#123800 From: "antony272b2" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:18 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi antony272b2 Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: "In AN, persons are as a rule not reduced to mere collections of aggregates, elements and sense-bases, but are treated as real centers of living experience engaged in a heartfelt quest for happiness and freedom from suffering." (from Intro to Samyutta Nikaya) Wonderful! With metta / Antony. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, sarah abbott wrote: > > Hi Howard, > > Good news! Thx for sharing. We'll be putting in an order... > > Metta > > Sarah > > > >________________________________ > > From: "upasaka@..." > > >On another list I found out about this exciting development! You may > >check the following web site: > >_http://www.wisdompubs.org/Pages/display.lasso?-KeyValue=33160&-Token.Action=&i\ mage=1_ > >(http://www.wisdompubs.org/Pages/display.lasso?-KeyValue=33160&-Token.Action=&i\ mage=1) . > >I've already ordered my copy. :-) > <...> > #123801 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:20 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: eating animal corpses upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah (and Vince, and Robert) - In a message dated 4/18/2012 3:36:48 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Dear Vince, Rob E & Howard, --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , Vince wrote: > >> HCW: > >> I don't eat meat, and not because of my kamma vipaka. I don't eat > >> meat, because > >> I don't want to support the killing of animals, and that because I don't > >> want to cause distress. > >> ---------------------------------------------- > > >R: That is laudable, and I understand those sentiments, although I am someone who both > > loves animals and also eats meat - a contradiction which I can't easily resolve. > > However, our personal response to animals, for better or for worse, seems to be a little > > bit different than the Buddha's teaching on meat-eating. > >V: I think - just my view - when we feel compassion in front the killing of some animal, it > is something arising in the present moment. When we feel the same in front a piece of meat > without any life, then here we are using the imagination. In that same moment we need to > imagine an animal when he was alive, or maybe we remember the sufferings of many animals > who are alive, etc.. But there is not any living being in front us. .... S: I agree with Vince. There cannot be compassion and metta towards meat. At the moment of eating meat, there is no distress for the animal as it's no longer alive. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Obviously. One who has compassion for meat is insane. But that is irrelevant to the issue. Not eating meat is an abstention that I choose for myself but do not "push" on others. The basis for my not eating meat, though I DO eat fish and shellfish - not a plus for me, is the following: Were I to eat meat, after a period of time I would consume the equivalent of one cow (or a calf if I ate veal), which adds to the demand for meat and leads to the killing of another cow [a replacement - basic economics], and this would happen again and again. It is people's eating of beef that leads to the slaughtering of cows. None would be killed if none were eaten. That is simple fact. Compassion for animals IS a valid basis for abstaining from meat, because eating meat creates demand resulting in the slaughter of more animals. ------------------------------------------------ The Buddha stressed the importance of understanding the present citta, the present states of mind. As Vince says, in the case of the meat, we are using our imaginations, remembering the sufferings of animals and so on. More precious is a moment of direct understanding of the reality at such a time - thinking, aversion and so on. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: More precious for *whom*? ------------------------------------------------ As Vince quoted, the Buddha was very specific about the circumstances under which bhikkhus could not eat meat. Metta Sarah =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123802 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:27 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friend Colette, et al Yes, I have been most fortunate in being a temporary monk and as a householder. My best friend and lover (read a "wife") has always supported me. She, in her quiet way, led me to Buddhism... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123803 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:32 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi Jon, Thanks for your reply. > J: I don't know about that. The 'intervention' (my own term, btw, not something from the texts) could just as easily be in the form of a natural occurrence such as an avalanche, a lightening strike, etc. The principle is the same. > > So I do not see this as being, in Dhamma terms, a case of an 'interaction between two people or their cittas and cetasikas'. Just different dhammas. pt: Yes, that makes sense in theory. Though I generally end up confusing all that with people and things they do, so I guess that's where my questions are coming from. > J: (In any event, in the particular case being discussed (killer and victim), the rupa which conditions the end of lifespan would in fact be the weapon used so in any event this would not be a case of a rupa that is produced by the intimation of the killer.) pt: ok, could we say in summary, one person "interacts" with another there "through the medium" of rupas. I.e. killer's volition conditions intimation, which then basically moves the knife (miriyad of rupas conditioning one another there, and then), which then conditions the rupa of the victim (life faculty) and this in turn conditions the citta of the victim (death citta, alongside with other conditions such as vipaka, etc), in simple terms? And if we call the above "physiscal interaction", then I'd guess "verbal interaction" would happen in the same way - through the medium of rupas - i.e. citta and volition of one person condition vocal intimation, which then produces other rupas that eventually end up as an object of auditory consciousness of the other person etc? > > =============== > > 2. We've said that cittas and cetasikas of the two people shouldn't be mixed up. We've also said that kamma patha for the killer depends on the victim's death (ending of life-faculty). So, what I'm looking for is again a dhamma that acts as a condition between the two - basically in what way does the ending of life-faculty (a dhamma) of the victim, condition the vipaka citta of the killer? I mean, these two are dhammas of two different people, so then they can't condition eachother directly, and therefore there must be some other dhammas in between through which the first would conditions the second? At this point I don't really see what sort of dhamma(s) could that be. If that's the right way to consider this issue in the first place. > > =============== > > J: What you are asking, I think, is: How does the cetana of the 'killer' know that the death of the 'victim' has in fact resulted (a death that may be quite some time and distance removed from the act in question)? > > I don't know the answer to that, and I'd see that as being one of the 'imponderable' aspects of kamma. Perhaps it falls under the category of information that we'd all like to know but which in fact would not be of any particular help for the development of the path. pt: Yes I had a feeling we'll run into one of those imponderables pretty soon:) Ok, leaving that issue aside and returning to the issue of "interaction" - I already asked above about physical and verbal interaction, so that only leaves "mental" interaction: Short of telepathy, the only other example of that sort that I can think of is when a deva influences the mind of a person (i think i read about it in some commentary saying something like - the object of citta can be a sign of kamma, as well as a whole bunch of other things, one of which was an influence of a deva. I guess we're still talking about telepathy of some sort here, and we're also assuming that all that deva business is actually true and possible for the purposes of our example here) - in terms of dhammas, how would one nama dhamma there (of a deva) condition the other nama dhamma (of the person), since I assume there are no rupas to act as a "medium" between them? Best wishes pt #123804 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 10:58 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi Sarah, Thanks for your reply. > So in the case of the cuti citta - this is conditioned by past kamma. Prior moments of experiencing hardness through the body-sense and other sense experiences are also conditioned by past kamma. Is cuti citta conditioned only by past kamma? And I forgot, can rupa even condition citta? Seems like it should, at least the sense-consciousness cittas. Best wishes pt #123805 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question on difference between Train of chittas and ordinary th... ptaus1 Hi Howard, I think we briefly talked about this but I forgot: > HCW: > The central meditative practice that Goenka teaches is sweeping the > attention across the body, missing no areas, wordlessly noting any and all > sensations that arise. These sensations are, in fact, body-door rupas, but > Goenka calls them "vedana". What are some of the things that lead you to conclude that these are in fact rupas? I mean, that these are dhammas in the first place, and not just conceptual/perceptual pattern/issue of some sort? I think I mentioned before that I experienced something similar to the fast pulses you described when I used to meditate regularly for several hours, but my conclusion was that this was basically just a trick of perception, so not an experience of dhammas. I mean, I couldn't really conclusively say why would it be a dhamma and not just more imagination/perception patterns. I mean, imagination/perception is capable of a lot more than just really fast pulses all over the body(e.g. just think of lucid dreaming) and I can't really find any feature which would distinguish that experience from imagination. Best wishes pt #123806 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Question on difference between Train of chittas and ordinary th... upasaka_howard Hi, pt - In a message dated 4/18/2012 9:13:40 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ptaus1@... writes: Hi Howard, I think we briefly talked about this but I forgot: > HCW: > The central meditative practice that Goenka teaches is sweeping the > attention across the body, missing no areas, wordlessly noting any and all > sensations that arise. These sensations are, in fact, body-door rupas, but > Goenka calls them "vedana". What are some of the things that lead you to conclude that these are in fact rupas? I mean, that these are dhammas in the first place, and not just conceptual/perceptual pattern/issue of some sort? I think I mentioned before that I experienced something similar to the fast pulses you described when I used to meditate regularly for several hours, but my conclusion was that this was basically just a trick of perception, so not an experience of dhammas. I mean, I couldn't really conclusively say why would it be a dhamma and not just more imagination/perception patterns. I mean, imagination/perception is capable of a lot more than just really fast pulses all over the body(e.g. just think of lucid dreaming) and I can't really find any feature which would distinguish that experience from imagination. Best wishes pt ================================ The sensations could, of course, be illusory, though I think not. In any case, they are not acts of knowing, so they are not nama. Bodily pressures, itches, warmth, etc are rupas, so why not felt pulses? In any case, there is no separate category of "vedanas" akin to body-door rupas but different. There ARE, however, instances of the operation called "vedana". With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123807 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Wed Apr 18, 2012 11:56 pm Subject: Wednesday's Child Is A Child Of Woe????? yawares1 Dear Members, I happened to listen to this song "Wednesday's Child" by Matt Monroe @youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUPRnDYA6Z4 May I ask you all...is it true? Do you know anyone who was born on Wednesday? Is he/she a child of woe/born to be alone?? I'm a Friday's child and so far I win at love, but I'm not superstitious about Wednesday child...just curious. Curious mind, yawares #123808 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 1:40 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) moellerdieter Hi Ken H, KH: There has never been any doubt in my mind that we disagree. I see the Dhamma as a description of the way things ultimately are in the present moment. You see the Dhamma as a set of instructions to be followed. Those two understandings can never be reconciled D: Ken you may have faith in the present moment , but not the faith conditioned by suffering , due to a fair understanding of the first Noble Truth. The Buddha proclaimed "All what I am teaching is suffering .. and the way to end suffering" , " without old age ,sicknes and death there would be no teaching" for "the suffering being". Dhamma is all about the 4 Noble Truths and the different aspects (e.g.Abhidhamma ) are all means ( the raft) for the aim cessation of suffering, nibbana. Without this background one conceptualizes a raft without having the intention to cross the river ...that is the wrong grip of the snake. You may now claim that is not your but my comment what presents the wrong grip of the Dhamma, so that we can close our discussion with 'nice to talk to you , we agree to disagree , never mind ..' with Metta Dieter #123809 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 1:50 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) moellerdieter Dear Sarah, you wrote: D: the other shore means full detachment, cessation of kamma , cessation of suffering, nibbana .. so the teaching , Dhamma with its core , the 4 Noble Truths , fulfilled its purpose and can be left behind like a raft. > This includes good and bad states which are rooted in kamma (intended action) , abandon because they do not apply anymore. > The understanding is not left behind otherwise an Arahant could hardly teach those still caught in samsara. > Any disagreement ? ... S: It is the attachment and other kilesas (defilements) that are "left behind", eradicated at stages of enlightenment. It is not the 4 Noble Truths or the Dhamma which are left behind. D: Sarah ,please read the concerned text again: "And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?' In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas." with Metta Dieter #123810 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:02 am Subject: Re: Fw: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 moellerdieter Dear Sarah, you wrote: Thx for your feedback! D: I try ;-) not easy to translate Abhidhamma into (daily life ) experience. > S: The only cittas it does NOT arise with are: > > a) the 5 pairs of sense-cognition (i.e. seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching - each may arise as kusala or akusala vipaka, therefore there are 10 cittas) and > > b) 6 other ahetuka (rootless) cittas.> > Therefore, 73 out of the 89 kinds of cittas are accompanied by viriya.> > I think it's important to realise that even when akusala cittas arise (and all of these are rooted in moha or ignorance/dullness) viriya arises at every single moment. > D: assuming background knowledge of the Matika necessary (?) > What does it mean 'The only cittas it does NOT arise with are: a) the 5 pairs of sense-cognition ' ? ... S: Good question. It means that at moments of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting and touching, viriya (effort) does not arise. This is because these cittas do not need viriya in order to experience their objects (visible object and so on), D: that is what I meant by " idea to a ): These are only experienced in a state of awareness without an active sixth sense ..a passive state of mind . 'Listening ' instead of 'sending' , > no intention but reality experience .. a kamma break so to say. ...energy not translated into effort , no energizing of the mental factors .." .... S: but the other cittas, such as the subsequent javana cittas (when kusala and akusala states arise) need viirya to support or "strengthen" the cittas and other cetasikas to perform their functions. D: that seems to me be covered by above 'energizing of the mental factors ' (arising of kusala /akusala states) S:I'm not sure I follow you. When there is awareness of seeing or hearing, for example, at such moments the awareness arises with the javana cittas. At such moments of awareness, viriya is there, supporting those cittas with awareness in a wholesome way. It just occurs naturally, not by any intention to be aware or have energy arise. Pls ask me more if this is not clear. D: not yet clear ..I had to look for 'javana'..(Nyanatiloka) javana (fr. javati, to impel): 'impulsion', is the phase of full cognition in the cognitive series, or perceptual process (citta-vīthi; s. viññāṇa-kicca) occurring at its climax, if the respective object is large or distinct. It is at this phase that kamma is produced, i.e. wholesome or unwholesome volition concerning the perception that was the object of the previous stages of the respective process of consciousness. There are normally 7 impulsive moments. In mundane consciousness (lokiya, q.v.), any of the 17 kammically wholesome classes of consciousness (Tab. I, 1-17) or of the 12 unwholesome ones (Tab. I, 22-23) may arise at the phase of impulsion. For the Arahat, however, impulsion has no longer a karmic, i.e. rebirth-producing character, but is a kammically independent function (kiriya, q.v.; Tab. I, 72-89). There are further 8 supermundane classes of impulsion (Tab. I, 18-21, 66-69). The 4 impulsive moments immediately before entering an absorption (jhāna, q.v.) or one of the supermundane paths (magga; s. ariyapuggala) are: the preparatory (parikamma), approach (upacāra), adaptation (anuloma), and maturity-moment (gotrabhū, q.v.) snip .. following text is interesting too in respect to above (a) and the note by the translator http://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/Texts-and-Translations/Short-Pieces/Malunk\ yaputtasuttam.htm Māluṅkyaputtasuttaṁ (Saṁ 35. 95) The Discourse Concerning Māluṅkyaputta Edited & Translated by Ānandajoti Bhikkhu (excerpt ) Ettha ca te Māluṅkyaputta, “Now here for you, Māluṅkyaputta, diṭṭhasutamutaviññātabbesu dhammesu in regard to things that are seen, heard, sensed, or cognized, diṭṭhe diṭṭhamattaṁ bhavissati, in what is seen there must be only what is seen, sute sutamattaṁ bhavissati, in what is heard there must be only what is heard, mute mutamattaṁ bhavissati, in what is sensed there must be only what is sensed, viññāte viññātamattaṁ bhavissati. in what is cognized there must be only what is cognized. Commentary: Just as when a form comes into focus eye consciousness is not excited (not impassioned), not tainted, not deluded, so, being devoid of passion etc., in regard to the measure of eye consciousness there must be no impulsion. Translator: Ethically impulsion (javana) is the most important stage in the cognitive series, because it is in the seven mind moments that are termed javana that wholesome and unwholesome volition takes place, and kamma is made. According to the instruction given here the cognitive process should be checked by mindfulness before it reaches the javana stage. unquote Dict. impulsion:1 [countable] a strong desire to do something2 [uncountable] a reason for doing something so far I understand by "it is in the seven mind moments that are termed javana that wholesome and unwholesome volition takes place, and kamma is made" , javana means the 7 moments of mind /citta states of impulsion in which action (kamma ) takes place. A categorization of the citta , but not to be mistaken with volition or kamma force (sankhara) ..but not sure how far it fits with your statement. > > b) Not clear is the relation of viraya to the dullness group (Mendis: 'effort (viriya), which energizes the mental factors and opposes idleness) > The citta accompanied by the cetasika dullness is hardly an initiation of viriya arousing, isn't it? ... S: Again, good qus. I think that what Mendis is referring to is (wholesome) viriya as an indriya (faculty). The controlling faculty of viriya (such as when satipatthana has been developed), controls or inhibits idleness/laziness, the defilement opposed to wholesome viriya. We have to know the context as to whether viriya in general or samma vayama/viriya is being referred to. ... D: we are talking within the context of the cetasika viriya which developed is samma vayama /viriya, isn't it? Another grouping is " indriya: 'faculties', is a name for 22, partly physical, partly mental, phenomena often treated in the Suttas as well as in the Abhidhamma. " , a different grouping . Part of indriya are the 5 Spiritual Faculties (s. bala): 15. faith: saddhā 16. energy: viriya 17. mindfulness: sati 18. concentration: samādhi 19. wisdom: paññā and I don't think Mendis refered here to > D: 'it is better not to arouse energy at all than to arouse it in the wrong way. ' > This is the 'element of initiating or beginning of action' (pls compare with the sutta 'The Self Doer' ) which seems to me a constant issue of misunderstandings on the forum . I see the reason in a lack of consideration of (the common formula of) Dependent Orgination which presents the 'background ' of the deluded person. .... S: Another way of putting it would be: "Wrong effort is worse than no effort at all" - however it's put, there's no Self that initiates effort - just mental factors arising with particular cittas, performing their functions and falling away. Let me know if this makes sense!´ D: in a conventional way it is the person (see the sutta:the Self doer) which initiates effort , in super-mundane way (not supra-mundane related to nibbana) it is the process of the Law of Dependent Orgination ,in particular the ignorant volition/will (avijja -sankhara) and its sibling mental formation (the 50 cetasikas of sankhara khanda).. with Metta Dieter #123811 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:46 am Subject: Re: eating animal corpses moellerdieter Dear Sarah (Vince, Rob E , Howard, Han) you wrote: S: I agree with Vince. There cannot be compassion and metta towards meat. At the moment of eating meat, there is no distress for the animal as it's no longer alive. The Buddha stressed the importance of understanding the present citta, the present states of mind. As Vince says, in the case of the meat, we are using our imaginations, remembering the sufferings of animals and so on. More precious is a moment of direct understanding of the reality at such a time - thinking, aversion and so on. As Vince quoted, the Buddha was very specific about the circumstances under which bhikkhus could not eat meat. D: I agree there is no compassion towards meat ..but sometimes the pictures of industrial stock raising is difficult to suppress, in particular as poultry is concerned. We have a big stock farmer here who calls his cattles and pigs 'happy meat ' , because, so he argues, though they are all facing the slaughter house , at least during life time he provides them the best environment to enjoy . Unfortunately -as we know- that is more the exception than the rule..and I.MO. very worthwhile to support ,leaving aside the possibility of joining the vegetarians ( no fish ,no meat ), which I postponed to future . extract: The background Story of # 157 ,The Story of Bodhirajakumara) is an aspect of the topic to be considered ( copied from Han's postings on Triple Gem) "While residing at the Bhesakala wood, the Buddha uttered Verse (157), with reference to Prince Bodhi (Bodhirajakumara): To him, the Buddha said that he and his wife were not going to have any children because of their past evil deeds. The Buddha then related their past story. In one of their past existences, the prince and his wife were the sole survivors of a shipwreck. They were stranded on a deserted island, and there they lived by eating birds' eggs, fledglings and birds, without any feeling of remorse at any time. For that evil deed, they would not be blessed with any children. If they had felt even a slight remorse for their deed at any stage of their lives, they could have a child or two in this existence. Then turning to the prince, the Buddha said, "One who loves himself should guard himself in all stages of life, or at least, during one stage in his life." Obviously (the killing of the animals ) without remorse is the issue here.. not the eating (for reasons of survival ) with Metta Dieter #123812 From: "charlest" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:24 am Subject: Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friend Sarah C, et al You wrote in part, "I have read and studied the Vinaya Nikaya (all 6 volumes of the English translation)... " Please advise where I may obtain a copy. Both here in USA and in Thailand I have been unable to obtain a complete English copy of the Vinaya-pitaka. Sincere warm thanks for your help. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123813 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:03 am Subject: Re: eating animal corpses epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: I agree with Vince. There cannot be compassion and metta towards meat. At the moment of eating meat, there is no distress for the animal as it's no longer alive. The Buddha stressed the importance of understanding the present citta, the present states of mind. As Vince says, in the case of the meat, we are using our imaginations, remembering the sufferings of animals and so on. More precious is a moment of direct understanding of the reality at such a time - thinking, aversion and so on. > > As Vince quoted, the Buddha was very specific about the circumstances under which bhikkhus could not eat meat. That is why I said in my response to Howard that I think what we might do in conventional living may not be the same as the Buddha's teaching in an area. As far as the conventional world goes, however, where we do encounter beings, bodies, even industries, it makes sense for someone who cares about animal to think about the way animals are raised, killed and marketed. It's not compassion for the meat, but you are right, it is not a direct view of what is arising in the moment either. So our conceptual life has a purpose in making wise choices in everyday living, even though that may not be the most direct view of dhammas at that time. Can you we have metta for the animals who are being slaughtered, even though we are not right in front of them at that moment, and can that lead to choices about whether or what kind of meat to eat? I think it is possible. Isn't metta in relation to a conceptual object, the idea of a being who is suffering? In any case, I understand the distinction between being present to what is arising now, and dealing with concepts, but the concept of animals in slaughterhouses represents a conceptual reality that may be worth considering in conventional reality. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #123814 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:44 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasanna Dear friend Chuck, The "complete" 6 volume Vinaya-pitaka was translated by I.B.Horner for the Pali Text Society back in the 1940s. She however did not include certain parts as she felt they were too indelicate for the laity (householder) to study. Wat Buddhavas here in Houston has the whole Pali Text Society translation of the Tipitaka except for a few volumes that are missing from when persons borrowed to read/study without returning to the Wat. I have been fortunate to have access to the translations which have definitely enriched my dhamma study. They do not have any of the commentaries or sub-commentaries in English translation although these are available in Thai translation. The Lao Temple here in Houston also has the complete Tipitaka again no commentarial texts (Pali Text Society translation) for perusal by its lay members. