ( the choice , the like, > i.e. the cetasikas of mental formation ), In such way Vipaka citta > associates with javana citta, doesn't it? > -------- N: I would not use the word associate, since there is only one citta at a time. Moreover: vipaaka is the result of kamma, old kamma or new kamma. You write: new kamma, what arises due to the seen. Perhaps you are thinking here of the triple round: seeing is vipaaka and on account of it defilements arise and these can motivate kamma again, and this kamma produces again vipaaka, then defilements again, and so it goes on and on. The triple round spin forever as explained in the Visuddhimagga. Like a vicious circle, and it occurs also now. ------- D: vipaka old = 'seeing' now and vipaka new (future) =due to kamma in response to seeing now .. corresponding with VisM > > This may fit to S.N. 35, 145 > Monks, I will teach you about new kamma and old kamma, about the > ceasing of kamma and the path that leads to the ceasing of kamma. > Listen well, pay close attention and I will speak.> "What, monks, is old kamma?"The eye [ear, nose tongue, body > (touch), mind],[1] monks, is to be regarded as old kamma, brought > into existence and created by volition,[2] forming a basis for > feeling.[3] This, monks, is called 'old kamma.'"And what, monks, is > new kamma? > > "The action[4] one performs now by body, speech and mind. This > monks, is called 'new kamma.'"When, monks, by ceasing actions of > body, speech and mind, one touches liberation,[5] this, monks, is > called 'the ceasing of kamma.' "And what, monks, is the path that > leads to the ceasing of kamma? "It is the Noble Eightfold Path >> Now , that is my version and not necessarily shared by Nina , but I > would appreciate an explanation fitting to above extract. > ------ N: The Buddha had many different ways to explain being in the cycle and being freed from the cycle. All such texts should not 'stay in the book', but they are to be applied to our life just now. Otherwise our studying and reading would be useless. ------- D: yes, different ways .. .the Carpenter Fivetools Sutta comes into my mind . It would be correct to speak ( only) of 2 , 3....108 kinds of feeling," extract:"Regarding the Dhamma thus shown by me in different ways, if there are those who do not agree with, do not consent to, and do not accept what is rightly said and rightly spoken, it may be expected of them that they will quarrel, and get into arguments and disputes, hurting each other with sharp words. "Regarding the Dhamma thus shown by me in different ways, if there are those who agree with, consent to, and accept what is rightly said and rightly spoken, it may be expected of them that they will live in concord and amity, without dispute, like milk (that easily mixes) with water, looking at each other with friendly eyes. a nice motto for any Buddhist forum , isn't it ? with Metta Dieter #120786 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:28 am Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Rob E (120647) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > No offense taken. If you are not offended by all the undereducated challenges I've thrown your way, I'm not offended by anything you say to me, to be sure! :-) > =============== J: Well I know you have a preference for approaching the teachings very much from the perspective of your own experience and views (as opposed to trying to understand the texts as they stand). Fair enough. However, it does make meaningful discussion difficult at times ! :-)) > =============== > [RE:] I mean, there are some obvious conventional statements that point in this direction, such as "practice this for 7 yrs., months or days and you will become enlightened." You can argue that this is only for one capable of "really practicing" for the 7 weeks or days, but still, it is a specific result, a fruit of the path, based on doing a specific practice. It is clearly not just awaiting for kusala moments to arise, but is a practice said to take place in a defined time frame, so we are talking "conventional time" here, not the space of a single citta. Here is the quote from the satipatthana sutta: > =============== J: Thanks for quoting the sutta text (below). I think the key words are "develop [mindfulness] in this way". This refers to the way of development described in the preceding part of the sutta. So only by analysing the rest of the sutta could one know whether a deliberate 'practice' of some kind is being referred to. That apart, however, we know from personal experience that the development of a mental quality (such as being more considerate/attentive/sympathetic) does not require a deliberate practice of any kind, but only that one keep in mind the importance of the quality to be developed and make the most of the opportunities that present themselves. So I don't quite see why you are so confident that it's a deliberate practice that's being referred to here. > =============== > [RE:] http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.010.than.html > > E. Conclusion > > "Now, if anyone would develop these four frames of reference in this way for seven years, one of two fruits can be expected for him: either gnosis right here & now, or � if there be any remnant of clinging/sustenance � non-return. ..." > > [RE:] So this is saying not only will certain factors develop if practiced consistently according to the sutta, but that the culmination of enlightenment, or else non-return if there is still a bit of clinging left, will ensue from such a practice. > =============== J: Yes, but the passage does not tell us what constitutes 'practice' [actually, 'development', a somewhat more neutral term] according to the sutta. That is the very question we are at issue on. The assurance of attainment passage simply doesn't help resolve this issue. > =============== > > [J:] So I would not see the assurance of attainment as suggesting any time frame for a practice to be done, or as encouraging a kind of deliberate practice. > > [RE:] Why the mention of all the years and such, and giving a definite time frame and then saying an even shorter time frame would do as well. What's that all about? > =============== J: To indicate that this development alone will suffice. > =============== > [RE:] The assurance of enlightenment