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane ________________________________ From: charlest <...> You wrote in part, "I have read and studied the Vinaya Nikaya (all 6 volumes of the English translation)... " Please advise where I may obtain a copy. Both here in USA and in Thailand I have been unable to obtain a complete English copy of the Vinaya-pitaka. <...> #123815 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:24 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friend Sarah C (dhammasanna), et al 1. Do I understand correctly that Ms. I. B Horner did not completely translate the Vinaya-pitaka? 2. As you wrote in part, "She however did not include certain parts as she felt they were too indelicate for the laity (householder) to study. " Perhaps what she did not translate was the part about masturbation among monks? 3. Please clarify as I perceive from your message; Ms. I. B. Horner did not completely translate the Vinaya-pitaka. Hence, there is NO complete English translation, yes? No? with sincere respect, yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck #123816 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:10 pm Subject: SPD #1 (what is born?) philofillet Dear Group I've been aware of a lack of gratitude towards Nina, Sarah, Jon and others for the existence of this group. DSG is far from the way *I* would like it to be, and I complain about the lack of a more exclusive focus on what I consider to be correct Dhamma (and what I feel is accepted as correct Dhamma when people meet to discuss in Thailand, etc) but griping doesn't accomplish anything. As the Buddha said, "be the change that you want to see in the world." He didn't say that? Well, he did now. Consequently, I will occasionally post passages from the best non-canonical Dhamma book I know, Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, by A. Sujin. I'll stick to posting the passages, if people would like to discuss, great. Here is the first one: "We say of people, of other living beings, or devas, that they are born; but in reality, citta, cetasika and rupa are born. When a specific type of citta accompanied by cetasikas arises together with rupa, we say, in conventional language, that a person is born." Thank you again, Sarah and Jon, for this group. Without it I would have not had access to the Dhamma in its correct form, so hard to come across in this day and age with its hunger for fast results. And thank you Nina for sharing your understanding so tirelessly. Phil #123817 From: SARAH CONNELL Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:14 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasanna Dear friend Chuck, I guess you would have to say that it is not all there. She would leave out details of various rules as she felt they were too much for a layperson to handle such as in reference to things such as masturbation etc. However the Vinaya-pitaka is otherwise translated. You therefore would have to say that technically there is no complete translation although this is the most complete to be found in English. May you be well and happy and always smiling, Sarah Jane ________________________________ From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro To: DGG Sent: Wed, April 18, 2012 9:25:01 PM Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. Good friend Sarah C (dhammasanna), et al 1. Do I understand correctly that Ms. I. B Horner did not completely translate the Vinaya-pitaka? 2. As you wrote in part, "She however did not include certain parts as she felt they were too indelicate for the laity (householder) to study. " Perhaps what she did not translate was the part about masturbation among monks? 3. Please clarify as I perceive from your message; Ms. I. B. Horner did not completely translate the Vinaya-pitaka. Hence, there is NO complete English translation, yes? No? <...> #123818 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:36 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi philofillet Hi Howard, all This will seem very small-minded of me, perhaps, but I have concerns about this project. B.Bodhi has been involved in social work projects unsuitable to a monk recently, he has allowed a social justice aspect of Dhamma to become predominant in his life, when there is no such justification for such a focus in the ancient texts. The problem is that his commentarial notes tend to be taken with great seriousness by people, "neo-commentary" as Scott once called it. He is a worthy, hard-working translator, what a shame if his rather eccentric ideas about the role of Dhamma in social justice projects (which are great in their own sphere) become accepted as correct Dhamma. There are other problems with BB - he wrote in his preface to SN that Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma a fair view for an academic, but shameful for a monk meant to be representing Theravada Orthodoxy. Also, in his talks, he teaches Dhamma as exercises to be practiced. In Thailand, others shared concerns about BB, I wonder if they will speak out or does political correctness prohibit it? Then again, the Buddha predicted that the true Dhamma would disappear from the world, starting with Abhidhamma, so perhaps it is just to be accepted with equanimity. Phil p.s I won't be posting except for SPD passages once a week, I promise. (My delisting lasted even less time than Howard's, sigh, I lose... --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > On another list I found out about this exciting development! You may > check the following web site: > _http://www.wisdompubs.org/Pages/display.lasso?-KeyValue=33160&-Token.Action=&im\ age=1_ > (http://www.wisdompubs.org/Pages/display.lasso?-KeyValue=33160&-Token.Action=&im\ age=1) . > I've already ordered my copy. :-) <...> #123819 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:46 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friend Sarah Jane, et al Sincere warm thanks for your response. Would you provide the source of what is available of the English translation of the Vinaya-pitaka? If I may. I had this on when I saw your message... a very favorite... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZ8WN0KEVoU&feature=related [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123820 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:58 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi dhammasaro Good friends all, In the latest translation, do you perceive any errors? If yes, what are they? Sincere warm thanks... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123821 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:00 pm Subject: Re: SPD #1 (what is born?) sarahprocter... Dear Phil, Many thx for your kind thoughts. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Consequently, I will occasionally post passages from the best non-canonical Dhamma book I know, Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, by A. Sujin. I'll stick to posting the passages, if people would like to discuss, great. > > Here is the first one: > > "We say of people, of other living beings, or devas, that they are born; but in reality, citta, cetasika and rupa are born. When a specific type of citta accompanied by cetasikas arises together with rupa, we say, in conventional language, that a person is born." ... S: A great idea to just post a few lines at a time like this. An excellent reflection for the day. Even now, just a citta, cetasikas and rupas being born at this very moment. That's it! Metta Sarah ===== #123822 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:13 pm Subject: Re: Question on difference between Train of chittas and ordinary th... ptaus1 Hi Howard, Thanks for your reply. > H: The sensations could, of course, be illusory, though I think not. In > any case, they are not acts of knowing, so they are not nama. Bodily > pressures, itches, warmth, etc are rupas, so why not felt pulses? Ok. I guess it goes down to how one interprets the experience. I don't know what goes on in your case. The way I went about it is to refer to the citta processes. I.e. there is probably a rupa behind an experience of an itch or a pulse, but the issue is whether what' s actually being cognised - the object of a citta process - is a rupa or a concept (perception, imagination). My conclusion was that it was most likely a concept (even though it was a non-verbal thought/perception so to speak). A related issue is that if a cognition can truly distinguish a rupa, then this is already satipatthana and possibly already one of the stages of insight. So it seemed unrealistic that this would in fact occur so frequently (and so easily). Besides, as mentioned, I would think that an experience of a rupa would have to have sati and panna etc, so it would be quite different to other experiences, and probably not quite as continuous as a series of pulses of some duration. But I don't really know of course. > H: In any case, > there is no separate category of "vedanas" akin to body-door rupas but > different. There ARE, however, instances of the operation called "vedana". No argument there. Best wishes pt #123823 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:14 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi sarahprocter... Hi Phil & all, I quite understand all the concerns you mention, but isn't it the present concern, the anxiety, the speculation and so which is the only problem now. I think that BB's AN anthology has been a great contribution to the English translations, so I'm sure the full Translation will be a very helpful addition. More speculation, however - awareness can be aware of the thinking now. As for any shortcomings, and "neo-commentaries" , again it's a test of our understanding and equanimity when we read them - just like here! The problem is never in what anyone else says or does - it's the citta being born now! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > This will seem very small-minded of me, perhaps, but I have concerns about this project. <...> > p.s I won't be posting except for SPD passages once a week, I promise. (My delisting lasted even less time than Howard's, sigh, I lose... ... S: Ha, ha! Metta Sarah ==== #123824 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:20 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCge-suZLWw&feature=related Once again... #123825 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:39 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: [SariputtaDhamma] RE: Vinaya was intended for the monks. dhammasaro Good friends all, Why I am not a monk... I love my significant other... Chumnien... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y7YuDRO5d0&feature=related [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123826 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:54 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi philofillet Hi Sarah > I quite understand all the concerns you mention, but isn't it the present concern, the anxiety, the speculation and so which is the only problem now. Right you are, there is no need to speculate, mind your own cittas etc. > I think that BB's AN anthology has been a great contribution to the English translations, so I'm sure the full Translation will be a very helpful addition. More speculation, however - awareness can be aware of the thinking now. Yes, thinking now, a lot of it. All sorts of stories about people I dislike. Funny that this only goes on with Dhamma, I tend to be very open-minded about people in general. At work I have a gift for befriending and supporting the students other teachers shun, but when it comes to Dhamma, so much attachment, I guess. Thus the bizarre intensity of my aversions. That can be understood. > > As for any shortcomings, and "neo-commentaries" , again it's a test of our understanding and equanimity when we read them - just like here! The problem is never in what anyone else says or does - it's the citta being born now! > Right you are. I'm sure the new anthology with its relatively short suttas will bring a lot of people into the door, and then if there are conditions for panna, there will be a seeing through shortcomings. Or not. That goes for everything of course. Its why I've always questioned your statement "I'd rather have never heard the DHamma than hear the wrong Dhamma", or something like that, because if there are conditions for panna, panna works its way. And there were for you. In passing let me say that during this time of not having Dhamma discussion, and feeling that the essence of DSG was being lost in the name of plurality, reading your posts to various people has been reassuring. Phil p.s no more to say on this topic, Sarah said it all. And Chuck, I don't "hate" monks, ok? I just don't revere them unreservedly, I can't. If that equals "hate," so be it I guess. #123827 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:51 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi dhammasaro Good friend Phil, Please forgive me if I wrote or implied such on what you wrote in the past: p.s no more to say on this topic, Sarah said it all. And Chuck, I don't "hate" monks, ok? I just don't revere them unreservedly, I can't. If that equals "hate," so be it I guess. Thank you for clearing the air. I did not understand your thinking that you/I thought you hated monks! I never thought that of you nor any other person on this venue. Having been a monk, I well understand the temptations and problems of being a monk when a lay person has no knowledge of the Vinaya-pitaka. And, yes, as a monk, I always did not appreciate the reverence the laity showed me. It was the same as when I was an USA Army officer... a junior person would get up and salute when walking by... peace to you my good friend, in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123828 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 6:59 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi ptaus1 Hi Phil, > p.s I won't be posting except for SPD passages once a week How's your dhammasangani study going? I just started reading it slowly with the commentary, will probably slowly post questions as they arise, would be good to see your questions as well. Best wishes pt #123829 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:03 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat ptaus1 Hi Sarah, > S: If there is one of the concepts you refer to above, such as concept about the tip of the nose....belly going up etc, why might this be samatha bhavana? What is the wise reflection at such times? Yes, that's one of the things i hope to discuss with RobE when we get to the issue of samatha bhavana, so stay tuned. Best wishes pt #123830 From: "Ken H" Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 7:46 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) kenhowardau Hi Dieter, ------------ <. . .> > D: Ken you may have faith in the present moment , but not the faith conditioned by suffering , due to a fair understanding of the first Noble Truth. ------------- KH: You have said that to me before. I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. The concept of "faith conditioned by suffering" is new to me. What does it mean? (Sorry if I have asked that question before but I have forgotten the answer.) ----------------------- > D: The Buddha proclaimed "All what I am teaching is suffering .. and the way to end suffering" , " without old age ,sicknes and death there would be no teaching" for "the suffering being". Dhamma is all about the 4 Noble Truths and the different aspects (e.g.Abhidhamma ) are all means ( the raft) for the aim cessation of suffering, nibbana. Without this background one conceptualizes a raft without having the intention to cross the river ...that is the wrong grip of the snake. ---------------------- KH: I still don't know what you are talking about, but that last part rings true to me. There are so few of us who have the courage to even *consider* crossing the river. That requires contemplating a world in which there is no past and no future (just the presently existing realities none of which is a self). Who has that courage? Certainly no meditator has it. ------------------------ > D: You may now claim that is not your but my comment what presents the wrong grip of the Dhamma, so that we can close our discussion with 'nice to talk to you , we agree to disagree , never mind ..' ----------------------- KH: Yes, nice to talk to you, and perhaps this particular conversation has gone on long enough, But I won't agree to agreeing to disagree. Anywhere else in the world I am prepared to shut up about the Dhamma, but not here. There will be other threads! :-) Ken H #123831 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 10:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi upasaka_howard Hi, Phil - It's really nice to hear from you! :-) [Shocker: We don't view this matter in the same way. ;-)] With metta, Howard In a message dated 4/19/2012 2:39:01 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: Hi Howard, all This will seem very small-minded of me, perhaps, but I have concerns about this project. B.Bodhi has been involved in social work projects unsuitable to a monk recently, he has allowed a social justice aspect of Dhamma to become predominant in his life, when there is no such justification for such a focus in the ancient texts. The problem is that his commentarial notes tend to be taken with great seriousness by people, "neo-commentary" as Scott once called it. He is a worthy, hard-working translator, what a shame if his rather eccentric ideas about the role of Dhamma in social justice projects (which are great in their own sphere) become accepted as correct Dhamma. There are other problems with BB - he wrote in his preface to SN that Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma a fair view for an academic, but shameful for a monk meant to be representing Theravada Orthodoxy. Also, in his talks, he teaches Dhamma as exercises to be practiced. In Thailand, others shared concerns about BB, I wonder if they will speak out or does political correctness prohibit it? Then again, the Buddha predicted that the true Dhamma would disappear from the world, starting with Abhidhamma, so perhaps it is just to be accepted with equanimity. Phil p.s I won't be posting except for SPD passages once a week, I promise. (My delisting lasted even less time than Howard's, sigh, I lose... #123832 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:07 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Ken (and Dieter) - In a message dated 4/19/2012 5:46:49 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: Hi Dieter, ------------ <. . .> > D: Ken you may have faith in the present moment , but not the faith conditioned by suffering , due to a fair understanding of the first Noble Truth. ------------- KH: You have said that to me before. I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. The concept of "faith conditioned by suffering" is new to me. What does it mean? (Sorry if I have asked that question before but I have forgotten the answer.) =============================== Please see the Upanisa Sutta (SN 12.23). With metta, Howard P. S. A commentary for this might be useful, however, because the sutta doesn't explain HOW suffering conditions faith/confidence/trust. Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123833 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:24 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) moellerdieter Hi KenH, (Howard), you wrote: ' D: Ken you may have faith in the present moment , but not the faith conditioned by suffering , due to a fair understanding of the first Noble Truth. ------------- KH: You have said that to me before. I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. The concept of "faith conditioned by suffering" is new to me. What does it mean? (Sorry if I have asked that question before but I have forgotten the answer.) D: you may come closer to understanding when you consider the core of Dhamma , the 4 Noble Truth. Panna as the counterpart of avijja , or samma ditthi , the perfection of view /understanding is ' just 'about that. And Dukkha , suffering (or whatever translation for the term is used ),is not by chance explained by the first Noble Truth. It is the entrance of understanding with its conventional and supermundane part (suffering in brief is 5 Khanda attachment). As you will know the Law of Dependent Origination explains the origination of the whole mass of suffering , i.e. first and second Noble Truth. In following sutta the common sequence from avijja up to jati (birth .... old age , sickness and death) is extended to cessation , i.e. the third Noble Truth. Hence birth as the 'supporting condition for suffering..suffering the supporting condition for faith etc. , In SN 12.23 Upanisa Sutta: Discourse on Supporting Conditions translated from the Pali by Bhikkhu Bodhi.. see http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.023.bodh.html extract Just as, monks, when rain descends heavily upon some mountaintop, the water flows down along with the slope, and fills the clefts, gullies, and creeks; these being filled fill up the pools; these being filled fill up the ponds; these being filled fill up the streams; these being filled fill up the rivers; and the rivers being filled fill up the great ocean - in the same way, monks, ignorance is the supporting condition for kamma formations, kamma formations are the supporting condition for consciousness, consciousness is the supporting condition for mentality-materiality, mentality-materiality is the supporting condition for the sixfold sense base, the sixfold sense base is the supporting condition for contact, contact is the supporting condition for feeling, feeling is the supporting condition for craving, craving is the supporting condition for clinging, clinging is the supporting condition for existence, existence is the supporting condition for birth, birth is the supporting condition for suffering, suffering is the supporting condition for faith, faith is the supporting condition for joy, joy is the supporting condition for rapture, rapture is the supporting condition for tranquillity, tranquillity is the supporting condition for happiness, happiness is the supporting condition for concentration, concentration is the supporting condition for the knowledge and vision of things as they really are, the knowledge and vision of things as they really are is the supporting condition for disenchantment, disenchantment is the supporting condition for dispassion, dispassion is the supporting condition for emancipation, and emancipation is the supporting condition for the knowledge of the destruction (of the cankers)." ( Bhikkhu Bodhi translates bhava as 'existence ' , however the usual , and I.MH.O. more fitting translation is 'becoming') ----------------------- > D: The Buddha proclaimed "All what I am teaching is suffering .. and the way to end suffering" , " without old age ,sicknes and death there would be no teaching" for "the suffering being". Dhamma is all about the 4 Noble Truths and the different aspects (e.g.Abhidhamma ) are all means ( the raft) for the aim cessation of suffering, nibbana. Without this background one conceptualizes a raft without having the intention to cross the river ...that is the wrong grip of the snake. ---------------------- KH: I still don't know what you are talking about, but that last part rings true to me. There are so few of us who have the courage to even *consider* crossing the river. That requires contemplating a world in which there is no past and no future (just the presently existing realities none of which is a self). D: There is no contemplation about nibbana , because there is no idea of nibbana (possible) . The uncreated,unconditioned is not what the All of our consciousness is . Hence no way of description (by terms/ideas within the framework of the All). It is only when the fruits of the Ariya Magga are realized , that nibbana may be experienced. The existing realities recognized by a state of a citta 'coloured by beautiful mental factors' (cetasika) corresponds with 'knowledge and vision of things as they really are ' (see above) KH: Who has that courage? Certainly no meditator has it. D: Ken , how do you know that? It is certainly not an issue for the 'armchair meditators' , but for many of the so-called forest monks . who in solitude are/can be consequent meditators . So you may say , certainly not all the mediators have the courage (especially measured against the Prince Siddharta , who promised himself not before to get up until deliverance of mind has been achieved) , not to talk about the capability due to a lack of Path advancements . ------------------------ > D: You may now claim that is not your but my comment what presents the wrong grip of the Dhamma, so that we can close our discussion with 'nice to talk to you , we agree to disagree , never mind ..' ----------------------- KH: Yes, nice to talk to you, and perhaps this particular conversation has gone on long enough, But I won't agree to agreeing to disagree. Anywhere else in the world I am prepared to shut up about the Dhamma, but not here. There will be other threads! :-) D: nobody talks about 'shut up' and if you still see potential of agreement with my comments , it is fine with me to continue. Otherwise I don't see the possibility of a beneficial dialogue. with Metta Dieter #123834 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:32 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard , (KenH), you wrote: Please see the Upanisa Sutta (SN 12.23). P. S. A commentary for this might be useful, however, because the sutta doesn't explain HOW suffering conditions faith/confidence/trust. D: my appreciation for keeping this sutta in mind ;-) as you may have seen in my previous posting by now , I started with an explanation ..coments of course wellcome with Metta Dieter #123835 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 3:08 am Subject: Kamasanna vs lobha truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, I have this question: What (if any) difference between kamasanna and lobha? Is it possible to say that Buddha can have kamasanna (so he could teach us about its drawbacks) but no Lobha (He has no defilements)? With metta, Alex #123836 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 3:11 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Ken) - In a message dated 4/19/2012 11:32:24 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard , (KenH), you wrote: Please see the Upanisa Sutta (SN 12.23). P. S. A commentary for this might be useful, however, because the sutta doesn't explain HOW suffering conditions faith/confidence/trust. D: my appreciation for keeping this sutta in mind ;-) as you may have seen in my previous posting by now , I started with an explanation ..coments of course wellcome ------------------------------------------------ HCW: I did read what you wrote, but neither in the sutta nor in your comments do I see in what way suffering/unsatisfactoriness is a support for faith/confidence. The sutta merely states the relationship as a fact. If ever there were a circumstance in which explanatory commentary would be useful, I see this as one. :-) ------------------------------------------------ with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123837 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 4:22 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard, (KenH) you wrote: I did read what you wrote, but neither in the sutta nor in your comments do I see in what way suffering/unsatisfactoriness is a support for faith/confidence. The sutta merely states the relationship as a fact. If ever there were a circumstance in which explanatory commentary would be useful, I see this as one. :-) D: hm.......what else can be the the supporting condition for faith? It was the recognition of Dukkha (old age, sickness and death) which lead the Prince to search for truth not submitted to that suffering causing impermanence. His re-discovered (4 Noble ) truth (s) , its convincing reasoning and the possibility to see for oneself provides the motivation based on that faith, doesn't it? a good opportunity to recall George Burns in the movie 'Oh God' II .. "God says: "I know it sounds like a cop-out but there's nothing I can really do about pain and suffering. My problem was that I could never figure out how to make anything with just one side to it. Ever see a front without a back, a top without a bottom, an up without a down? O.K. There can't be good without bad, life without death, pleasure without pain. That's how it is. If I take sad away, happy has to go with it. If anyone knows another way, I wish they'd put it in the suggestion box." well, the suggestion has been put into the box long time ago , however not of interest , not an issue of faith for those satisfied with above. If you do not see that as a support (ing condition ) , please explain what supports your faith in the Buddha Dhamma. with Metta Dieter #123838 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 4:37 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Ken) - In a message dated 4/19/2012 2:22:50 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, (KenH) you wrote: I did read what you wrote, but neither in the sutta nor in your comments do I see in what way suffering/unsatisfactoriness is a support for faith/confidence. The sutta merely states the relationship as a fact. If ever there were a circumstance in which explanatory commentary would be useful, I see this as one. :-) D: hm.......what else can be the the supporting condition for faith? It was the recognition of Dukkha (old age, sickness and death) which lead the Prince to search for truth not submitted to that suffering causing impermanence. His re-discovered (4 Noble ) truth (s) , its convincing reasoning and the possibility to see for oneself provides the motivation based on that faith, doesn't it? -------------------------------------------- HCW: Faith in what? Faith or trust in the Buddha and his Dhamma, I presume. But it isn't suffering that is a basis for that, as far as I can see. Everybody is aware of suffering. But not everyone gains trust in the Buddha. Certainly the existence of dukkha is prerequisite for it's cessation, but so what? The fact that suffering exists does not give me faith in the Buddha and his Dhamma any more than it does in Jesus and Christianity, for example. -------------------------------------------- a good opportunity to recall George Burns in the movie 'Oh God' II .. "God says: "I know it sounds like a cop-out but there's nothing I can really do about pain and suffering. My problem was that I could never figure out how to make anything with just one side to it. Ever see a front without a back, a top without a bottom, an up without a down? O.K. There can't be good without bad, life without death, pleasure without pain. That's how it is. If I take sad away, happy has to go with it. If anyone knows another way, I wish they'd put it in the suggestion box." --------------------------------------------- HCW: So? So, now should we have faith in George Burns? ;-) ------------------------------------------ well, the suggestion has been put into the box long time ago , however not of interest , not an issue of faith for those satisfied with above. If you do not see that as a support (ing condition ) , please explain what supports your faith in the Buddha Dhamma. -------------------------------------------- HCW: Seeing the predicted consequences of putting the Dhamma into practice come about, is what. ------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123839 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:05 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard, (KenH) you wrote : ("God says: "I know it sounds like a cop-out but there's nothing I can really do about pain and suffering. My problem was that I could never figure out how to make anything with just one side to it. Ever see a front without a back, a top without a bottom, an up without a down? O.K. There can't be good without bad, life without death, pleasure without pain. That's how it is. If I take sad away, happy has to go with it. If anyone knows another way, I wish they'd put it in the suggestion box." well, the suggestion has been put into the box long time ago , however not of interest , not an issue of faith for those satisfied with above. 'HCW: So? So, now should we have faith in George Burns? ;-) D: so? .. isn't that the (mistaken) ' Zeitgeist ' ( spirit of the ages ) ? (D:If you do not see that as a support (ing condition ) , please explain what supports your faith in the Buddha Dhamma.) -------------------------------------------- HCW: Seeing the predicted consequences of putting the Dhamma into practice come about, is what. D: since when one is one putting something into practise for an aim (cessation of suffering) one isn't concerned about from the very beginning. If the sickness (dukkha ) isn't recognized /accepted , the doctor 's diagnosis and cure will be hardly matter . Really , Howard ,you are surprising me ;-) with Metta Dieter #123840 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:25 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/19/2012 3:06:07 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: (D:If you do not see that as a support (ing condition ) , please explain what supports your faith in the Buddha Dhamma.) -------------------------------------------- HCW: Seeing the predicted consequences of putting the Dhamma into practice come about, is what. D: since when one is one putting something into practise for an aim (cessation of suffering) one isn't concerned about from the very beginning. If the sickness (dukkha ) isn't recognized /accepted , the doctor 's diagnosis and cure will be hardly matter . Really , Howard ,you are surprising me ;-) ------------------------------------------------- HCW: As I pointed out, everybody is aware of suffering. The fact that there is suffering is not what gives me confidence in the Dhamma. Of course if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless(as would all other religions which aim to put an end to it), but that is a triviality. I do not believe that this is all that is meant by dukkha --> saddha. There must be more to it. (Sorry you are "surprised" by me, Dieter! ;-) ------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123841 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 6:02 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard, you wrote: As I pointed out, everybody is aware of suffering. D: yes , as G.Burns (plaing God ) stated .. but with the assumption it is only the other side of the coin H: The fact that there is suffering is not what gives me confidence in the Dhamma. Of course if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless(as would all other religions which aim to put an end to it), but that is a triviality. D: is the anicca -dukkha relation ( the point of impermanence , change towards decay ( ageing,death , the core of suffering ) a triviality shared by all other religions? The Bodhisattva in his quest didn't think so ..(truth cannot be found in what is submitted to anicca) H: I do not believe that this is all that is meant by dukkha --> saddha. There must be more to it. (Sorry you are "surprised" by me, Dieter! ;-) D: as you may have noted , I mentioned before ' I started with an explanation'. Possibly you are considering the issue of anatta. But anatta isn't the beginning of faith , this wisdom needs to be penetrated by insight during practise . with Metta Dieter #123842 From: "azita" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:31 am Subject: Re: Kamasanna vs lobha gazita2002 Hallo Alex, what is kamasanna? I cannot find this word in my dictionary. thank you, azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Dear Nina, all, > > I have this question: > What (if any) difference between kamasanna and lobha? > > Is it possible to say that Buddha can have kamasanna (so he could teach us about its drawbacks) but no Lobha (He has no defilements)? > > > With metta, > > Alex > #123843 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:39 am Subject: Re: SPD #1 (what is born?) epsteinrob Hi Phil. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: ...I will occasionally post passages from the best non-canonical Dhamma book I know, Survey of Paramattha Dhammas, by A. Sujin. I'll stick to posting the passages, if people would like to discuss, great. > > Here is the first one: > > "We say of people, of other living beings, or devas, that they are born; but in reality, citta, cetasika and rupa are born. When a specific type of citta accompanied by cetasikas arises together with rupa, we say, in conventional language, that a person is born." And I guess the accumulations that citta carries and then passes on creates the stream of arising cittas with their particular characteristics that we call "a person?" This points to the idea that when we are encountering people, we are in fact conceptually interpreting the many rupas that arise that constitute their seeming appearance as a being. Would you agree with that? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #123844 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:44 am Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi epsteinrob Hi Phil, or anyone. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > > Hi Howard, all > > This will seem very small-minded of me, perhaps, but I have concerns about this project. B.Bodhi has been involved in social work projects unsuitable to a monk recently, he has allowed a social justice aspect of Dhamma to become predominant in his life, when there is no such justification for such a focus in the ancient texts. The problem is that his commentarial notes tend to be taken with great seriousness by people, "neo-commentary" as Scott once called it. He is a worthy, hard-working translator, what a shame if his rather eccentric ideas about the role of Dhamma in social justice projects (which are great in their own sphere) become accepted as correct Dhamma. What is wrong with doing good works in conventional life? How does that harm the understanding of the Dhamma? Why should metta not be expressed as caring about people's well-being? > There are other problems with BB - he wrote in his preface to SN that Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma a fair view for an academic, but shameful for a monk meant to be representing Theravada Orthodoxy. Also, in his talks, he teaches Dhamma as exercises to be practiced. In Thailand, others shared concerns about BB, I wonder if they will speak out or does political correctness prohibit it? Then again, the Buddha predicted that the true Dhamma would disappear from the world, starting with Abhidhamma, so perhaps it is just to be accepted with equanimity. What is the historical or other evidence that the Buddha personally spoke/taught the Abhidhamma? Who is it that passed on the account of his delivering of the Abhidhamma in the arupa planes? What is the source for that? Thanks, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #123845 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:49 am Subject: Re: Question on difference between Train of chittas and ordinary th... epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > Ok. I guess it goes down to how one interprets the experience. I don't know what goes on in your case. The way I went about it is to refer to the citta processes. I.e. there is probably a rupa behind an experience of an itch or a pulse, but the issue is whether what' s actually being cognised - the object of a citta process - is a rupa or a concept (perception, imagination). My conclusion was that it was most likely a concept (even though it was a non-verbal thought/perception so to speak). > > A related issue is that if a cognition can truly distinguish a rupa, then this is already satipatthana and possibly already one of the stages of insight. So it seemed unrealistic that this would in fact occur so frequently (and so easily). Unless you had the accumulations for that to take place. How do you know you don't? The arising of doubt doesn't mean those accumulations/abilities are not present. > Besides, as mentioned, I would think that an experience of a rupa would have to have sati and panna etc, so it would be quite different to other experiences, and probably not quite as continuous as a series of pulses of some duration. But I don't really know of course. It seems to me that if the direct experience of a rupa arose due to accumulations and conditions that were correct for it to arise, that it might very well lead to a string of such experiences taking place. If so, that would be quite extraordinary and very much worth noting. I wouldn't assume whether something like that could or couldn't happen, no matter how you may experience it afterwards, when conceptual thinking starts spinning over it. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #123846 From: "azita" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 7:54 am Subject: Re: SPD #1 (what is born?) gazita2002 Hallo Phil,Sarah, Jon --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Thank you again, Sarah and Jon, for this group. Without it I would have not had access to the Dhamma in its correct form, so hard to come across in this day and age with its hunger for fast results. And thank you Nina for sharing your understanding so tirelessly. azita: I'll second that Phil, most beneficial for all of us , I think. dsg was my 're-introduction' to the dhamma after many messy years in 'fog' hope all is going well for you Phil, remember its all jst citta, cetasika and rupa arising, lasting for such a short time and then gone again. Patience, courage and good cheer azita #123847 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:16 am Subject: Re: Kamasanna vs lobha truth_aerator Hello Azita, >Azita:what is kamasanna? I cannot find this word in my dictionary. >===================== I use it in "perception of sensuality" or "sensuality perception" context. With best wishes, Alex #123848 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 8:51 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/19/2012 4:02:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, you wrote: As I pointed out, everybody is aware of suffering. D: yes , as G.Burns (plaing God ) stated .. but with the assumption it is only the other side of the coin H: The fact that there is suffering is not what gives me confidence in the Dhamma. Of course if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless(as would all other religions which aim to put an end to it), but that is a triviality. D: is the anicca -dukkha relation ( the point of impermanence , change towards decay ( ageing,death , the core of suffering ) a triviality shared by all other religions? --------------------------------------------- HCW: Dieter, actually, the relationship of impermanence to suffering is not unique to the Dhamma. What is unique about the Dhamma is 1) it's pointing out the no-self principle, 2) it's pointing out the specific central cause of suffering, namely tanha (and upadana), which, BTW, is what makes impermanence a condition for dukkha, and 3) it's providing a complete and detailed path to achieve the elimination of the defilements, the 8-fold noble path. --------------------------------------------- The Bodhisattva in his quest didn't think so ..(truth cannot be found in what is submitted to anicca) H: I do not believe that this is all that is meant by dukkha --> saddha. There must be more to it. (Sorry you are "surprised" by me, Dieter! ;-) D: as you may have noted , I mentioned before ' I started with an explanation'. Possibly you are considering the issue of anatta. But anatta isn't the beginning of faith , this wisdom needs to be penetrated by insight during practise . --------------------------------------------- HCW: The Buddha taught deep matters, and I presume his making a point of suffering somehow supporting faith in his Dhamma is deep. I would like to know the deep connection, but I do not know it yet. --------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123849 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 9:32 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) kenhowardau Hi Dieter, I think I remember your previous explanations now, thank you very much. And I think I remember Nina helping out with some further explanations. However I still don't understand why you made your initial statement: "Ken you may have faith in the present moment , but not the faith conditioned by suffering , due to a fair understanding of the first Noble Truth." I can guess at what "faith in the present moment" might mean, but I have no idea why (according to you) I don't have the other kind of faith (the one conditioned by right understanding of the first noble truth). Thinking about it as I write, I wonder if you are saying "the Dhamma as a description of the present-moment reality" is a matter of faith in the present moment, whereas "the Dhamma as a set of instructions" is a matter of faith conditioned by suffering. Is that it? Sorry for taking so long, but I got there in the end. :-) No prizes for guessing what I am going to say next! The sense of urgency (to put an end to dukkha) is a function of realities, not of concepts. Panna performs that function. And it does so without any help, or hindrance, from a controlling self (sentient being). In the same way, other dhammas are performing their functions *right now* without any help or hindrance from sentient beings. So the Dhamma is all about understanding the dhammas that are arising now, whichever they might be. ----------------- <. . .> >> KH: There are so few of us who have the courage to even *consider* crossing the river. That requires contemplating a world in which there is no past and no future (just the presently existing realities none of which is a self). >> > D: There is no contemplation about nibbana , because there is no <. . .> ------------------ KH: Perhaps I had my terminologies wrong. I was using the term "crossing the river" to refer to satipatthana as well as to supramundane vipassana. So I was thinking it meant understanding the conditioned world as anicca, dukkha and anatta as well as understanding the unconditioned world as anatta. In any case, can you see what I meant by "the courage to even *consider* crossing"? With all due respect to meditators, I maintain that all meditators lack that courage. Meditators insist on seeing Buddhism as a conventional teaching. In a conventional teaching there is a sentient being that does the work. That's very comforting to someone who clings to the idea of his own existence. A true Dhamma student, however, must face the fact that there is no such self. There is no control over ultimate reality, and so there is no way in which the Dhamma can be a conventional teaching. Ken H #123850 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:06 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi kenhowardau Hi Robert E, --------- <. . .> > RE: What is wrong with doing good works in conventional life? How does that harm the understanding of the Dhamma? Why should metta not be expressed as caring about people's well-being? ---------- KH: I wonder why you ask those questions. DSG has often discussed the vinaya and how important it is. Do you really see no problem in a monk's breaking the rules of training? ------------------ <. . .> > RE: What is the historical or other evidence that the Buddha personally spoke/taught the Abhidhamma? Who is it that passed on the account of his delivering of the Abhidhamma in the arupa planes? What is the source for that? ------------------ KH: I think Phil's point was that a monk should not put forward such accusations (that the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma). As for the allegations themselves, I can't see how any serious Dhamma student could give them any credit at all. According to the Buddha's First Discourse, he taught a Dhamma that was "previously unheard by man nor god." That would be the Abhidhamma, wouldn't it? What else? Ken H #123852 From: "Prasad Praturi" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 12:53 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad ppraturi Howard and all, When we are angry, we feel some sensations(some chemical process happen on body) and breath changes its normal course. Also when we have fearful, some other changes happen on body sensations and breath... Diffrent toughts about diffrent objects in mind produce different body phenomena?? How do you understand this phenomena?. Aren't Nama(s) influence/induce Rupa(s). If so? These Rupa(s) again influence Nama(s) and reinforce volition(s)..hence more kamma.. How do you explain in simple language this phenomena in terms of vedana(cetasika). Metta, Prasad #123853 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:29 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi kenhowardau --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "antony272b2" wrote: > > Bhikkhu Bodhi wrote: "In AN, persons are as a rule not reduced to mere collections of aggregates, elements and sense-bases, but are treated as real centers of living experience engaged in a heartfelt quest for happiness and freedom from suffering." (from Intro to Samyutta Nikaya) > > Wonderful! > ---------- Hi Antony, I agree it is wonderful. People should be treated with care and respect. Dhammas, on the other hand, are impersonal phenomena that don't need to be treated in any particular way. And it is dhammas that we learn about in satipatthana, not people. I hope Ven Bodhi was not suggesting that the Abhidhamma, or any other part of the Tipitaka, reduced people to mere dhammas. That, I hope you will agree, would be a fundamental misrepresentation. Ken H #123854 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:24 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi upasaka_howard Hi, Ken - In a message dated 4/19/2012 10:07:02 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, kenhowardau@... writes: As for the allegations themselves, I can't see how any serious Dhamma student could give them any credit at all. According to the Buddha's First Discourse, he taught a Dhamma that was "previously unheard by man nor god." That would be the Abhidhamma, wouldn't it? What else? ================================= That would be what he spoke in all his suttas for 45 years: His Dhamma. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123855 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 20, 2012 10:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad upasaka_howard Hi, Prasad - In a message dated 4/19/2012 10:50:14 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, ppraturi@... writes: Howard and all, When we are angry, we feel some sensations(some chemical process happen on body) and breath changes its normal course. Also when we have fearful, some other changes happen on body sensations and breath... Diffrent toughts about diffrent in mind produce different body phenomena?? How do you understand this. Aren't Nama(s) influence/induce Rupa(s). If so? These Rupa(s) again influence Nama(s) and reinforce volition(s)..hence more kamma.. How do you explain in simple language this phenomena? ------------------------------------------------ HCW: How do I explain it? I don't follow you. It is a fact that mentality and materiality are mutually conditioning. I guess I do not explain it. ;-) ------------------------------------------------- Metta, Prasad ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123856 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 2:37 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard, H: The fact that there is suffering is not what gives me confidence in the Dhamma. Of course if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless(as would all other religions which aim to put an end to it), but that is a triviality. D: is the anicca -dukkha relation ( the point of impermanence , change towards decay ( ageing,death , the core of suffering ) a triviality shared by all other religions? --------------------------------------------- HCW:Dieter, actually, the relationship of impermanence to suffering is not unique to the Dhamma. D: actually in the West ( it should be) known since Adam and Eve , who faced ageing and death beyond Eden. But that was not my point . Without doubt , there is a lot of wisdom in other religions/philosophies too . . It is the use of 'triviality ' , " the state of being unimportant or dealing with unimportant things" for the anicca-dukkha relation. I still believe there is a misunderstanding (?) Recently somebody wrote to me : "If someone finds aging and death a problem in themselves, that the problem is just that we get old, sick, and die, then I'd reply that very view is he problem ..."Of course people are born and will die. So?"' Here is no misunderstanding ... HCW: What is unique about the Dhamma is 1) it's pointing out the no-self principle, 2) it's pointing out the specific central cause of suffering, namely tanha (and upadana), which, BTW, is what makes impermanence a condition for dukkha, and 3) it's providing a complete and detailed path to achieve the elimination of the defilements, the 8-fold noble path. --------------------------------------------- D: yes, there are a lot of reasons what makes the Buddha Dhamma unique like the aspects you mention : anatta doctrine ..the origin of suffering ... the anicca dukkha relaton (no triviality) ,the way how to end suffering. Unique is certainly as well the characteristic of a meta religion .... H: I do not believe that this is all that is meant by dukkha --> saddha. There must be more to it. (Sorry you are "surprised" by me, Dieter! ;-) D: as you may have noted , I mentioned before ' I started with an explanation'. Possibly you are considering the issue of anatta. But anatta isn't the beginning of faith , this wisdom needs to be penetrated by insight during practise . --------------------------------------------- HCW: The Buddha taught deep matters, and I presume his making a point of suffering somehow supporting faith in his Dhamma is deep. I would like to know the deep connection, but I do not know it yet. --------------------------------------------- D: in a slight change of a saying: to have a religion , a philosophy of life (and death),is just that one's heart is attached to. So our choice is quite individualistic .. or an issue of previous kamma. Nevertheless as you said before: if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless. Or , if sufferring is not seen as a problem , faith into the Dhamma would be pointless. All about the Buddha Dhamma is suffering ...and its cessation, that I tried to explain before . You may like to read what Ven. Buddhadasa said in 'Dependent Origination' extract : see http://www.vipassati.ch/english/books/Paticcasamuppada-Practical-Dependent-Origi\ nation_ebook.html#14 This means that the end of asava depends on all the various conditions, in the order mentioned, until one comes down to faith. If we have confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, if we have confidence that the practice will end suffering, this is called the beginning of faith. Now let's trace all the conditions back: with faith arises joy; with joy arises rapture; with rapture arises tranquility; with tranquility arises happiness; with happiness arises concentration; with concentration arises absolute knowledge; with absolute knowledge arises disgust; with disgust arises fading away; with fading away arises deliverance; and then knowledge of deliverance has been obtained. And so there is the end of the asava, and the beginning in faith. Faith depends on suffering. This is strange. I would guess that not too many people have ever heard it put this way. The faith we have we have because of suffering. If suffering did not oppress us, we would not run to the Buddha for refuge. Isn't that so? We run to the Buddha as a refuge. We have a firm and strict faith in the Buddha because we have been oppressed by suffering. So in our life, suffering becomes the condition of faith and so suffering becomes a good thing. Just like a jewel in the forehead of the toad, which is really as ugly thing. In suffering there appears a gem/that which drives us to run to the Buddha and have faith. The Buddha's saying that suffering-which comes from ignorance, mental concocting, mentality/materiality, etc.