has to take place in some time frame, otherwise it is not a contractual assurance. :-) > > I really don't have any legal background at all, but I recall that a contract without a time frame is moot, since one can put off the guarantee forever without violating the contract. > =============== J: :-)) No question of a contract here, but you're right. If there's no agreement on a basic term, such as time of completion, price or manner of performing, then there's no actual 'agreement' and so no contract in the first place. > =============== > [RE:] I hear you saying there is no time frame in the above assurance, but yet you have not accounted for the time frame that is given, or why it is given, if there is in fact no time frame. That doesn't seem to add up to me. Buddha does give a time frame; it's right there. But then you say there is no time frame. Can you explain? > =============== J: He mentions a period of time, but is not giving a time frame for 'practice'. The idea of a time frame only makes sense in the context of a set form of 'practice'. Jon #120787 From: A T Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:41 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" truth_aerator Hi Jon, all, >J: Trees do exist in the conventional sense of the word. >==================================== Good. >J:However, in the world of dhammas spoken of by the Buddha, the >situation >is otherwise: there is no dhamma called 'tree'. >===================================================== We should not mix up two ways of talking to dismiss conventional. IMHO, With best wishes, Alex #120788 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:47 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" truth_aerator Hi RobertE, all, >RE: >I would like to ask you what you think would be understood or known >at any given moment if all concepts had been put aside >================================ Not anicca or anatta, that is for sure. It is a concept. It is never known through 5 sense organs. Color is not anicca, neither is sound or smell, taste or touch... With best wishes, Alex #120789 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:48 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" scottduncan2 Jon, Regarding the fateful outcome of your own concession: [J: "...Trees do exist in the conventional sense of the word..." A: "Good." J: "However, in the world of dhammas spoken of by the Buddha, the situation is otherwise: there is no dhamma called 'tree'. A: "We should not mix up two ways of talking to dismiss conventional..."] Scott: Look what you've started. Now it will be, 'trees do exist, you said so...' ha ha. Scott. #120790 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:59 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 Alex, A: "...Color is not anicca, neither is sound or smell, taste or touch..." Scott: This Dhamma is both good and bad news. The good news is that all the good things I love to look at and listen to and taste and smell and touch and be touched by will never stop. The bad news is that all the bad things I hate to look at and listen to and taste and touch and be touched by will never stop. And they will all go on at the same time. Forever and ever and ever and ever. So, on the one hand I'll have some song like, say, Boston's 'More Than A Feeling' going on ad nauseum (once is too much) while, on the other hand, I keep tasting that best sandwich I ever ate. Scott. #120791 From: "connie" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 8:21 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" nichiconn dear Mary Lee, here is an ode to a tree frog in the endless round of samsara where death and decay are not sabhava dhammas. http://www.youtube.com/v/UHwwJkKp7Oo&rel=1 connie --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Alex, > > A: "...Color is not anicca, neither is sound or smell, taste or touch..." > > Scott: This Dhamma is both good and bad news. > > The good news is that all the good things I love to look at and listen to and taste and smell and touch and be touched by will never stop. The bad news is that all the bad things I hate to look at and listen to and taste and touch and be touched by will never stop. And they will all go on at the same time. Forever and ever and ever and ever. So, on the one hand I'll have some song like, say, Boston's 'More Than A Feeling' going on ad nauseum (once is too much) while, on the other hand, I keep tasting that best sandwich I ever ate. > > Scott. > #120792 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 11:39 am Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta" scottduncan2 connie, And then there's this: http://vimeo.com/31133188 Scott. #120793 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:09 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) scottduncan2 Dear Jon, J: "...That apart, however, we know from personal experience that the development of a mental quality (such as being more considerate/attentive/sympathetic) does not require a deliberate practice of any kind, but only that one keep in mind the importance of the quality to be developed and make the most of the opportunities that present themselves. So I don't quite see why you are so confident that it's a deliberate practice that's being referred to here..." Scott: Jon, would you mind clarifying here. Do you equate 'being more considerate/attentive/sympathetic' with kusala dhammaa? In other words, are these 'mental qualities' the kusala dhammaa which are perfected through development by their arising and falling away naturally? Are you describing, albeit inadvertently, some sort of 'practice' when you suggest 'that one keep in mind the importance of the quality to be developed and make the most of the opportunities that present themselves?' Scott. #120794 From: "scottduncan2" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 1:49 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Knowing vipaka from kamma (transcript, kalkutta.2, India 2004) scottduncan2 Dieter, "'...Regarding the Dhamma thus shown by me in different ways, if there are those who agree with, consent to, and accept what is rightly said and rightly spoken, it may be expected of them that they will live in concord and amity, without dispute, like milk (that easily mixes) with water, looking at each other with friendly eyes.' a nice motto for any Buddhist forum, isn't it?" Scott: Do you have any particular reason you keep bringing stuff like this up? Scott. #120795 From: "Bhikkhu Samahita" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 12:59 pm Subject: The 4 Personalities! bhikkhu5 Friends: Some 4-fold Characterizations of Personalities! There are these 4 types of Human Personality: 1: One possessed by Greed, Desire, and Lust... 2: One possessed by Hate, Anger, and Aversion... 