- is the foundation for faith, shows us not to be sorry, not to be afraid, not to feel slighted. If we use Dependent Origination well, suffering will become the base of faith and faith will allow the Dhamma to blossom to the ending of the asava. Seeing suffering in this way is like finding a diamond in the forehead of an ugly toad. But usually people hate and fear such things as toads, mice, millipedes and worms. People fear all sorts of things. But if they know that suffering is the condition of faith, that it is the foundation for the blossoming of faith, then suffering becomes something that is useful. unquote looking forward to hearing from you that above has been helpful for your understanding "in what way suffering/unsatisfactoriness is a support for faith/confidence " ..... ;-) with Metta Dieter #123857 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:30 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/20/2012 12:37:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: D: in a slight change of a saying: to have a religion , a philosophy of life (and death),is just that one's heart is attached to. So our choice is quite individualistic .. or an issue of previous kamma. Nevertheless as you said before: if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless. Or , if sufferring is not seen as a problem , faith into the Dhamma would be pointless. All about the Buddha Dhamma is suffering ...and its cessation, that I tried to explain before . ============================== Of course. I entirely agree with that. :-) With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123858 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:53 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - (Continuing) In a message dated 4/20/2012 12:37:26 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: You may like to read what Ven. Buddhadasa said in 'Dependent Origination' extract : see _http://www.vipassati.ch/english/books/Paticcasamuppada-Practical-Dependent-Orig\ ination_ebook.html#14_ (http://www.vipassati.ch/english/books/Paticcasamuppada-Practical-Dependent-Orig\ ination_ebook.html#14) ------------------------------------------------ HCW: Yes, I've read him. --------------------------------------------- This means that the end of asava depends on all the various conditions, in the order mentioned, until one comes down to faith. If we have confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, if we have confidence that the practice will end suffering, this is called the beginning of faith. Now let's trace all the conditions back: with faith arises joy; with joy arises rapture; with rapture arises tranquility; with tranquility arises happiness; with happiness arises concentration; with concentration arises absolute knowledge; with absolute knowledge arises disgust; with disgust arises fading away; with fading away arises deliverance; and then knowledge of deliverance has been obtained. And so there is the end of the asava, and the beginning in faith. Faith depends on suffering. This is strange. -------------------------------------------- HCW: :-) Yes, it is. --------------------------------------------- I would guess that not too many people have ever heard it put this way. The faith we have we have because of suffering. If suffering did not oppress us, we would not run to the Buddha for refuge. Isn't that so? We run to the Buddha as a refuge. We have a firm and strict faith in the Buddha because we have been oppressed by suffering. So in our life, suffering becomes the condition of faith and so suffering becomes a good thing. Just like a jewel in the forehead of the toad, which is really as ugly thing. In suffering there appears a gem/that which drives us to run to the Buddha and have faith. --------------------------------------------- HCW: Faith may *depend* on suffering - it also depends on *existing*. But I would not say that suffering is a "support" for faith in any obvious way. I would say that the REDUCTION-of-suffering-as-a-consequence-of-following-the-Dhamma is a support for faith in the Dhamma. (Of course, reduction of suffering depends on the existence of suffering, but that fact is tautologous, hence trivial.) ------------------------------------------------ The Buddha's saying that suffering-which comes from ignorance, mental concocting, mentality/materiality, etc.- is the foundation for faith, shows us not to be sorry, not to be afraid, not to feel slighted. If we use Dependent Origination well, suffering will become the base of faith and faith will allow the Dhamma to blossom to the ending of the asava. Seeing suffering in this way is like finding a diamond in the forehead of an ugly toad. But usually people hate and fear such things as toads, mice, millipedes and worms. People fear all sorts of things. But if they know that suffering is the condition of faith, that it is the foundation for the blossoming of faith, then suffering becomes something that is useful. unquote ----------------------------------------------- HCW: I find that explanation inadequate. (My problem, I suppose.) ------------------------------------------------ looking forward to hearing from you that above has been helpful for your understanding "in what way suffering/unsatisfactoriness is a support for faith/confidence " ..... ;-) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Thanks, Dieter. :-) ----------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123859 From: "philip" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 3:58 am Subject: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi philofillet Dear several guys, group reply Chuck ok, no problemo Rob E, of course conventional acts of kindness and generosity are praised by tge Buddha utt not trying to fix the world, which would ibdicate a misunderstanding of kamma. But as unrelated to Dhamma I think social activism is great, I have projects here in Japan, nothing at all to do with Dhamma though. Howard, yes,we see things differently, so years and years to come (health permitting) of agree to disagree? I don't get that, I don't know how or why people do it, must be an intellectual deficiency on my part. So if things work out in what I consider to be a sensible way, our paths will rately cross here, which is not to say that I doybt you are a wonderful human being. Pt, dhs and atth have been shelved, I find it difficult to srudy them by myself, hopefully will turn to DSG for a group project next year, time permitting. I love my job but it leaves me little free time... Phil #123860 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:27 am Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi kenhowardau Hi Howard, ---- >> KH: According to the Buddha's First Discourse, he taught a Dhamma that was "previously unheard by man nor god." >> That would be the Abhidhamma, wouldn't it? What else? > H: That would be what he spoke in all his suttas for 45 years: His > Dhamma. ----- KH: As I never tire of saying, every word of the Buddha's Dhamma is to be understood in terms of satipatthana. That is: in terms of right understanding of conditioned reality. Therefore, as far as I am concerned, the Buddha's Dhamma is the Abhidhamma. If you, or anyone else, were to tell me the Dhamma could also be understood in other, non-Abhidhamma, ways, I would say "thanks but no thanks." For other ways of understanding I look to twenty-first century authorities. For treatment of my medical complaints, for example, I turn to twenty-first century medicine in preference to the cow's urine recommended in the Tipitika. Similarly, for scientific understanding of the world around me (including the evolution of plants and animals) I strongly recommend modern science, not 200 BC science. I could try to list all the forms of non-Abhidhamma teaching, but perhaps I should ask you: is there any one of them (politics, economics, recreation, marriage counselling) - any at all - that you would seek from the Tipitaka in preference to the best available twenty-first century sources? Ken H #123861 From: "azita" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 8:11 am Subject: Re: Kamasanna vs lobha gazita2002 Hallo Alex, thank you. So, in answer to yr question about the difference between kamasanna and lobha. If as you state, that kamasanna is merely perception of sensuality, then it is very different to lobha, which is attachment. However, perception of sensuality sounds vague to me. Sounds like it could be lots of moments of citta accompanied by sanna with the concept of sensuality as object. Or something like that:) patience, courage and good cheer azita --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Azita, > > > >Azita:what is kamasanna? I cannot find this word in my dictionary. > >===================== > > I use it in "perception of sensuality" or "sensuality perception" context. > > With best wishes, > > Alex > #123862 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 11:02 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna jonoabb Hi pt (123803) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > Thanks for your reply. > > > J: I don't know about that. The 'intervention' (my own term, btw, not something from the texts) could just as easily be in the form of a natural occurrence such as an avalanche, a lightening strike, etc. The principle is the same. > > > > So I do not see this as being, in Dhamma terms, a case of an 'interaction between two people or their cittas and cetasikas'. Just different dhammas. > > pt: Yes, that makes sense in theory. Though I generally end up confusing all that with people and things they do, so I guess that's where my questions are coming from. > > > J: (In any event, in the particular case being discussed (killer and victim), the rupa which conditions the end of lifespan would in fact be the weapon used so in any event this would not be a case of a rupa that is produced by the intimation of the killer.) > > pt: ok, could we say in summary, one person "interacts" with another there "through the medium" of rupas. I.e. killer's volition conditions intimation, which then basically moves the knife (miriyad of rupas conditioning one another there, and then), which then conditions the rupa of the victim (life faculty) and this in turn conditions the citta of the victim (death citta, alongside with other conditions such as vipaka, etc), in simple terms? > =============== J: The actual moment(s) of any 'interaction' between 2 persons/streams of cittas, whatever/whenever that may be in terms of dhammas, would be no different from any other moment. Just conditioned dhammas arising. If your question is whether the cittas of A can condition the cittas of B (or the object of such cittas), I can only say I know of no such conditioning described in the texts. To my understanding, the pleasant or unpleasant objects experienced by B, and the term of B's lifespan, are conditioned by past kamma (in conjunction with other conditions). > =============== > > And if we call the above "physiscal interaction", then I'd guess "verbal interaction" would happen in the same way - through the medium of rupas - i.e. citta and volition of one person condition vocal intimation, which then produces other rupas that eventually end up as an object of auditory consciousness of the other person etc? > =============== J: You are asking about a class of conventional event ('interaction' between streams of cittas) that is not discussed in the texts. So your guess is as good as mine! Jon #123863 From: "charlest" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 4:47 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi dhammasaro Good friends all, Is there not a sutta about the Historic Buddha taking care of an ill monk? He did even though this monk did not take care of other monks when he was well? Did not the Historic Buddha admonish the other monks? To this ole Buddhist among mostly non-Buddhist; I feel how I act reflects negatively/positively on the Dhamma!!! Imho, we Buddhist(s) do not live in a bubble!!! peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E, > --------- > > RE: What is wrong with doing good works in conventional life? How does that harm > the understanding of the Dhamma? Why should metta not be expressed as caring > about people's well-being? > ---------- [rest deleted by Chuck] #123864 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:13 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 1 sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, # 123670 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > S:At each moment a citta arises. > > > D: do I get that right: you see the present as a series of arising and ceasing moments similar to the sequence of pictures in a movie ? > But isn't the reality a constant stream of mental and corporal phenomena within the process of D.O., in which only certain particles rise and cease? .... S: At the present moment, there is only ever a single citta arising and falling away experiencing its object. On account of ignorance and continuity of experience, of namas and rupas, it seems there are whole pictures, stories, people and things. In reality, there are just a succession of cittas arising and falling away: AN, Ones (1, V, 8), The Buddha says: "No other thing do I know, O monks, that so quickly changes as the mind: Inasmuch that it is not easy to give an illustration for the mind's quick change." From the commentary to the Vibhanga, transl as `Dispeller of Delusion' (PTS), which I've quoted before: *** 242: "For the making known of the characteristic of no-self is not the province of anyone else; it is the province of the Fully Enlightened Ones only. Thus the characteristic of no-self is unobvious...........but here it should be understood that he taught it by means of both impermanence and pain. "But it is owing to not keeping in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment by what that these characteristics do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the 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)." [S: rather than being aware of postures, it is the idea of postures that conceals the truths about the elements as dukkha.. When there is awareness, there's no idea of posture at all] "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." [S: When there is an idea of `wholes' such as posture, chariot or self, there is no understanding of dhatus (elements) and no way to understand anatta.] "But when continuity is dissected by laying hold of rise and fall, the characteristic of impermanence appears in accordance with its true essential nature. When the postures are exposed (ugghaa.tita) by keeping in mind continual oppression, the characteristic of pain appears in accordance with its true essential nature. 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. "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall and change, or be cause of their absence after having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words `what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. "But the same five aggregates are no-self because of the words `what is painful is no-self' (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self." [S: `no exercising power over them', neither the khandhas or any ideas about them, such as postures, are at one's command]. S: The dhammas described in D.O. are just the same impermanent cittas, cetasikas and rupas - all impermanent. ... > S:As you know, each citta is accompanied by at least 7 cetasikas. The Buddha encouraged the understanding of any citta (or any other dhamma appearing) just as it is. > > D: the 7 universals ( sabbacitta sadharana) contact, feeling ,perception, volition , life faculty , one-pointedness ,attention (manasasikara), right? > Why are the last two always going along with the citta? ... S: Because there isn't a single citta that can arise without ekaggata (one-pointedness) and manasikara (attention), just like the other universals. ... > One-pointedness should exclude the state of unconcentrated mind as mentioned in the text above , shouldn't it? ... S: In the Maha Satipatthana Sutta, when it refers to: > "((3) He further clearly perceives and understands any state of consciousness or mind (cittanupassana), whether it is greedy or not, hateful or not, deluded or not, cramped or distracted, developed or undeveloped, surpassable or unsurpassable, concentrated or unconcentrated, liberated or unliberated (Nyanatiloka)"> Here, the "concentrated or unconcentrated" mind refer to samaahita citta and asamaahita citta - from the comy: "samaahita.m citta.m = 'The quieted state of consciousness.' It refers to the conscious state of him who has full or partial absorption. [S: access or jhana]." "asamaahita.m citta.m = 'The state of consciousness not quieted.' It refers to the conscious state without either absorption." Now, there is no jhana, but there is citta arising with greed, hate, distraction or kusala of some kind - with each of these cittas, along with moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas, there is always ekaggata cetasika (one-pointedness) and manasikara (attention). There is momentary concentration at each instant now, otherwise citta could not experience its object. There is no self to concentrate or attend ever. ... > > Even more evident is the exclusion of the cetasika Manasikara by following . > SN 9.11 PTS: S i 203 Ayoniso-manasikara Sutta: Inappropriate Attention translated from the Pali by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu > 'I have heard that on one occasion a certain monk was dwelling among the Kosalans in a forest thicket. Now at that time, he spent the day's abiding thinking evil, unskillful thoughts: i.e., thoughts of sensuality, thoughts of ill will, thoughts of doing harm.<...> ... S: Whether thinking evil, whether seeing, whether developing insight - at any moment at all, manasikara cetasika arises with the citta, attending to its object. It is never excluded, but the nature of akusala manasikara is different from kusala manasikara, just as akusala ekaggata is different from kusala ekaggata. ... > Furthermore I wonder how to distinguish this universal from the beautiful mental factor sati..? ... S: Sati is aware in a wholesome sense - it 'reminds' the citta to be kusala. The different cetasikas have different functions. More as we come to them perhaps as this post is already very long. ... > S: The Buddha encouraged the understanding of any citta (or any other dhamma appearing) just as it is. > So regardless of whether it is a citta rooted greed, hatred, delusion, i.e accompanied by these or any other mental states - wholesome or unwholesome, worldly or unworldly - it can be understood at this very moment when it appears. > In other words, the development of satipatthana is not a "waiting game", waiting until no nivaranas, no unwholesome states arise, waiting until the circumstances seem more favourable - it is the development of awareness and understanding at this very moment of the citta (or other dhamma) which appears now. > Do you read the passage any differently? Is there anything further to discuss on the cetasikas with regard to this example? > > D: I think no difference about the necessity of development of mindfulness/sati, and that means indeed no waiting game but recognition of the mind state and the consequence of practising right effort. ... S: Effort can also be kusala or akusala. It is the effort itself which 'practices' or 'develops' when it arises. Right effort only develops with right understanding, not by any self deciding to have it arise or practise it. ... > There are a couple of questions , like above . Furthermore:how do we have to understand to recognize the state of delusion (the unwholesome universal) ? The trouble with delusion is that something is taken for real until the 'mirage is unveiled' , isn't it? ... S: Yes and it's only "unveiled" through the development of understanding of present realities - cittas, cetasikas and rupas appearing now. This is why any discussion has to come back to the present dhammas. .... > I wonder why the 5 hindrances are mentioned under contemplation of mental formation and not under mind in the Sutta . ... S: Because they are not cittas, but cetasikas. Dhammanupassana includes all dhammas not yet referred to under the other headings (as well as them). So cetasikas, such as the 5 hindrances, are included here. ... > > So far what came into my mind .. ;-) ... S: Quite a lot of good thoughts came to your mind ;-) If a lot more come in response to my comments, perhaps you'd like to break it up into different posts. Any of the points can be elaborated on. Metta Sarah ==== #123865 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:22 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E & Pt, #123668 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >PT: ...Anyway, does kusala that's not directly part of the path, condition kusala that is strictly the path? I don't know, probably. Looks like we really need to start re-reading Nina's conditions. > >R: Not a bad idea. On the other hand, maybe we can also get a quick yes or no from Nina, Jon or Sarah. :-) And then still look at the more specific rundown on conditions. ... S: Not a "quick yes or no", but the way I see it is that any dhamma may be a condition for satipatthana now by being the object of the present citta for a start (arammana paccaya). Also, by natural decisive support condition (pakatu upanissaya paccaya), even akusala states can condition kusala states. Conditions are very complex. However, it would be quite wrong to have the idea that developing akusala states or even kusala states that are not part of the path would lead to insight and enlightenment. The conditions given by the Buddha for developing insight are the hearing of the Dhamma, the wise considering and the direct understanding of Dhamma/dhammas. Without these conditions there can never be the development of insight. So "yes and no":) Metta Sarah ==== #123866 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:36 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna sarahprocter... Dear Pt, (& all), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > pt: I'm still struggling how to relate this to conditions for cutti citta. Could it then be said that cutti citta of the one who is being killed is not conditioned just by his kamma, but firstly by falling away of life-faculty, which in turn falls away as conditioned by rupa that stops it from arising, such as hardness (of a conventional knife). I think I'm making a mistake somewhere. ... >R: Check out visuddhimagga viii where it talks about untimely death. .... S: Cuti citta is just conditioned by past kamma - the same kamma that conditioned the patisandhi and bhavanga cittas in that life-time. The life-faculty rupa is also conditioned by kamma as are any experiences through the senses at times of being assaulted. From Vism viii which Rob referred to: "Untimely death is a term for the death of those whose continuity is interrupted by kamma capable of causing them to fall (caavana) from their place at that very moment, as in the case of Duusi-Maara (see M. i. 337), Kalaaburaajaa (see Jaa, iii, 39), etc., or for the death of those whose [life's] continuity is interrupted by assaults with weapons, etc., ***due to previous kamma***" (my asterisks) Metta Sarah ==== #123867 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 6:40 pm Subject: Re: video clip for Sarah sarahprocter... Dear Yawares, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Yawares Sastri" wrote: > yawares: Lucky me, "watintaram" Thai Buddhist artists group produced Jataka 500 stories in videos!! I can watch them on every Uposatha day when I uphold 8 precepts(no TV, movies, music). > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-r7wV3F77Y&feature=my_favorites&list=FLotJHgCNZB\ SMDegcF0cIPLA > > Thank you very much for reading my Jataka story. .... S: I'm missing your Jataka stories - we haven't received one for quite a while. I looked at the link - very good. Jon can follow the Thai as well, but for me, I have to rely on the sub-titles which they give. Recently in Hong Kong, a friend of mine helped organise a festival of Buddhist films. I should recommend this to her. Maybe you or Pt can add a link to this in the "links". metta Sarah ==== #123868 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:05 pm Subject: Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad sarahprocter... Hi Howard, Prasad & Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > It occurs to me that what is going on is along the lines of the > following example: > A sharp "back pressure," a particular body-door rupa, is taken as > object of consciousness and is felt by vedana as unpleasant. ... S: As Rob E suggested, there must be multiple experiences of various rupas through the body-sense, interspersed with multiple mind-door processes of cittas before there is any idea of "back pressure"... > Subsequently, > blindingly fast and typically subliminal thinking combines the fresh memory of > that rupa with the fresh recollection of the feeling (or "vedanizing") of > it into an imagined, presently occurring 'feeling' called "a back pain". ... S: Yes, but multiple experiences of rupas, recollections and so on as you suggest... .. > There is, in fact, no such back pain outside of thinking. (There were only the > body-door rupa, the knowing of it as object, the affective evaluation of > it as unpleasant, and the rapid conceptualizing that followed.) ... S: Yes, as you suggest, in fact only rupas experienced through the body-sense, followed by lots of thinking and conceptualizing. "There is, in fact, no such back pain outside of thinking." Well said. Metta Sarah ==== #123869 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 7:19 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Furthermore the passage :"Herein a householder is wise: he is endowed with wisdom that understands the arising and cessation (of the five aggregates of existence); he is possessed of the noble penetrating insight that leads to the destruction of suffering. This is called the accomplishment of wisdom." > > The Venerable notes : (of the five aggregates of existence)" which I think is better commented by 'phenomena' ( dhammas) > .... > S: Is there any problem, as you see it, in referring to the understanding of the arising and cessation of the five khandhas? It seems fine to me. .... > D: I think it is the arising and cessation of phenomena /dhammas..not their 'abstract classification ' .. > (pls compare Ven.Nyanatiloka : Khanda -excerpt ) > > 'The fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence, <....> ... S: I think this is incorrect. The khandhas are dhammas, realities, just as the dhatus, ayatanas, namas or rupas are dhammas. This is why the suttas (as well as the Abhidhamma) refer to the arising and falling away of the khandhas, as in the quote I just sent you in the last message; "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why? Because they rise and fall and change, or be cause of their absence after having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words `what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. "But the same five aggregates are no-self because of the words `what is painful is no-self' (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self." .... S: The khandhas as discussed here are clearly not "an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence". Quite the contrary, the khandhas refer to all the dhammas arising and falling away now as we write - the visible object experienced now, the seeing, the likes, dislikes and so on. Also, from the beginning of the Upanissa Sutta which you've been quoting recently: "The destruction of the cankers, monks, is for one who knows and sees, I say, not for one who does not know and does not see. Knowing what, seeing what does the destruction of the cankers occur? 'Such is material form, such is the arising of material form, such is the passing away of material form. Such is feeling... perception... mental formations... consciousness; such is the arising of consciousness, such is the passing away of consciousness' " for one who knows and sees this, monks, the destruction of the cankers occurs." S: Nothing abstract about the khandhas as discussed here. They can be known right now as they appear, one khandha, one dhamma, at a time. Metta Sarah ====== Metta Sarah ===== #123870 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 21, 2012 10:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad upasaka_howard Hi, Sarah - In a message dated 4/21/2012 5:05:28 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sarahprocterabbott@... writes: Hi Howard, Prasad & Rob E, --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , upasaka@... wrote: > It occurs to me that what is going on is along the lines of the > following example: > A sharp "back pressure," a particular body-door rupa, is taken as > object of consciousness and is felt by vedana as unpleasant. ... S: As Rob E suggested, there must be multiple experiences of various rupas through the body-sense, interspersed with multiple mind-door processes of cittas before there is any idea of "back pressure"... ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: I used "back pressure" to make clear to the reader what sort of rupa I was referring to. (Recall how the Buddha referred to a "lute sound".) As for a number of rupas being involved, yes, I quickly replied to Robert that, yes, there was a bunch of such rupas all "combined" involved in the subsequent conceptualizinbg. -------------------------------------------------- > Subsequently, > blindingly fast and typically subliminal thinking combines the fresh memory of > that rupa with the fresh recollection of the feeling (or "vedanizing") of > it into an imagined, presently occurring 'feeling' called "a back pain". ... S: Yes, but multiple experiences of rupas, recollections and so on as you suggest... --------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes. ----------------------------------------------------- .. > There is, in fact, no such back pain outside of thinking. (There were only the > body-door rupa, the knowing of it as object, the affective evaluation of > it as unpleasant, and the rapid conceptualizing that followed.) ... S: Yes, as you suggest, in fact only rupas experienced through the body-sense, followed by lots of thinking and conceptualizing. "There is, in fact, no such back pain outside of thinking." Well said. ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: :-) --------------------------------------------------- Metta Sarah ============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123871 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:23 am Subject: suffering is the condition of faith moellerdieter Hi Howard, KenH and all , I think the issue is of general importance . (sorry for the length , I tried to avoid double references if presented in 2 parts) you wrote: (D: in a slight change of a saying: to have a religion , a philosophy of life (and death),is just that one's heart is attached to. So our choice is quite individualistic .. or an issue of previous kamma. Nevertheless as you said before: if there were no suffering, the Dhamma would be pointless. Or , if sufferring is not seen as a problem , faith into the Dhamma would be pointless. All about the Buddha Dhamma is suffering ...and its cessation, that I tried to explain before .) ============================== Of course. I entirely agree with that. :-) D: always nice to hear that ;-) Ven. Buddhadasa in Dependent Orgination refreing to the Upanissa Sutta (: If we have confidence in the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha, if we have confidence that the practice will end suffering, this is called the beginning of faith. Now let's trace all the conditions back: with faith arises joy;with joy arises rapture;with rapture arises tranquility;with tranquility arises happiness;with happiness arises concentration; with concentration arises absolute knowledge;with absolute knowledge arises disgust;with disgust arises fading away;with fading away arises deliverance; and then knowledge of deliverance has been obtained. And so there is the end of the asava, and the beginning in faith. Faith depends on suffering. This is strange. -------------------------------------------- HCW: :-) Yes, it is. --------------------------------------------- D: I think that depends ...supposing that the Venerable used 'strange' for his listeners, as he said before- "if we have confidence that the practice will end suffering, this is called the beginning of faith .." which is quite clear, isn't it? V.B.:I would guess that not too many people have ever heard it put this way. The faith we have we have because of suffering. If suffering did not oppress us, we would not run to the Buddha for refuge. Isn't that so? We run to the Buddha as a refuge. We have a firm and strict faith in the Buddha because we have been oppressed by suffering. So in our life, suffering becomes the condition of faith and so suffering becomes a good thing. Just like a jewel in the forehead of the toad, which is really as ugly thing. In suffering there appears a gem/that which drives us to run to the Buddha and have faith. --------------------------------------------- HCW: Faith may *depend* on suffering - it also depends on *existing*. D: that is obvious as the D.O. chain is continued. Following the sutta in context : http://buddhasutra.com/files/upanisa_sutta.htm (translation by Thanissaro Bhikkhu) Dwelling at Savatthi... "Monks, the ending of the effluents is for one who knows and sees, I tell you, not for one who does not know and does not see. For one who knows what and sees what is there the ending of effluents? 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such is perception, such its origination, such its disappearance. Such are fabrications, such their origination, such their disappearance. Such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' The ending of the effluents is for one who knows in this way and sees in this way. "The knowledge of ending in the presence of ending has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is the prerequisite for the knowledge of ending? Release, it should be said. Release has its prerequisite, I tell you. It is not without a prerequisite. And what is its prerequisite? Dispassion... Disenchantment... Knowledge and vision of things as they actually are present... Concentration... Pleasure... Serenity... Rapture... Joy... Conviction... Stress... Birth... Becoming... Clinging... Craving... Feeling... Contact... The six sense media... Name-and-form... Consciousness... Fabrications... Fabrications have their prerequisite, I tell you. They are not without a prerequisite. And what is their prerequisite? Ignorance, it should be said. "Thus fabrications have ignorance as their prerequisite, onsciousness has fabrications as its prerequisite,name-and-form has consciousness as its prerequisite, the six sense media have name-and-form as their prerequisite,contact has the six sense media as its prerequisite,feeling has contact as its prerequisite, craving has feeling as its prerequisite,clinging has craving as its prerequisite, ecoming has clinging as its prerequisite, birth has becoming as its prerequisite, stress and suffering have birth as their prerequisite, conviction has stress and suffering as its prerequisite,joy has conviction as its prerequisite, rapture has joy as its prerequisite,serenity has rapture as its prerequisite,pleasure has serenity as its prerequisite,concentration has pleasure as its prerequisite, knowledge and vision of things as they actually are present has concentration as its prerequisite,disenchantment has knowledge and vision of things as they actually are present as its prerequisite,dispassion has disenchantment as its prerequisite,release has dispassion as its prerequisite,knowledge of ending has release as its prerequisite... "Just as when the gods pour rain in heavy drops and crash thunder on the upper mountains: The water, flowing down along the slopes, fills the mountain clefts and rifts and gullies. When the mountain clefts and rifts and gullies are full, they fill the little ponds. When the little ponds are full, they fill the big lakes. When the big lakes are full, they fill the little rivers. When the little rivers are full, they fill the big rivers. When the big rivers are full, they fill the great ocean. In the same way..snip( T.B. uses conviction instead of faith ) In the Nidana Sutta we find : "..snip From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, aging, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, and despair come into play. Such is the origination of this entire mass of stress..." I.e. direct reference to the First Noble Truth , for which fair understanding is assumed as the Upanisa Sutta is concerned. And this understanding is the prerequisite for faith ... Not strange at all as far this context is concerned, is it? HCW:I would not say that suffering is a "support" for faith in any obvious way. I would say that the REDUCTION-of-suffering-as-a-consequence-of-following-the-Dhamma is a support for faith in the Dhamma. (Of course, reduction of suffering depends on the existence of suffering, but that fact is tautologous, hence trivial.) ------------------------------------------------ D: More general I think we agree that faith in the Teacher means confidence in the Buddha Dhamma Vinaya /Sangha. The Buddha stated that a Buddhist (a follower of his teaching) is somebody who takes refuge in the Triple Gem. Now there is beginning of faith when e.g. the Kalama took refuge after listening to the Buddha ( 'When they know for themselves.. not by hearsay etc.) , i.e. no blind face.. the disciple is requested to 'check the genuity like a goldsmith would do with gold and silver'. So faith is growing by recognizing the truth of what has been proclaimed ..piece by piece , and in this way I agree when you say " REDUCTION-of-suffering-as-a-consequence-of-following-the-Dhamma is a support for faith in the Dhamma" . V.B.:The Buddha's saying that suffering-which comes from ignorance, mental concocting, mentality/materiality, etc.- is the foundation for faith, shows us not to be sorry, not to be afraid, not to feel slighted. If we use Dependent Origination well, suffering will become the base of faith and faith will allow the Dhamma to blossom to the ending of the asava. Seeing suffering in this way is like finding a diamond in the forehead of an ugly toad. But usually people hate and fear such things as toads, mice, millipedes and worms. People fear all sorts of things. But if they know that suffering is the condition of faith, that it is the foundation for the blossoming of faith, then suffering becomes something that is useful. unquote ----------------------------------------------- HCW: I find that explanation inadequate. (My problem, I suppose.) ------------------------------------------------ D: I think that has been well said by Venerable Buddhadasa : "If we use Dependent Origination well, suffering will become the base of faith and faith will allow the Dhamma to blossom to the ending of the asava " . There is of course as well the issue of not seeing suffering as a problem (not refering to you, of course) but as a matter of the ups and downs of life one is indispensable submitted to. Please see my previous quotations... and I believe such view represents the 'Zeitgeist' of many in the West . If suffering isn't understood there is no condition for faith (in the teaching to end suffering) Bhikkhu Bodhi comments refering to the topic (please note as well the last passage in respect to the 'cetasika in daily life-project'-viriya.) http://www.dhammatalks.net/Books2/Bhikkhu_Bodhi_Transcendental_Dependent_Arising\ .htm A Translation and Exposition of the Upanisa Sutta extract: Since it is suffering that impels us to seek the way to liberation, suffering is called the supporting condition for faith. By itself, however, the confrontation with suffering even at the level of mature reflection is not sufficient to generate faith. For faith to arise two conditions are required: the first is the awareness of suffering, which makes us recognize the need for a liberative path; the second is the encounter with a teaching that proclaims a liberative path. Thence the Buddha says that faith has for its nutriment hearing the exposition of the true Dhamma. [11] Saddha, the faith that comes into being as a result of hearing the exposition of the true Dhamma is essentially an attitude of trust and commitment directed to ultimate emancipation. In order for such faith to arise and become a driving force of spiritual development, it must meet with an objective ground capable of eliciting its forward leap into the unknown and of prompting its inner urge towards liberation. From the Buddhist perspective this objective ground is provided by the three objects of refuge -- the Buddha, the Dhamma, and the Sangha, that is, the enlightened Teacher, his teaching, and his community of noble disciples. The faith to be placed in them must not be blind and uncritical. Though initially requiring consent born out of trust, it also must be based on critical scrutiny -- the Teacher tested to determine his trustworthiness, his doctrine examined to decide on its cogency, and his disciples interrogated to ascertain their reliability. [12] As a result of such examination, conducted either through personal confrontation whenever possible or through scrutiny of the scriptural records, faith becomes settled in the Buddha as the Perfectly Enlightened One, the unerring guide on the path to deliverance; in the Dhamma as his teaching and the path leading to deliverance; and in the Sangha as the community of the Buddha's disciples who have verified his teaching through their own direct experience, and hence may be relied upon for guidance in our own pursuit of the goal.As the first requisite of spiritual development, faith is compared to a hand in that it is needed to take hold of beneficial practices, and to a seed in that it is the vitalizing germ for the growth of the higher virtues. Beneath its seeming simplicity it is a complex phenomenon combining intellectual, emotional, and cognitive elements. Intellectually faith implies a willingness to accept on trust propositions beyond our present capacity for verification, propositions relating to the basic tenets of the doctrine. Through practice this assent will be translated from belief into knowledge, but at the outset there is required an acceptance which cannot be fully corroborated by objective evidence. Emotionally faith issues in feelings of confidence and serene joy, coupled with an attitude of devotion directed to the objects of refuge. And at the level of volition faith reinforces the readiness to implement certain lines of conduct in the conviction they will lead to the desired goal. It is the mobilizing force of action, stirring up the energy to actualize the ideal." snip with Metta Dieter #123872 From: "philip" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 3:54 am Subject: SPD#2 (javana cittas performing their functions) philofillet Dear group, Today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas: "The first javana citta is repetition condition (asevena paccaya) for the second one, which arises and partakes of the object again and so on until the seventh javana citta, which is not repetition condition for the succeeding citta...through this condition there is a repetiton of the same jaati which arise and perform the function of javana, and thus kusala citta and akusala citta can aquire strength, they can become kamma condition for the arising of vipaaka in the future, moreover they can be natural strong dependence condition (upanissaapaccaya) for the arising again in the future of kusala javana vitthi citta and akusala javana vitthi citta." Apologies in advance for not responding to comments etc re these SPD passages, I will just post them for the benefit of the group. And in the future with the permission of the moderators I will leave off my name, seems superfluous at the end of a passage from a book, thank you. Phil #123873 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 1:32 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > > > Hi Robert E, > > --------- > <. . .> > > RE: What is wrong with doing good works in conventional life? How does that harm > the understanding of the Dhamma? Why should metta not be expressed as caring > about people's well-being? > ---------- > > KH: I wonder why you ask those questions. DSG has often discussed the vinaya and how important it is. Do you really see no problem in a monk's breaking the rules of training? Maybe I'm not familiar enough with the rules to see what is wrong with this. In general, I think that helping people is a good thing, but I am not very familiar with the restrictions for monks. > ------------------ > <. . .> > > RE: What is the historical or other evidence that the Buddha personally spoke/taught > the Abhidhamma? Who is it that passed on the account of his delivering of the > Abhidhamma in the arupa planes? What is the source for that? > ------------------ > > KH: I think Phil's point was that a monk should not put forward such accusations (that the Buddha did not teach Abhidhamma). > > As for the allegations themselves, I can't see how any serious Dhamma student could give them any credit at all. According to the Buddha's First Discourse, he taught a Dhamma that was "previously unheard by man nor god." That would be the Abhidhamma, wouldn't it? What else? I think he was referring to the Dhamma as a whole when he said that. There is no historical record of his teaching the specifics that appear in the Abhidhamma in the form in which they appear. There is no claim in the suttas that there is a higher Dhamma that he is not teaching to those to whom he delivered the suttas. The claim that he taught the Abhidhamma on the arupa planes did not come from the Buddha's lips. So I am asking what the basis is for this assertion - in what scripture does it appear? It's a valid question, so one can know the source of this contention. In my view, unless that assertion is established and is not just a belief, there is no heresy in suggesting that the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma per se, that is, the Abhidhamma as recorded in the books of the Abhidhamma. I would agree that the principles of the Abhidhamma are suggested in some of the suttas, but Buddha does not call it Abhidhamma or speak in the same degree of detail as what we know as the books of the Abhidhamma. Bikkhu Bodhi is an expert in the historical record of Buddhism, and I am sure his assertion is an expression of what he knows and understand historically. Is it heretical for a monk to say what he said? If Buddha never mentioned the Abhidhamma by name, or at least not as the canonical work that we know today, on what basis is it heretical? Mahayana sutras have statements within them that claim that the Buddha delivered them at a particular time and place, or on another plane as is claimed for the Abhidhamma. Would you have a problem saying that the Mahayana sutras were not taught by the Buddha? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #123874 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:01 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Howard and Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > HCW: > The Buddha taught deep matters, and I presume his making a point of > suffering somehow supporting faith in his Dhamma is deep. I would like to > know the deep connection, but I do not know it yet. > --------------------------------------------- Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - #123875 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 2:11 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah, and pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > However, it would be quite wrong to have the idea that developing akusala states or even kusala states that are not part of the path would lead to insight and enlightenment. > > The conditions given by the Buddha for developing insight are the hearing of the Dhamma, the wise considering and the direct understanding of Dhamma/dhammas. > > Without these conditions there can never be the development of insight. > > So "yes and no":) Good to hear those conditions repeated. It's the "direct understanding" where all the thorny questions come into play. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #123876 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:17 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SPD#2 (javana cittas performing their functions) nilovg Dear Phil, Op 21-apr-2012, om 19:54 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Apologies in advance for not responding to comments etc re these > SPD passages, I will just post them for the benefit of the group. > And in the future with the permission of the moderators I will > leave off my name, seems superfluous at the end of a passage from a > book, thank you. ------- N: Leave your name, so that we have an opportunity to rejoice in your kusala. This is also a way of daana you give us the opportunity to. Nina. #123877 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 6:24 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi dhammasaro Good friends all, If i may... Just a quiet reminder... on the Vinaya-pitaka, there are many more rules than the mere 227 rules recited every fourth-night... as one who tried to "walk the talk" I almost daily broke some obscure minor rule!!! In many instances, ignorance of the rule is still a violation of the obscure rule and should be confessed to a senior monk... peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9DcDoMlJOU&feature=relmfu [Rest deleted by Chuck] #123878 From: "philip" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 8:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] SPD#2 (javana cittas performing their functions) philofillet Hi Nina > ------- > N: Leave your name, so that we have an opportunity to rejoice in your > kusala. This is also a way of daana you give us the opportunity to. > Right, thanks. I do talk a lot about lobha but there is also kusala involved when we post here and we can rejoice in that kusala. Thanks for the reminder. Phil #123879 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 10:17 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/22/2012 12:01:53 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard and Dieter. --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , upasaka@... wrote: > HCW: > The Buddha taught deep matters, and I presume his making a point of > suffering somehow supporting faith in his Dhamma is deep. I would like to > know the deep connection, but I do not know it yet. > --------------------------------------------- Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out. ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: There is no doubt that suffering is fundamental to the Dhamma, but, in fact, it is likely the basis for *all* religion. As I see it, what provides faith, confidence, and trust in the Buddha and his Dhamma is observing the lessening of suffering as a result of following that Dhamma. Those people who observe this certainly gain saddha (in the Buddha and Dhamma). Those who do not, either lack confidence or just have an ersatz, blind faith based on wishing, hoping, and imagining - not what I consider to be saddha. ----------------------------------------------------- Best, Rob E. =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123880 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Apr 22, 2012 11:16 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard and Robert, you wrote: There is no doubt that suffering is fundamental to the Dhamma, but, in fact, it is likely the basis for *all* religion. D: to a certain extent, yes.. but : (Wiki) : In theology, salvation is the concept that, as part of divine providence, God saves people: [1] 1.. from biological death, by providing for them an eternal life or long-lasting afterlife.[1][not in citation given] 2.. from spiritual death and death by sin, by providing divine law, illumination, and judgment.[2][not in citation given] Contrasted with the concept of validation via judgment of good works, salvation may also be called "deliverance" or "redemption" from sin and its effects.[3] The theological study of salvation is called soteriology. It covers the means by which salvation is effected or achieved, and its results. The concept of salvation belongs mostly to Judaism and Christianity and Islam, the major Abrahamic religions. Seemingly analogous concepts within other religions, such as nirvana and moksha, are not in fact equivalents to the concept of salvation, in part because they include reliance on self-effort as contrasted to reliance upon divine agency.[4][5] HCW:As I see it, what provides faith, confidence, and trust in the Buddha and his Dhamma is observing the lessening of suffering as a result of following that Dhamma. Those people who observe this certainly gain saddha (in the Buddha and Dhamma). Those who do not, either lack confidence or just have an ersatz, blind faith based on wishing, hoping, and imagining - not what I consider to be saddha. D: observing the lessing of suffering is a consequence of (at least a base of ) faith and confidence , isn't it? with Metta Dieter #123881 From: "Lukas" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 12:49 am Subject: Re: Lukas. trip to england szmicio Dear Sarah, Nina, > N:> I just mentioned impact on our daily life and now I like to repeat > what I heard this morning on a Thai recording, about extending > mettaa. Yes, satipa.t.thaana and mettaa are closely connected. > Someone asked Kh Sujin about extending mettaa. She said: we have to > develop it a lot, since mettaa is the foot of the world [N: keeps the > world going]. We should consider others as close friends, and include > even animals. We want to help them. If there is no mettaa yet, we > should train, she said. There is so much akusala and we should > develop each kind of kusala. Not be fixed on gain or profit for > ourselves. We should not pay lip service to metta while reciting the > sutta. > I like the exhortation to develop each and every kind of kusala. It > makes me think of Thailand, such a good example. L: Yes, but even the thoughts of cruelty, it's just dhatu, an element and it doesnt belong to anyone isnt it? It's so hard to be with strong akusala. I take them for me, myself, mine. I want other people, that I am angry with, that they have more metta to my behaviours, and I am with my angry thoughts all day. No metta than, and it doesnt seems that meeta is gona to come. dukkha...dukkha... Best wishes Lukas #123882 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 1:31 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Rob E, Howard, you wrote: Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out. D: well said , with one suggestion to change: .."that points to the unsatisfying [self-delusioned] nature of samsara " and of course , we may not forget nibbana ... ;-) with Metta Dieter #123883 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 2:57 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > HCW: > > The Buddha taught deep matters, and I presume his making a point of > > suffering somehow supporting faith in his Dhamma is deep. I would like > to > > know the deep connection, but I do not know it yet. > > --------------------------------------------- > > Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of > liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact > of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to > the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps > that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four > Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out. > ---------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > There is no doubt that suffering is fundamental to the Dhamma, but, in > fact, it is likely the basis for *all* religion. > As I see it, what provides faith, confidence, and trust in the Buddha > and his Dhamma is observing the lessening of suffering as a result of > following that Dhamma. I think there are two good points here - one is what you say, that the lessening of suffering can actually be observed, rather than promised in Heaven, or in a future lifetime, although faith in a future lifetime may perhaps also be justified if the Buddha's system and explanation is highly understood and practiced. I think the second point is that it is not just the fact of suffering or the desire to end suffering that is important, but also the relationship to suffering. Buddhism has a complete system for working with suffering and understanding its roots. The kind of practical yogic meditation taught by Patanjali in the Hindu tradition also has a very systematic "eightfold path" [Ashtanga] for releasing the attachment of the outer personality and developing greater awareness and concentration leading to deep samadhi and release of personal attachment. The main difference is that it does not have a clear understanding of anatta, leading instead to a resting in the inner spiritual self, and it does have the same emphasis on mindfulness leading to insight. It makes what appears to be a mistake in thinking that the suppression of attachment and suffering in deep samadhi in and of itself will lead to liberation. Those people who observe this certainly gain saddha (in > the Buddha and Dhamma). Those who do not, either lack confidence or just > have an ersatz, blind faith based on wishing, hoping, and imagining - not what > I consider to be saddha. I agree that the practical experience of what the Buddha spoke about through practice is essential. What kinds of practice are effective for gaining this experience is still not fully answered for me, but I do have faith in the progressive path of Buddhist meditation. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #123884 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:01 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, Howard, > > you wrote: > Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out. > > D: well said , with one suggestion to change: .."that points to the unsatisfying [self-delusioned] nature of samsara " Not sure why you would prefer self-delusioned to non-self. I think the fact of the non-self nature of phenomena is more essential that merely delusion. Do you think there is a non-deluded self that becomes enlightened? You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding? > and of course , we may not forget nibbana ... ;-) I am not sure if nibbana is anything but a dream for most Buddhists. It is important to know it is there, of course, but I think that suffering and the nature of suffering are more important for actually engaging the path. What is the relationship you propose we should have with nibbana? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #123885 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:48 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Dieter, and Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > HCW:As I see it, what provides faith, confidence, and trust in the Buddha and his Dhamma is observing the lessening of suffering as a result of > following that Dhamma. Those people who observe this certainly gain saddha (in the Buddha and Dhamma). Those who do not, either lack confidence or just > have an ersatz, blind faith based on wishing, hoping, and imagining - not what I consider to be saddha. > > > D: observing the lessing of suffering is a consequence of (at least a base of ) faith and confidence , isn't it? Faith and confidence sometimes help people to bear suffering and expect something better in the future. In my view, it does not lessen or end suffering. Suffering lessens from getting rid of the causes of suffering - attachment and clinging, delusion, the poisons and defilements, not wishing, hoping, or believing. That actual lessening of suffering comes from practice that begins to break down those factors that cause suffering. For instance, from seeing and understanding that anicca - constant change and instability - is inherent in human existence, one stops expecting things to be good all the time, or to think that by trying really hard, or through picking and choosing, somehow we will control things being better than if we just let go of such efforts. When bad things then happen, and one understands that this is expected, suffering is lessened to a certain degree. When one stops clinging to pleasant experiences and avoiding unpleasant experiences, suffering is lessened, etc. I think understanding is more important to lessening suffering than is faith, but faith is important to keep one going on the path. To me, that is its function. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #123886 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 1 moellerdieter Dear Sarah, thanks for taking the time for our not always easy topics of discussion . you wrote: D: do I get that right: you see the present as a series of arising and ceasing moments similar to the sequence of pictures in a movie ? > But isn't the reality a constant stream of mental and corporal phenomena within the process of D.O., in which only certain particles rise and cease? .... S: At the present moment, there is only ever a single citta arising and falling away experiencing its object. D:I understand that the citta or consciousness is aware about the changing 6senses media, but it is not part of it. In other words the fact of being conscious, knowing about ...... is rising and falling only in case of unconsciousness, isn't it? On account of ignorance and continuity of experience, of namas and rupas, it seems there are whole pictures, stories, people and things. In reality, there are just a succession of cittas arising and falling away: AN, Ones (1, V, 8), The Buddha says: "No other thing do I know, O monks, that so quickly changes as the mind:Inasmuch that it is not easy to give an illustration for the mind's quick change." D: I assume the mind = nama/mano : perception, feeling and mental formation) - cetasikas (we need to check the pali) From the commentary to the Vibhanga, transl as `Dispeller of Delusion' (PTS), which I've quoted before: *** 242: "For the making known of the characteristic of no-self is not the province of anyone else; it is the province of the Fully Enlightened Ones only. D: the authority is with the Buddha Dhamma , the canon, to explain anatta.. one may ask why then a commentary? Thus the characteristic of no-self is unobvious...........but here it should be understood that he taught it by means of both impermanence and pain. D: yes, that is important .. anicca and dukkha provide reasons for disenchantment as a prerequisite for detachment. "But it is owing to not keeping in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment by what that these characteristics do not appear? Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the rise and fall owing to its being concealed by continuity (santati). D:concealed by the stream of rising and falling dhammas "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)." [S: rather than being aware of postures, it is the idea of postures that conceals the truths about the elements as dukkha.. When there is awareness, there's no idea of posture at all] D: why concealed by postures (only), the position in which you hold your body when standing or sitting ... ? I don't think the idea is meant .. perhaps relation to meditation? (recalling that in meditation retreats one is told if pain is arising , preferably not to change the posture in order to see the nature of pain..) "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." [S: When there is an idea of `wholes' such as posture, chariot or self, there is no understanding of dhatus (elements) and no way to understand anatta.] D: the matter of wholes is a complex topic I think one needs to read about headings like emergence and self organization - see Wiki - " Emergence is the way complex systems and patterns arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions" , so the chariot is the emergence of interaction of its parts ..which is not to be found in its parts . One may possibly say in the case of a person/ individuum it is the emergence of interacting mental and corporal phenomena/dhammas in a stream of dependent orgination . ( posture isn't a whole as the only element is the body ). "But when continuity is dissected by laying hold of rise and fall, the characteristic of impermanence appears in accordance with its true essential nature. When the postures are exposed (ugghaa.tita) by keeping in mind continual oppression, the characteristic of pain appears in accordance with its true essential nature. 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. "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why?Because they rise and fall and change, or be cause of their absence after having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. D: there is no doubt that the khandas are impermanent , obvious at the moment of death , not to talk about the moments of nibbana experience . I have difficulties to see the impermanence related to the moment as mentioned above "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words `what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. "But the same five aggregates are no-self because of the words `what is painful is no-self' (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self." [S: `no exercising power over them', neither the khandhas or any ideas about them, such as postures, are at one's command]. D: well , posturers are at one's command , aren't they? S: The dhammas described in D.O. are just the same impermanent cittas, cetasikas and rupas - all impermanent. ... > S:As you know, each citta is accompanied by at least 7 cetasikas. The Buddha encouraged the understanding of any citta (or any other dhamma appearing) just as it is. > > D: the 7 universals ( sabbacitta sadharana) contact, feeling ,perception, volition , life faculty , one-pointedness ,attention (manasasikara), right? > Why are the last two always going along with the citta? ... S: Because there isn't a single citta that can arise without ekaggata (one-pointedness) and manasikara (attention), just like the other universals. ... > One-pointedness should exclude the state of unconcentrated mind as mentioned in the text above , shouldn't it? ... S: In the Maha Satipatthana Sutta, when it refers to: > "((3) He further clearly perceives and understands any state of consciousness or mind (cittanupassana), whether it is greedy or not, hateful or not, deluded or not, cramped or distracted, developed or undeveloped, surpassable or unsurpassable, concentrated or unconcentrated, liberated or unliberated (Nyanatiloka)"> Here, the "concentrated or unconcentrated" mind refer to samaahita citta and asamaahita citta - from the comy: "samaahita.m citta.m = 'The quieted state of consciousness.' It refers to the conscious state of him who has full or partial absorption. [S: access or jhana]." "asamaahita.m citta.m = 'The state of consciousness not quieted.' It refers to the conscious state without either absorption." D: I think one needs to distinguish between laying the foundation of mindfulness , i.e. the contemplation with a quieted state of consciousness (calm of body and mind as stated in the sutta ) and the application of sati in daily life which works due to the foundation. S:Now, there is no jhana, but there is citta arising with greed, hate, distraction or kusala of some kind - with each of these cittas, along with moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas, there is always ekaggata cetasika (one-pointedness) and manasikara (attention). There is momentary concentration at each instant now, otherwise citta could not experience its object. There is no self to concentrate or attend ever. D: there is -as I see it - the intention of a focus ...attention towards x...and a difference between looking at -let us say- the forest or a leaf , a difference due to the influence by the cetasikas , isn't it? ... > > Even more evident is the exclusion of the cetasika Manasikara by following . > SN 9.11 PTS: S i 203 Ayoniso-manasikara Sutta: Inappropriate Attention translated from the Pali by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu > 'I have heard that on one occasion a certain monk was dwelling among the Kosalans in a forest thicket. Now at that time, he spent the day's abiding thinking evil, unskillful thoughts: i.e., thoughts of sensuality, thoughts of ill will, thoughts of doing harm.<...> ... S: Whether thinking evil, whether seeing, whether developing insight - at any moment at all, manasikara cetasika arises with the citta, attending to its object. It is never excluded, but the nature of akusala manasikara is different from kusala manasikara, just as akusala ekaggata is different from kusala ekaggata. D: yes, manasikara is grouped under the 13 ethically variable factors , the kusala or akusala type obviously described/accompanied by the 39 ethically determined cetasikas (?) D:> Furthermore I wonder how to distinguish this universal from the beautiful mental factor sati..? ... S: Sati is aware in a wholesome sense - it 'reminds' the citta to be kusala. The different cetasikas have different functions. More as we come to them perhaps as this post is already very long. D: agreed ;-) ... > S: The Buddha encouraged the understanding of any citta (or any other dhamma appearing) just as it is. > So regardless of whether it is a citta rooted greed, hatred, delusion, i.e accompanied by these or any other mental states - wholesome or unwholesome, worldly or unworldly - it can be understood at this very moment when it appears. > In other words, the development of satipatthana is not a "waiting game", waiting until no nivaranas, no unwholesome states arise, waiting until the circumstances seem more favourable - it is the development of awareness and understanding at this very moment of the citta (or other dhamma) which appears now. > Do you read the passage any differently? Is there anything further to discuss on the cetasikas with regard to this example? > > D: I think no difference about the necessity of development of mindfulness/sati, and that means indeed no waiting game but recognition of the mind state and the consequence of practising right effort. ... S: Effort can also be kusala or akusala. It is the effort itself which 'practices' or 'develops' when it arises. Right effort only develops with right understanding, not by any self deciding to have it arise or practise it. D: well, understanding what means right effort.. ... > There are a couple of questions , like above . Furthermore:how do we have to understand to recognize the state of delusion (the unwholesome universal) ? The trouble with delusion is that something is taken for real until the 'mirage is unveiled' , isn't it? ... S: Yes and it's only "unveiled" through the development of understanding of present realities - cittas, cetasikas and rupas appearing now. This is why any discussion has to come back to the present dhammas. .... > I wonder why the 5 hindrances are mentioned under contemplation of mental formation and not under mind in the Sutta . ... S: Because they are not cittas, but cetasikas. Dhammanupassana includes all dhammas not yet referred to under the other headings (as well as them). So cetasikas, such as the 5 hindrances, are included here. Dnot clear , e.g. hate and greed are cetasikas , belonging to mental formation .. but mentioned under mind .. ... > > So far what came into my mind .. ;-) ... S: Quite a lot of good thoughts came to your mind ;-) If a lot more come in response to my comments, perhaps you'd like to break it up into different posts. Any of the points can be elaborated on. D: yes, better we continue with smaller parts .. ladies first , of course ;-) with Metta Dieter #123887 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:44 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Robert) - In a message dated 4/22/2012 9:17:02 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard and Robert, you wrote: There is no doubt that suffering is fundamental to the Dhamma, but, in fact, it is likely the basis for *all* religion. D: to a certain extent, yes.. but : (Wiki) : In theology, salvation is the concept that, as part of divine providence, God saves people: [1] 1.. from biological death, by providing for them an eternal life or long-lasting afterlife.[1][not in citation given] 2.. from spiritual death and death by sin, by providing divine law, illumination, and judgment.[2][not in citation given] Contrasted with the concept of validation via judgment of good works, salvation may also be called "deliverance" or "redemption" from sin and its effects.[3] The theological study of salvation is called soteriology. It covers the means by which salvation is effected or achieved, and its results. The concept of salvation belongs mostly to Judaism and Christianity and Islam, the major Abrahamic religions. Seemingly analogous concepts within other religions, such as nirvana and moksha, are not in fact equivalents to the concept of salvation, in part because they include reliance on self-effort as contrasted to reliance upon divine agency.[4][5] HCW:As I see it, what provides faith, confidence, and trust in the Buddha and his Dhamma is observing the lessening of suffering as a result of following that Dhamma. Those people who observe this certainly gain saddha (in the Buddha and Dhamma). Those who do not, either lack confidence or just have an ersatz, blind faith based on wishing, hoping, and imagining - not what I consider to be saddha. D: observing the lessing of suffering is a consequence of (at least a base of ) faith and confidence , isn't it? ----------------------------------------------------- HCW: Not full confidence but a conceptual understanding of the Dhamma sufficient to be willing to give it a try would be requisite. ---------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123888 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 3:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Lukas. trip to england sarahprocter... Dear Lukas, >________________________________ > From: Lukas >L: Yes, but even the thoughts of cruelty, it's just dhatu, an element and it doesnt belong to anyone isnt it? It's so hard to be with strong akusala. I take them for me, myself, mine. .... S: Just dhatu that doesn't belong to anyone. The more insight develops and understands the true nature of cruelty and other kinds of akusala, the greater the danger in accumulating such akusala is seen. In Udana 4, Meghiya, 1, remember that Meghiya, the Buddha's attendant at the time, goes to a secluded mango grove 'for the purposes of effort', but is overwhelmed by thoughts of sense-desires, ill-will and cruelty. He returns to the Buddha who says: “When liberation of heart is not fully mature , Meghiya, five things conduce to full maturity.” These five in brief are: 1. The good friend 2. Morality. “..............seeing fear in sins even the size of an atom.....’ 3. Talk concerned with the Dhamma and development of wholesome states 4. the 4 Right Efforts 5. Insight leading to the destruction of dukkha. The commentary adds the following on the 2nd point above: “seeing fear in sins even the size of an atom”....: “...For whatever monk there be who beholds a sin, even the size of the smallest of atoms, taking this to be similar to Sineru, king of mountains, that is a hundred thousand yojanas, plus sixty-eight thousand more besides, in height, who also beholds mere bad speech, which is totally petty, taking this to be similar to (an offence involving ) Defeat, such a one is also known as “one seeing fear in sins even the size of an atom”. In other words, understanding dhammas as dhatus means understanding their true characteristics when they arise - seeing the danger of akusala and the benefit of kusala. >I want other people, that I am angry with, that they have more metta to my behaviours, and I am with my angry thoughts all day. No metta than, and it doesnt seems that meeta is gona to come. dukkha...dukkha... ... S: Because it's "I want, I want....", no metta, no concern for the welfare of others. It's even "I want metta"! When we're so obsessed with what we want, what we don't want and how others treat us, we'll always be angry and miserable. No understanding at all at such times. As K.Sujin said we should consider others as close friends. "If there is no mettaa yet, we should train" and "not be fixed on gain or profit for ourselves". When people approach her with their family or personal difficulties, she always responds by stressing the development of understanding of present dhammas, such as seeing and visible object, and also by encouraging metta for all the people we associate with - metta without any expectations. Metta Sarah ==== #123889 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 4:25 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... kenhowardau Hi Howard, ----------- > HCW: Not full confidence but a conceptual understanding of the Dhamma sufficient to be willing to give it a try would be requisite. ----------- KH: You must have known that would get a reaction. :-) A conceptual understanding of the Dhamma is enough to tell us that mere dhammas exist rolling on by conditions. Any idea of giving (or not giving) it a try would be totally incompatible with that understanding. Ken H #123890 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:17 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad sarahprocter... Dear Prasad, > How do you understand this. Aren't Nama(s) influence/induce Rupa(s). If > so? These Rupa(s) again influence Nama(s) and reinforce volition(s)..hence > more kamma.. > > How do you explain in simple language this phenomena? > ------------------------------------------------ S: Have you heard of the 3 rounds or vatta, kilesa vatta, kamma vatta, vipaka vatta? On account of the kilesa (defilements), kamma is committed and this brings results by way of vipaka and rupas produced by kamma. The following is from 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas' by Sujin on Dependent Origination and the 3 rounds: "As we have seen, the cycle of birth and death is threefold: the cycle of defilement, the cycle of kamma and the cycle of vipaaka. The cycle of defilement revolves when objects are experienced through the sense-doors and through the mind-door. Defilements that arise in the series or succession of javana cause the committing of kamma. Then the cycle of kamma revolves, akusala kamma and kusala kamma, performed through body, speech and mind. The cycle of kamma conditions vipaaka, and then the cycle of vipaaka revolves. When vipaakacitta arises and experiences an object through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue or the bodysense, defilements are bound to arise on account of the object that is experienced, and then the cycle of defilement revolves again. Time and again the defilements of like or dislike arise because of what appears through the sense-doors or the mind-door. Defilements again condition the performing of kamma, kusala kamma and akusala kamma, and these produce kusala vipaaka and akusala vipaaka. Thus there is no end to the threefold cycle. So long as pa~n~naa has not been developed and is not powerful enough to reach the stage of being able to realise the Four Noble Truths, the threefold cycle of defilement, kamma and vipaaka is bound to revolve all the time." Does this answer the question? Metta Sarah ====== #123891 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Question on difference between Train of chittas and ordinary thoughts sarahprocter... Dear Prasad, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Prasad Praturi wrote: -------------------------------------------------- P: Again this vipassana technique does not teach or suggets to supress any specific dhammas or suggest to expect any specific dhammas... Technique suggests see things (Reality) as it is ... this is repeated many times throught the instruction periods... However the technique expect a student sit and close ones eyes and mediatate... during the 10 day course.. ---------------------------------- S: Now we're not sitting with eyes closed or focussing on sensations and yet there are dhammas being experienced which can be known directly. So there's no need to wait until our eyes are closed or we're sitting quietly - there can be awareness now of any dhamma appearing without any prior determination of what dhamma, what reality that may be. Vipassana is the development of insight, not a technique. .... > ------------------------------------------------------------------- P: Finally,, I do not know how a kinder garden student coming to learn dhamma practice .. can understand this high level understanding of terms... abhidhamma concepts.. and practice 24/7 like as suggested.. ( understanding namas...Rupas.. distinctions... conditionalities .... rasing and falling dhammas on senese doors... etc.. etc..) ... S: The dhamma practice has to start 'right' from the beginning, otherwise we go more and more off-track. So the beginning is hearing and considering more about the realities which make up our life, even now as we speak. So now there is seeing and visible object which is seen. There is thinking about what is seen, there is like, dislike and so on. These are not "abhidhamma concepts", but the realities that the Buddha taught about in the entire Tipitaka. There won't be awareness at every moment 24/7 - that's not the goal. However, the understanding and awareness of a dhamma can only ever be at the present moment. The closer the understanding is to what is experienced now, the reality appearing now, the more it begins to develop. When we doubt this or think there has to be a technique to speed progress, that doubt can be known now as another reality too. It's impossible for there to be any understanding of the impermanence of dhammas if there isn't a beginning to understand those dhammas at this very moment. .... >P: In order to teach simple eight fold path in three divisions taught by buddha.. Ledi Saydaw ( we do not know about his teacher) taught students ... Practicing morality (sila) ... Then concentrating mind using anapana meditation (samadhi).. Then enter into experiencial faculty and gaining understaning of reality (pa~~nya) ... using scanning body senations from head to toe... and observaing the changing nature of these sensations... Later This technique is converted in 10 day format and taught thousands of students worldwide... so that large number of students will get benifit( Bhahujana hitaya .. Bahujana sukhaya) When ceratin advanced students ... when they are interested ... Can study and perfect the practice with those details you have outlined.. That is my understanding.. .... S: I appreciate this and I know the technique is very popular, but it's not the way that the Buddha taught the development of understanding, the development of insight. I think that the Buddha taught the understanding of present dhammas as anatta from the very beginning. The sooner we begin to appreciate that dhammas are not within our control, the sooner understanding with detachment will develop. Even the sila and samadhi can only be developed and purified with the development of right understanding of realities from the beginning. Yes, we're all beginners, so now is the time to begin being aware of what appears right now. Please let me know if you disagree. Metta Sarah ===== #123892 From: "Prasad Praturi" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad ppraturi Dear Sarah, Thanks for the expalnation. Last one week I am carefully reading and understanding Nina's Writings. I am also listening to Acharn Sujin's recordings archived at DSG website. These Audio tecahings are very helpful and touching the core of understanding. Currently where is Achrn Sujin? Are there any meetings or talks scheduled in near future? Very thankful for recoding this ddhamma talks and writings. Metta Prasad --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Dear