3: One possessed by Confusion, Doubt & Ignorance... 4: One possessed by Pride, Conceit, and Arrogance... 1: One who has learned little, but who does not act upon it... 2: One who has learned little, who does indeed act upon it... 3: One who has learned much, but who does not act upon it... 4: One who has learned much, who does indeed act upon it... 1: One drifting along with the stream, driven by craving... 2: One going against the stream of ordinary convention... 3: One remaining stuck in the middle of deep stagnation... 4: One who has reached the far shore and now dwells in fruition... 1: One who attains calm, but not insight... 2: One who attains insight, but not calm... 3: One who attains neither calm, nor insight... 4: One who attains both calm and insight... <...> Source: The 4th Abhi-Dhamma Book: The Personality Concept: Puggala-Paññatti. 25-27 http://www.pariyatti.com/book.cgi?prod_id=130096 Have a nice & noble day! Friendship is the Greatest! Bhikkhu SamÄ�hita _/\_ * <...> #120796 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:28 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" jonoabb Hi Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > > Hi Jon, all, > > >J: Trees do exist in the conventional sense of the word. > >==================================== > > Good. > > > >J:However, in the world of dhammas spoken of by the Buddha, the >situation >is otherwise: there is no dhamma called 'tree'. > >===================================================== > > We should not mix up two ways of talking to dismiss conventional. > =============== J: Agreed. And I don't think anyone here has dismissed the conventional world as being of no account (if they did they would surely meet with an accident very quickly). And likewise, we should also not mix up the two ways of talking to take the conventional as having the 3 characteristics of anicca-dukkha-anatta. In fact, I would say that mistaking references to dhammas as including reference to conventional objects is the more serious of the 2, since it will result in wrong practice and the development of weighty wrong view (a far more serious consequence than meeting with an accident! ;-)). Jon #120797 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:32 pm Subject: Re: Is there a dhamma called "anatta", "samsara", "rise and fall of citta" jonoabb Hi Scott (and Alex) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Jon, > > Regarding the fateful outcome of your own concession: > > [J: "...Trees do exist in the conventional sense of the word..." > A: "Good." > J: "However, in the world of dhammas spoken of by the Buddha, the situation is otherwise: there is no dhamma called 'tree'. > A: "We should not mix up two ways of talking to dismiss conventional..."] > > Scott: Look what you've started. Now it will be, 'trees do exist, you said so...' ha ha. > =============== J: I think Alex understands my statement. He goes on to say that we should not mix up the two ways of talking. That is a very pertinent observation. Jon #120798 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:46 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) jonoabb Hi Scott --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "scottduncan2" wrote: > > Dear Jon, > > J: "...That apart, however, we know from personal experience that the development of a mental quality (such as being more considerate/attentive/sympathetic) does not require a deliberate practice of any kind, but only that one keep in mind the importance of the quality to be developed and make the most of the opportunities that present themselves. So I don't quite see why you are so confident that it's a deliberate practice that's being referred to here..." > > Scott: Jon, would you mind clarifying here. Do you equate 'being more considerate/attentive/sympathetic' with kusala dhammaa? In other words, are these 'mental qualities' the kusala dhammaa which are perfected through development by their arising and falling away naturally? > =============== J: Thanks for asking me to clarify. I should perhaps have made it clear that I was speaking in purely conventional terms: resolving to be a 'better' spouse/person, etc by being conventionally more considerate/attentive/sympathetic. I'm sure we've all done this at times throughout our lives and seen the difference that it can bring. > =============== > [Scott:] Are you describing, albeit inadvertently, some sort of 'practice' when you suggest 'that one keep in mind the importance of the quality to be developed and make the most of the opportunities that present themselves?' > =============== J: I was trying to illustrate just the opposite: that where there is the keeping in mind, albeit intermittently and imperfectly, of the advantage/benefit to others of improved conduct on our part, then when a relevant situation occurs there is a chance of a different response than the usual one. All very conventional. Jon #120799 From: "philip" Date: Mon Nov 28, 2011 6:42 pm Subject: Re: Khandhas and samsara (was, A lovely dream ...) philofillet Hi Jon, Scott and all > > J: Thanks for asking me to clarify. I should perhaps have made it clear that I was speaking in purely conventional terms: resolving to be a 'better' spouse/person, etc by being conventionally more considerate/attentive/sympathetic. I'm sure we've all done this at times throughout our lives and seen the difference that it can bring. > Yes, none whatsoever! Jon, this is one step short of recommending multi-directional metta radiation!!! But as has often been noted, you and Sarah are paragons of patience ( from what I can see) so conventional prompts might have more conditioning impact on your piddly impatience. But really a bit surprised to see you recommending behaviour vows. Yahoo account hacker/Jon imitator at work? Phil