Prasad, > > > > How do you understand this. Aren't Nama(s) influence/induce Rupa(s). If > > so? These Rupa(s) again influence Nama(s) and reinforce volition(s)..hence > > more kamma.. > > > > How do you explain in simple language this phenomena? > > ------------------------------------------------ > > S: Have you heard of the 3 rounds or vatta, kilesa vatta, kamma vatta, vipaka vatta? > > On account of the kilesa (defilements), kamma is committed and this brings results by way of vipaka and rupas produced by kamma. > > The following is from 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas' by Sujin on Dependent Origination and the 3 rounds: > > "As we have seen, the cycle of birth and death is threefold: the cycle of defilement, the cycle of kamma and the cycle of vipaaka. The cycle of defilement revolves when objects are experienced through the sense-doors and through the mind-door. Defilements that arise in the series or succession of javana cause the committing of kamma. Then the cycle of kamma revolves, akusala kamma and kusala kamma, performed through body, speech and mind. The cycle of kamma conditions vipaaka, and then the cycle of vipaaka revolves. > > When vipaakacitta arises and experiences an object through the eyes, the ears, the nose, the tongue or the bodysense, defilements are bound to arise on account of the object that is experienced, and then the cycle of defilement revolves again. Time and again the defilements of like or dislike arise because of what appears through the sense-doors > or the mind-door. Defilements again condition the performing of kamma, kusala kamma and akusala kamma, and these produce kusala vipaaka and akusala vipaaka. Thus there is no end to the threefold cycle. So long as pa~n~naa has not been developed and is not powerful enough to reach the stage of being able to realise the Four Noble Truths, the threefold cycle of defilement, kamma and vipaaka is bound to revolve all the time." > > Does this answer the question? > > Metta > > Sarah > ====== > #123893 From: "jonoabb" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:52 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna jonoabb Hi Rob E (123753) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > ... > > J: The way I see it is as follows: > > > > - "cetana dhammas have to arise in relation to a conceptual being in order for kamma patha to take place". The concept of a being is (merely) the *object* of the citta. And that is what a concept is: something that is formed in the mind (only); concepts have no 'existence' at any level other than as mental object at the very moment of being such. > > Somehow I seem to agree with the above and find it illuminating. I think the problem arises with "concepts have no existence at any level other than as mental object" when we talk about people, cars and universes. If you are saying that there is no person, car or universe outside of the momentary concept in the mind, I am not sure about that, and would require some greater investigation. If you will assert that there is no physical reality beyond our concept of such, [and free-floating rupas that have no relationship to any substantial objects per se,] I will take that as something to investigate further. > =============== J: If I've understood correctly, the question you're interested in is whether or not conventional objects (such as 'people, cars and universes') can be said to have any existence/reality other than as object of thinking. That's a question that I think is not addressed in so many words in the texts. The Buddha taught the path to release from samsara, and the development of that path. That development involves coming to see things by direct experience as they truly are. The key is understanding by direct experience. Direct experience means the consciousness and/or object of consciousness associated with one of the 6 doorways at the present moment. That is to say, only 1 doorway at a time. Now if that doorway is one of the 5 sense-doors (for example, the eye-door), then the object will be a rupa (visible object that subsequent thought processes take to be part of 'a car'). If that doorway is the mind-door, then the object may be that just-fallen away rupa or a concept associated with that rupa (the concept of a car). In either case, it is not the conventional object itself that is being directly experienced. The existence of the conventional object is not something that can be established by direct experience in the way that the (momentary) existence, and true/inherent nature of, the object of the current seeing consciousness or visible object can. Nor is the nature of any such 'existence' of any relevance to the development of that kind of understanding. Jon #123894 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 6:58 pm Subject: Death of Ven. Dhammadharo nilovg Dear Sarah, you posted before how Kh Sujin helped you to take his death in the right way and how you were consoled. Please, could you repost? I think it is helpful for anyone who has lost a dear person. I will send it on to Tadao. Nina. #123895 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:03 pm Subject: to Lukas. nilovg Dear Lukas, I told Tadao that you would like to hear more Dhamma reminders by Ven. Dhammadharo. He wrote to me: "If Lucas is interested in knowing about my encounter with Dhammdhara, he can contact me anytime." At that time he was a novice, samanera, Jetananda. Lukas, you could ask him questions: what he remembers as to Dhamma in difficult situations of daily life, or when there are many akusala cittas. We would profit if you would share his answers with us all on dsg. We all need Dhamma reminders. I would be very grateful to you. Nina. #123896 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:13 pm Subject: Re: Reaction of Buddha toward Dukkha sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > When Gotama became Buddha He didn't want to teach others for: > "And if I were to teach the Dhamma and others would not understand me, that would be tiresome for me, troublesome for me. > ..."As I reflected thus, my mind inclined to dwelling at ease, not to teaching the Dhamma. MN26 > ==================================================== > > How can anything be tiresome and troublesome for Buddha/Arhat? ... S: Obviously, no aversion. It just means that he realises the strength of defilements and the depth, the profundity of the Dhamma that others would not understand. Dwelling at ease - dwelling in phala samapatti and nirodha samapatti, as I understand, with no physical discomfort. ... > =========================================== > "At present I am living hemmed in by bhikkhus and bhikkhunis... by sectarian teachers and their disciples, and I live in discomfort and not at ease. Suppose I were to live alone, secluded from the crowd?"...Then, while the Lord was in solitude and seclusion, this thought arose in his mind: ...But now I live not hemmed in by bhikkhus and bhikkhunis... in comfort and at ease." Ud4.5 > ================================================== > > External surroundings did affect how Buddha felt. He experienced discomfort living with lay followers and monastics, but experienced comfort when alone. .... S: from the comy: "Fathoming his own seclusion (attano ca paviveka.m viditvaa): aware of his physical separation that had been acquired as a result of his not being crowded in by anyone, the other separations being, however, still found to exist for the Lord at all times." The other separations (viveka) are mental and substrate separation. "And physical separation is for those with physical aloofness, for those with delight in renunciation; mental separation is for those whose hearts are completely pure, for those who have reached the highest cleansing; while substrate separation is for those individuals who are without substrate, for those who are gone to that devoid of formations (Nd 27)." .... > In DN16 Buddha has renounced his will to live. The Buddha could have prolonged His life, he could let it run its natural course, or He could shortened it. He chose the latter. His mission was done and to exist more would mean to suffer more. > > This suggests that Dukkha is so all-pervasive that it even affects the Buddha. External surroundings and circumstances do matter, which is why the Buddha praised physical seclusion. These suttas perhaps also suggest the Arhat/Buddha is not sort of state that is invulnerable to suffering and brings it "back to earth" and on achievable level. ... S: The first arrow, physical suffering through the body-sense, the result of past kamma, but not mental suffering, no aversion, no defilements at all. Metta Sarah ==== #123897 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna nilovg Dear Rob M, I was away for a week, that is why I answer only today. Op 11-apr-2012, om 6:14 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I agree with that, but I understand that metta and dana are not > direct conditions for enlightenment? So it seems that enlightenment > is more of the cold understanding of the mind than of the opening > of the heart... > > N: > Any kind of kusala, also when it is without pa~n~naa is > beneficial. > > We cannot order pa~n~naa to accompany each kusala citta. They are > all > > supportive conditions for pa~n~naa. > > R: That is good to know - but on the other hand what is beneficial > "here and now" may not be beneficial for the path - except > indirectly. Is that not correct? > --------- > N: We were talking about the fact whether anattaa is so cold, and also knowing conditions is so cold. I know what you mean, and here on dsg we have spoken of a cold shower. Still, it is beneficial to know the truth, we have to be realistic. Metta and dana are among the perfections that have to be cultivated and are the supports of pa~n~naa. Thus, what is beneficial here and now leads eventually to enlightenment. Enlightenment, this is the eradication of defilements. This is to the benefit of both ourselves and others. When you think of conditions and anattaa it may seem an intellectual analysing and you feel disinclined. But when Pa~n~naa directly understands realities in daily life, it is a different matter. This kind of pa~n~naa develops very naturally as you go along in daily life, no matter you are talking to your daughter, eating, walking, laughing, helping others with metta. You learn to know your own accumulations and there is nothing forced about it. Nina. #123898 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:25 am Subject: appreciation to Howard. nilovg Hi Howard, ------- Howard: P.S. I miss Nina 's postings , hoping she is well =========================== Yes, the last post from Nina I see was a single one 3 days ago! Nina, is everything okay? -------- I was just checking the old posts and appreciating your kind concern. We were away walking for a week as Sarah explained. I do not advertise this for safety reasons (thieves!). Next month when you do not hear anything, it will be the same, do not worry. I want to thank you for the Wisdom books Ven. Bodhi transl and I also ordered a copy. Good news. Nina. #123899 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] appreciation to Howard. upasaka_howard Hi, Nina - In a message dated 4/23/2012 10:25:54 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, vangorko@... writes: Hi Howard, ------- Howard: P.S. I miss Nina 's postings , hoping she is well =========================== Yes, the last post from Nina I see was a single one 3 days ago! Nina, is everything okay? -------- I was just checking the old posts and appreciating your kind concern. ------------------------------------------ :-) BTW, I seem to recall that it was Dieter who first noticed the gap in your posting. ----------------------------------------- We were away walking for a week as Sarah explained. I do not advertise this for safety reasons (thieves!). ---------------------------------------------- HCW: Sensible! ------------------------------------------------ Next month when you do not hear anything, it will be the same, do not worry. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: Thanks. :-) ------------------------------------------------ I want to thank you for the Wisdom books Ven. Bodhi transl and I also ordered a copy. Good news. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes! I'm really happy about it. (Unfortunately probably no delivery until September, but it is something to look forward to! :-) ------------------------------------------------- Nina. ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123900 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:28 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) moellerdieter Hi KenH, you wrote: I think I remember your previous explanations now, thank you very much. And I think I remember Nina helping out with some further explanations. However I still don't understand why you made your initial statement: "Ken you may have faith in the present moment , but not the faith conditioned by suffering , due to a fair understanding of the first Noble Truth." I can guess at what "faith in the present moment" might mean, but I have no idea why (according to you) I don't have the other kind of faith (the one conditioned by right understanding of the first noble truth). Thinking about it as I write, I wonder if you are saying "the Dhamma as a description of the present-moment reality" is a matter of faith in the present moment, whereas "the Dhamma as a set of instructions" is a matter of faith conditioned by suffering. Is that it? Sorry for taking so long, but I got there in the end. :-) D: good that you took your time to define what isn't easy to express. Perhaps we can both polish it further . It may explain different angles of view which so often lead to misunderstandings on the forum . We need to get an understanding first what means faith (in Buddhism) . It concerns as you know , the cetasika saddha , belonging to the so-called 19 Beautiful Universals of the 25 Beautiful Mental Factors group. (Sobhana Cetasikas) The discussion about 'suffering conditions faith' (pls compare with my recent postings ) fits indeed to the 'cetasika in daily life' -project. KenH: No prizes for guessing what I am going to say next! The sense of urgency (to put an end to dukkha) is a function of realities, not of concepts. Panna performs that function. And it does so without any help, or hindrance, from a controlling self (sentient being). D: Avijja is defined by ignorance, not knowing the 4 Noble Truths. The counterpart is Panna , which is the (hopefully ) growing wisdom about them, supposed to develop one's understanding/view to samma ditthi and by that dissolving the ignorance gradually. You say 'Panna performs that function ..without any help (..from a controlling self.) But how can wisdom develop , if is not fed by insights? Insight or Vipassana is an application of mindfulness , i.e. the Path factor Sati , usually mentioned as the second of the mentioned Beautiful Factors Group ( the cetasika Panna last ) You suggest an automatic as far as I understand , please explain.. KH: In the same way, other dhammas are performing their functions *right now* without any help or hindrance from sentient beings. So the Dhamma is all about understanding the dhammas that are arising now, whichever they might be. ----------------- D: the dhammas which are arising now are first of all those of previous kamma (vipaka) , aren't they? The action (or re-action on vipaka -) here and now is future kamma . To understand the wholesome or unwholesome nature of mind here and now , the foundation must be laid. That is , for example, the topic of knowing the cetasikas , which 'color' the citta , besides application of training in order to keep the necessary level of attention/concentration. <. . .> >> KH: There are so few of us who have the courage to even *consider* crossing the river. That requires contemplating a world in which there is no past and no future (just the presently existing realities none of which is a self). >> > D: There is no contemplation about nibbana , because there is no <. . .> ------------------ KH: Perhaps I had my terminologies wrong. I was using the term "crossing the river" to refer to satipatthana as well as to supramundane vipassana. So I was thinking it meant understanding the conditioned world as anicca, dukkha and anatta as well as understanding the unconditioned world as anatta. In any case, can you see what I meant by "the courage to even *consider* crossing"? With all due respect to meditators, I maintain that all meditators lack that courage. Meditators insist on seeing Buddhism as a conventional teaching. In a conventional teaching there is a sentient being that does the work. That's very comforting to someone who clings to the idea of his own existence. D: sorry , Ken.. I can't take this seriously You would have to rewrite the canon and its commentaries KH:A true Dhamma student, however, must face the fact that there is no such self. There is no control over ultimate reality, and so there is no way in which the Dhamma can be a conventional teaching. D: well , the intellectual understanding of no self , is one thing , its penetration another.. because that means (khanda) detachment , a process of disentchantment and dispassion . For that the Buddha instructed us to apply the (training of the) 8fold Path . Reminds me that I intended to quote about sila,samadhi, panna passages for you.. with Metta Dieter #123901 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:44 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" > > > J: The way I see it is as follows: > > > > > > - "cetana dhammas have to arise in relation to a conceptual being in order for kamma patha to take place". The concept of a being is (merely) the *object* of the citta. And that is what a concept is: something that is formed in the mind (only); concepts have no 'existence' at any level other than as mental object at the very moment of being such. > > > > Somehow I seem to agree with the above and find it illuminating. I think the problem arises with "concepts have no existence at any level other than as mental object" when we talk about people, cars and universes. If you are saying that there is no person, car or universe outside of the momentary concept in the mind, I am not sure about that, and would require some greater investigation. If you will assert that there is no physical reality beyond our concept of such, [and free-floating rupas that have no relationship to any substantial objects per se,] I will take that as something to investigate further. > > =============== > > J: If I've understood correctly, the question you're interested in is whether or not conventional objects (such as 'people, cars and universes') can be said to have any existence/reality other than as object of thinking. > > That's a question that I think is not addressed in so many words in the texts. > > The Buddha taught the path to release from samsara, and the development of that path. That development involves coming to see things by direct experience as they truly are. The key is understanding by direct experience. ...if that doorway is one of the 5 sense-doors (for example, the eye-door), then the object will be a rupa... If that doorway is the mind-door, then the object may be that just-fallen away rupa or a concept associated with that rupa (the concept of a car). In either case, it is not the conventional object itself that is being directly experienced. > > The existence of the conventional object is not something that can be established by direct experience in the way that the (momentary) existence, and true/inherent nature of, the object of the current seeing consciousness or visible object can. Nor is the nature of any such 'existence' of any relevance to the development of that kind of understanding. I think this is a very cogent statement and leaves the door open for some further clarification of the nature of human existence and how it pertains to the path. BTW, as an aside regarding the contemplation of the Dhamma any place, any time - I am currently on the train from New York back to Washington, D.C. after a memorial. The wife of my cousin passed away, and all of the cousins of this part of the family were assembled. Contemplating the death of this lovely person, and seeing how all the cousins had aged since we last met, led to a lot of reflection on constant change, impermanence, and the unsatisfactory nature of existence, as well as clinging and craving. At the same time, there was a powerful sense of sympathy, metta etc., arising many times over at many different times. Perhaps at some moments these were directly experienced, many other times they were surely grasped as concepts and reflective thoughts. It just seems that in some ways it brings the Buddha's message and the understanding of samsara closer to us at such times. And here on the train, between two cities that I've alternately called home, traveling past fleeting objects, it also seems to give a sense of unrootedness, non-ownership, and the futility of control in a moving space; yet the display of places quickly passed through is somehow satisfying in their fleetingness. Anyway, your point appears to be that the existence of "whole conventional objects" that might or might not exist independent of what we experience is irrelevant to the path, as the path concerns only a direct understanding of that which can be directly experienced, and the nature of that by which it is experienced at a given single moment. So what is happening in the 6 doorways at any given moment is all that can be the object of the path. I hope that is an accurate paraphrase of part of your point. At a moment when we experience the concept of a house, it is irrelevant whether there really is a house that this concept is referencing, because what is important for the path with regard to this concept is that we understand that for the experience of the moment the mind door is entertaining a concept for a single moment, and we focus on the nature of the mind door and its accompanying cetasikas, etc., rather than on anything having to do with the concept, which would be a distraction from understanding the nature of the operation taking place in the moment. I hope that is also a somewhat accurate rendition of your point about the irrelevance of conventional objects and their purported existence or nonexistence for the development of the path. So, for the path, the less one pays any attention to the purported existence of conventional objects, which are only delivered via conceptual thinking, and the more we pay attention to what we actually experience, which is always by way of a citta apprehending what is taking place through one of the six doorways, the better for the development of sati and panna, and the better for the development of the path. My questions about the nature of conventional objects focuses on the general area: "What do we do the rest of the time, when we are not in direct discernment of the moment?" In other words, we are usually involved in conventional life and operations and experiencing a lot of people and places. Although not propitious for the path, these conceptually-based operations demand our attention. So how do we regard them? This question breaks down into a number of others. For instance, does the Buddha's teachings have anything to say about how we should behave in conventional life, how we should regard and treat other people, what kind of activities we should or shouldn't engage in, and what kinds of people we should strive to be? Whether or not this is directly relevant to the supramundane path, and even if it is a distraction from the supramundane path, is there any kusala/akusala in the conventional application of the teachings? Some have suggested that it is strictly irrelevant whether someone is a diligent snow-shoveler or a murderer by profession. :-) The reason being that any moment whether kusala or akusala is equally salient as an object of panna. I have pointed out that a murderer may not have enough kusala accumulated to be able to discern anything, whether kusala or akusala, and I think that may be a valid point too, but it is true that any object is a good object for understanding the nature of dhammas. But the basic argument that whether one is a murderer or a social worker is irrelevant to the path has always struck me as being incorrect. It seems to me that even if conventional activities are secondary, derived conglomerates of arising dhammas, they still have some relation to real dhammas and reflect the kusala or akusala that is accumulated on the level of dhammas. We don't see too many enlightened murderers in history or at present, and there's probably a reason for that. So I wonder what you think about the general proposition that, given the nature of the path as that which is directly experienced only, any conventional variations, whether seemingly good or bad, are strictly beside the point. I don't think so, and my understanding of what I have read from Rob K. is that he doesn't either. I mention him because he is my only potential ally from your side of the group. :-) Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #123902 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 3:55 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Jon. Pt. II :-) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > The existence of the conventional object is not something that can be established by direct experience in the way that the (momentary) existence, and true/inherent nature of, the object of the current seeing consciousness or visible object can. Nor is the nature of any such 'existence' of any relevance to the development of that kind of understanding. I also have another question about the existence of conventional objects. It seems that despite the irrelevance of the existence or nonexistence of conventional objects for the path, a number of people make statements that clearly indicate that they believe that conventional objects do not exist. You have said that there is no direct statement in the Dhamma as to whether conventional objects ultimately exist or not, so it should not be a matter of Buddhist debate, unless it has some relevance to the path. Yet it seems to be a point that is made many times in order to emphasize the imporance of dhammas that there is "no conventional object, just dhammas!" If one were to follow your lead in this current statement, it might be more accurate and less controversial to say "We only experience dhammas, not conventional objects." In other words, to emphasize experience, rather than existence or non-existence. Would you agree hat such a distinction would represent the Dhamma more directly, and lead to less debate and confusion about a kind of "dhammas versus conventional objects" argument? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #123903 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:45 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Jon) - In a message dated 4/23/2012 1:56:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Yet it seems to be a point that is made many times in order to emphasize the importance of dhammas that there is "no conventional object, just dhammas!" ============================== Well, considering the Sabba Sutta (SN 35.23), that is a position difficult to argue with, don't you think? The so-called conventional objects are mere collections of the dhammas that comprise "the all", collections mistakenly viewed as entities. Moreover, if one adds to this such teachings as copied at the end of this post, does not emptiness reign supreme? With metta, Howard /Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./ (From the Phena Sutta) My note: The elements of "the all" are all empty. ------------------------------- /Now suppose a man, when dreaming, were to see delightful parks, delightful forests, delightful stretches of land, & delightful lakes, and on awakening were to see nothing. In the same way, householder, a disciple of the noble ones considers this point: 'The Blessed One has compared sensuality to a dream, of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks.' Seeing this with right discernment, as it actually is, then avoiding the equanimity coming from multiplicity, dependent on multiplicity, he develops the equanimity coming from singleness, dependent on singleness, where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace./ (From the Potaliya Sutta) My note: "where sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world ceases without trace" can be nothing other than nibbana. ----------------------------------- /See how the world together with the devas has self-conceit for what is not-self. Enclosed by mind-and-body it imagines, 'This is real.' Whatever they imagine it to be, it is quite different from that. It is unreal, of a false nature and perishable. Nibbana, not false in nature, that the Noble Ones know as true. Indeed, by the penetration of the true, they are completely stilled and realize final deliverance./ (From the Dvayatanupassana Sutta) My note: All unreal except for nibbana. #123904 From: "philip" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 11:07 am Subject: SPD#3 (happy akusala) philofillet Dear Group Today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket, Dhamma Study and Support Foundation, 2005.): "We do not like it when the citta is annoyed, disturbed, restless, sad or anxious. We like it when the citta is happy, when it is full of joy and when it is infatuated with pleasant objects. However, when the citta is joyful, when it is happy and absorbed in pleasure, the citta is not pure, because it is accompanied by the cetasika that is attachment, lobha cetasika. Lobha is the dhamma that takes pleasure in an object, which clings to it, and is absorbed in it. The Buddha taught people to study and investigate realities so that sati of satipatthana could be aware of the characteristics of the realities which are appearing and right understanding of them could be developed. This means that one should investigate realities, notice their characterisitics and be aware of them in order to know them precisely, just as they are. In this way we can come to know which dhammas are kusala, which are akusala and which are neither kusala nor akusala. We can come to know akusala as akusala, not matter to what degree, be it coarse or more subtle. It should be known that not only aversion (dosa) is akusala dhamma, but there are also many other types of akusala cetasikas." (end of passage) Phil #123905 From: "Ken H" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 12:26 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) kenhowardau Hi Dieter, ------------- <. . .> > D: good that you took your time to define what isn't easy to express. Perhaps we can both polish it further . It may explain different angles of view which so often lead to misunderstandings on the forum . ------------- KH: That would be good. There certainly are different angles of view at DSG. And there are misunderstandings between the people who hold those views. But what are the misunderstandings? Some of us might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have all been talking about the same thing; we have just been viewing it from different angles." Others might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have been talking about two very different things." I belong to the second group. I believe the first group misunderstands the misunderstandings. :-) ---------------------------- > D: We need to get an understanding first what means faith (in Buddhism) . It concerns as you know , the cetasika saddha , belonging to the so-called 19 Beautiful Universals of the 25 Beautiful Mental Factors group. (Sobhana Cetasikas) The discussion about 'suffering conditions faith' (pls compare with my recent postings ) fits indeed to the 'cetasika in daily life' -project. ---------------------------- KH: I agree: faith concerns the cetasika, saddha. In your recent postings you (and Ven Buddhadasa) seemed to make too much of the fact that faith was conditioned by suffering. Certainly if there was no suffering there would be no right understanding of suffering, and so there would be no Way Out of suffering. But that's as far as it goes, isn't it? It doesn't mean suffering is good. If I break my leg, and a doctor fixes it, that means the doctor was good; it doesn't mean my broken leg was good. ------------------ <. . .> > D: You say 'Panna performs that function ..without any help (..from a controlling self.) But how can wisdom develop , if is not fed by insights? ------------------ KH: What is the connection between those two sentences? Are you suggesting the development of panna requires input from a controlling self? -------------------------------- > D: Insight or Vipassana is an application of mindfulness , i.e. the Path factor Sati , usually mentioned as the second of the mentioned Beautiful Factors Group ( the cetasika Panna last ) -------------------------------- KH: Insight and panna are one and the same. Panna arises with the other path factors, but it is their leader. Without panna (samma-ditthi) sati would not be samma-sati and viriya would not be samma-viriya (etc). ------------------ > D: You suggest an automatic as far as I understand , please explain.. ------------------ KH: By "automatic" I think you mean "without assistance from a controlling self." So, yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting. That's the whole point of the Dhamma. -------------------------- <. . .> D: the dhammas which are arising now are first of all those of previous kamma (vipaka) , aren't they? The action (or re-action on vipaka -) here and now is future kamma . -------------------------- KH: I think I know what you mean, but for the sake of clarity I would add that there is only one citta any one time. That citta can be either a vipakka citta, or a kammicly active citta, or a neutral (purely functional) citta. (I am not sure why you use the term "future kamma" but let's not worry about that now.) ---------- > D: To understand the wholesome or unwholesome nature of mind here and now , the foundation must be laid. That is , for example, the topic of knowing the cetasikas , which 'color' the citta , besides application of training in order to keep the necessary level of attention/concentration. ---------- KH: Yes, but instead of saying the foundation must be laid I think you should have said the foundation must *have been* laid." How else could something happen here and now? If the foundations for its happening here and now have not been laid then it is simply not going to happen, is it? --------------------- <. . .> >> KH: Meditators insist on seeing Buddhism as a conventional teaching. In a conventional teaching there is a sentient being that does the work. That's very comforting to someone who clings to the idea of his own existence. >> > D: sorry , Ken.. I can't take this seriously You would have to rewrite the canon and its commentaries --------------------- KH: I know you can't take it seriously: there are very few people (Buddhist or non-Buddhist) in the world today who can take it seriously. That is why I said at the beginning of this post we must accept we are talking about two very different ways of understanding. Nearly everyone assumes the Buddha's teaching was a conventional one. A conventional teaching says "Follow these instructions and you will get from A to B." Just a few people believe it was an unconventional teaching. It said there was no permanent entity capable of getting from A to B. (There was a path, but no traveller on it.) As for "You will have to rewrite the Canon and its commentaries," may I point out who is doing the rewriting? It is always meditators (the followers of a conventional path) who insist the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma, or who insist the commentaries are "not the Buddha's words." -------------- <. . .> > D: well , the intellectual understanding of no self , is one thing , its penetration another.. because that means (khanda) detachment , a process of disentchantment and dispassion . For that the Buddha instructed us to apply the (training of the) 8fold Path . -------------- KH: If we have heard the teaching and considered it wisely then right understanding of a presently arisen dhamma might occur. Right understanding (which arises purely by conditions) *is* the training. Ken H #123906 From: "philip" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 2:09 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) philofillet -Hi Ken H, all > <. . .> > > D: good that you took your time to define what isn't easy to express. > Perhaps we can both polish it further . It may explain different angles of view which so often lead to misunderstandings on the forum . > ------------- > > KH: That would be good. There certainly are different angles of view at DSG. And there are misunderstandings between the people who hold those views. > > But what are the misunderstandings? Some of us might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have all been talking about the same thing; we have just been viewing it from different angles." Others might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have been talking about two very different things." > > I belong to the second group. I believe the first group misunderstands the misunderstandings. :-) Ph: I have been thinking about this sort of thing. The modern Western ideal of finding common ground and ironing out differences is great for establushing cease fires and for coming up with best selling products and blockbuster movies but I think it can only distort a correct understanding of Dhamma. I also suspect these days that the Dhamma is so deep that there may indeed be more than one correct way to understand it. It could be that what I call the Kalama Crew (Howard, Rob E, Dieter, Alex and surely more to arrive) understand Dhamma correctly in their own way (it is a possibility I am keeping open) but when they insist on imposing their way on our way, or when attempts are made with all good intention (a la pt) to find common groynd, the result is a kind of corrupted form of Dhamma. I don't know, still thinking, but when the "common ground" that is so helpful in ibter-communuty discourse in modern society is sought in Dhamma, it is probably a loss for all involved. And I feel DSG has become a Common Ground Seeking Project. I may be wrong, just wanted to get some things I've been thinking on to paper, so to speak. Understanding of Dhamma shouldn't be used to try to fill gaps in understanding that exist between people, I am pretty sure. This is why (as I said to Howard) I will try to avoid discussion with the Kalama Crew and why my efforts to avoid discussion with the Kalama Crew may *possibly* be rooted in wisdom rather than aversion. Possibly. They are obviously good human beings, people who are drawn to Dhamma tend to be so. But the ultimate goal of Dhamma is not to get along harmoniously with other people, tgat comes at a cost unless it comes naturally, free of interference. I have felt a lot of interference and forcing of harmony here...let it come on its own, or not!!!! Ok, I have gone off topuc. I needed to get some things out. No furtger comment, as usual. Phil > ---------------------------- > > D: We need to get an understanding first what means faith (in Buddhism) . It > concerns as you know , the cetasika saddha , belonging to the so-called > 19 Beautiful Universals of the 25 Beautiful Mental Factors group. (Sobhana > Cetasikas) > The discussion about 'suffering conditions faith' (pls compare with my recent > postings ) fits indeed to the 'cetasika in daily life' -project. > ---------------------------- > > KH: I agree: faith concerns the cetasika, saddha. > > In your recent postings you (and Ven Buddhadasa) seemed to make too much of the fact that faith was conditioned by suffering. Certainly if there was no suffering there would be no right understanding of suffering, and so there would be no Way Out of suffering. But that's as far as it goes, isn't it? It doesn't mean suffering is good. > > If I break my leg, and a doctor fixes it, that means the doctor was good; it doesn't mean my broken leg was good. > > ------------------ > <. . .> > > D: You say 'Panna performs that function ..without any help (..from a controlling self.) > But how can wisdom develop , if is not fed by insights? > ------------------ > > KH: What is the connection between those two sentences? Are you suggesting the development of panna requires input from a controlling self? > > -------------------------------- > > D: Insight or Vipassana is an application of mindfulness , i.e. the Path factor Sati , usually mentioned as the second of the mentioned Beautiful Factors Group ( the cetasika Panna last ) > -------------------------------- > > KH: Insight and panna are one and the same. > > Panna arises with the other path factors, but it is their leader. Without panna (samma-ditthi) sati would not be samma-sati and viriya would not be samma-viriya (etc). > > ------------------ > > D: You suggest an automatic as far as I understand , please explain.. > ------------------ > > KH: By "automatic" I think you mean "without assistance from a controlling self." So, yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting. That's the whole point of the Dhamma. > > -------------------------- > <. . .> > D: the dhammas which are arising now are first of all those of previous kamma (vipaka) , aren't they? The action (or re-action on vipaka -) here and now is future kamma . > -------------------------- > > KH: I think I know what you mean, but for the sake of clarity I would add that there is only one citta any one time. That citta can be either a vipakka citta, or a kammicly active citta, or a neutral (purely functional) citta. > > (I am not sure why you use the term "future kamma" but let's not worry about that now.) > > ---------- > > D: To understand the wholesome or unwholesome nature of mind here and now , the > foundation must be laid. That is , for example, the topic of knowing the > cetasikas , which 'color' the citta , besides application of training in order > to keep the necessary level of attention/concentration. > ---------- > > KH: Yes, but instead of saying the foundation must be laid I think you should have said the foundation must *have been* laid." > > How else could something happen here and now? If the foundations for its happening here and now have not been laid then it is simply not going to happen, is it? > > --------------------- > <. . .> > >> KH: Meditators insist on seeing Buddhism as a conventional teaching. In a conventional teaching there is a sentient being that does the work. That's very comforting to someone who clings to the idea of his own existence. > >> > > > D: sorry , Ken.. I can't take this seriously You would have to rewrite the canon and its commentaries > --------------------- > > KH: I know you can't take it seriously: there are very few people (Buddhist or non-Buddhist) in the world today who can take it seriously. That is why I said at the beginning of this post we must accept we are talking about two very different ways of understanding. > > Nearly everyone assumes the Buddha's teaching was a conventional one. A conventional teaching says "Follow these instructions and you will get from A to B." > > Just a few people believe it was an unconventional teaching. It said there was no permanent entity capable of getting from A to B. (There was a path, but no traveller on it.) > > As for "You will have to rewrite the Canon and its commentaries," may I point out who is doing the rewriting? It is always meditators (the followers of a conventional path) who insist the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma, or who insist the commentaries are "not the Buddha's words." > > -------------- > <. . .> > > D: well , the intellectual understanding of no self , is one thing , its > penetration another.. because that means (khanda) detachment , > a process of disentchantment and dispassion . For that the Buddha instructed us to apply the (training of the) 8fold Path . > -------------- > > KH: If we have heard the teaching and considered it wisely then right understanding of a presently arisen dhamma might occur. Right understanding (which arises purely by conditions) *is* the training. > > Ken H > #123907 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:12 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad sarahprocter... Dear Prasad, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Prasad Praturi" wrote: > > Dear Sarah, > > Thanks for the expalnation. Last one week I am carefully reading and understanding Nina's Writings. I am also listening to Acharn Sujin's recordings archived at DSG website. These Audio tecahings are very helpful and touching the core of understanding. ... S: I'm very glad to hear of your interest. As I speak, we're trying to upload the rest of the series of KK 2011 at the end of the audio discussion with A.Sujin (just in draft form). I think you'll appreciate this series with some participants from DSG including Phil, Azita, Ann, Jon & myself with A.Sujin. ... > > Currently where is Achrn Sujin? Are there any meetings or talks scheduled in near future? .... S: She lives in Bangkok. Usually there's an English discussion on Saturday afternoons, but not always. Sometimes when we or other overseas visitors go to Bkk, extra sessions are arranged. We hope to next visit end May/early Jun. If anything is arranged, I'll let you know in case you can join us. That would be wonderful. A few months later, perhaps next Jan, Phil and others may join for another KK trip - these are the best as we have a few days together with lots of discussion in the countryside. Again, we'll keep you informed here. Keep listening to the audio in the meantime, asking questions and so on - helpful for us all. ... > > Very thankful for recoding this dhamma talks and writings. .... S: A pleasure - thank you for your appreciation. Metta Sarah p.s pls remember to trim your posts, deleting the earlier messages. ======================= #123908 From: sarah abbott Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:26 pm Subject: new audio uploaded sarahprocter... Dear Friends, The rest of the KK 2011 audio series (work in progress) has been uploaded on www.dhammastudygroup.org: Find under: Kaeng Krajaan, March 2011 (the new parts are the last section on 9 March and all the sections on 10 March) We'll be glad to have you all listening and making comments! There are some great discussions between Phil & K.Sujin in this series. Metta Sarah ====== #123909 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 4:51 pm Subject: Re: Death of Ven. Dhammadharo sarahprocter... Dear Nina, Lukas & Tadao, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > you posted before how Kh Sujin helped you to take his death in the > right way and how you were consoled. Please, could you repost? I > think it is helpful for anyone who has lost a dear person. I will > send it on to Tadao. .... I just searched and there were many messages. Perhaps you mean this one? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/59617 Or else, you may have meant the series I wrote/transcribed, starting with this one: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/73051 We can repost the series if you like. There is also a very good section in "useful posts" under "Death - mourning", helpful for anyone who experiences loss. Metta Sarah ===== #123911 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 5:02 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 1- arising and falling of citta sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, Part 1 - arising and falling away of citta --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: >> S: At the present moment, there is only ever a single citta arising and falling away experiencing its object. ... > D:I understand that the citta or consciousness is aware about the changing 6senses media, but it is not part of it. > In other words the fact of being conscious, knowing about ...... is rising and falling only in case of unconsciousness, isn't it? .... S: The citta which arises and falls away at each moment is the leader in experiencing its object. For example, at a moment of seeing consciousness, this citta experiences visible object and then it, the seeing consciousness, falls away. At a moment of thinking, the thinking citta experiences a concept and then falls away. Each citta arises, falls away and conditions the next citta to arise. .... >>S: On account of ignorance and continuity of experience, of namas and rupas, it seems there are whole pictures, stories, people and things. In reality, there are just a succession of cittas arising and falling away: > >> AN, Ones (1, V, 8), The Buddha says: > >> "No other thing do I know, O monks, that so quickly changes as the mind:Inasmuch that it is not easy to give an illustration for the mind's quick > change." ... > D: I assume the mind = nama/mano : perception, feeling and mental formation) - cetasikas > (we need to check the pali) .... S: Yes, Mano (mind) is the same as citta. Again it is the citta (mano) that changes quicker than anything we can imagine. Each citta/mano is accompanied by the cetasikas as we know, at least seven in each case. So as the citta arises and falls away, so do the accompanying cetasikas. Mind/citta/mano is often used to refer to citta + accompanying cetasikas. .... Other parts later! Thx for your detailed response and interest. Metta Sarah ===== #123912 From: "sarah" Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 5:07 pm Subject: Re: Why Some Confuse Vedana with Rupas/Sarah & Prasad sarahprocter... Dear Prasad, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Prasad Praturi" wrote: > I saw your last audio post (still editinng) in the list. I would like to join your english discussion with Acharn Sujin whenever it scheduled. > > In the mean time I am listening the audio recordings. ... S: Excellent! We'll be glad to meet you. If you come across anything interesting or confusing on the audio, pls share a few lines here for further discussion. Metta Sarah ====== #123913 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 7:05 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Death of Ven. Dhammadharo nilovg Dear Sarah, Thank you very much. I sent these to Tadao. More messages on the same topic as listed give a complete account. Helpful to reread them. Nina. Op 24-apr-2012, om 8:51 heeft sarah het volgende geschreven: > I just searched and there were many messages. #123914 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Apr 24, 2012 10:03 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Phil (and Ken & Dieter & "Kakama Crew!!!) - In a message dated 4/24/2012 12:09:18 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, philco777@... writes: -Hi Ken H, all > <. . .> > > D: good that you took your time to define what isn't easy to express. > Perhaps we can both polish it further . It may explain different angles of view which so often lead to misunderstandings on the forum . > ------------- > > KH: That would be good. There certainly are different angles of view at DSG. And there are misunderstandings between the people who hold those views. > > But what are the misunderstandings? Some of us might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have all been talking about the same thing; we have just been viewing it from different angles." Others might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have been talking about two very different things." > > I belong to the second group. I believe the first group misunderstands the misunderstandings. :-) Ph: I have been thinking about this sort of thing. The modern Western ideal of finding common ground and ironing out differences is great for establushing cease fires and for coming up with best selling products and blockbuster movies but I think it can only distort a correct understanding of Dhamma. I also suspect these days that the Dhamma is so deep that there may indeed be more than one correct way to understand it. It could be that what I call the Kalama Crew (Howard, Rob E, Dieter, Alex and surely more to arrive) understand Dhamma correctly in their own way (it is a possibility I am keeping open) but when they insist on imposing their way on our way, or when attempts are made with all good intention (a la pt) to find common groynd, the result is a kind of corrupted form of Dhamma. I don't know, still thinking, but when the "common ground" that is so helpful in ibter-communuty discourse in modern society is sought in Dhamma, it is probably a loss for all invo lved. And I feel DSG has become a Common Ground Seeking Project. I may be wrong, just wanted to get some things I've been thinking on to paper, so to speak. Understanding of Dhamma shouldn't be used to try to fill gaps in understanding that exist between people, I am pretty sure. This is why (as I said to Howard) I will try to avoid discussion with the Kalama Crew and why my efforts to avoid discussion with the Kalama Crew may *possibly* be rooted in wisdom rather than aversion. Possibly. They are obviously good human beings, people who are drawn to Dhamma tend to be so. But the ultimate goal of Dhamma is not to get along harmoniously with other people, tgat comes at a cost unless it comes naturally, free of interference. I have felt a lot of interference and forcing of harmony here...let it come on its own, or not!!!! Ok, I have gone off topuc. I needed to get some things out. No furtger comment, as usual. Phil ================================== It is ironic, Phil, that the post of Ken's (in his discussion with Dieter) to which you are replying, impressed me quite favorably. I thought that what Ken had to say, and how he said it, was excellent! Now I'll get to you, Phil - you, who are annoying me greatly with this post. I would appreciate it if you would restrict yourself to discussing the Dhamma without getting persona;l and without your snide "Kalama Crew" references. If, as you say, you want to "avoid discussion with (what you sneeringly call) the Kalama Crew," you might try harder! No one here, so far as I can see, is "insist(ing) on imposing their way on our way"! And, BTW, who is the "our" in that "our way"? Do you consider that folks here who are in "your group" are owners and others are outsiders who are imposing? The list owners do not! With metta, but, apologetically, with much annoyance, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123915 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:31 am Subject: Sakkaya Ditthi vv Kamma nilovg Dear "ymanatta" My delay is due to a week's vacation. Sarah answered already most of your points. I will see whether I can add something. ------ ym wrote: Can you please enlighten me? Viewing Sakkaya Dithi as "This is not mine, This i am not & This is not myself" on things when it arises to separate the materiality & mentality ------ N: the first stage of insight is knowing the difference between nama and rupa, and this not by thinking about terms and naming them, but by realizing directly their different characteristics. Just now there is seeing, but we know so little about its characteristic. Seeing is a reality that experiences, it experiences visible object. Seeing is nama and visible object or colour is rupa. Rupa does not know anything. When colour appears there is also seeing, but awareness can be aware of only one object at a time. We take seeing and colour together in a mass, we are just thinking about them. But when sati arises it is aware of one reality at a time. Sati does not arise on command, it can only arise when there are the right conditions for it: listening again and again to the Dhamma, discussing it, considering it. This is a long process. As Sarah wrote: This is most important. If there is even a slight idea of wishing for sati or trying to make it arise, no sati at all. Stages of insight can only arise when satipatthana has been developed on and on. When the difference between nama and rupa has not been realized we do not really understand nama as nama. Kamma is nama, but we do not understand kamma, so long as there is not direct understanding of the characteristic of nama. We only know the name kamma, we have theoretical understanding of it. Thus, we do not try to contemplate seeing as result of kamma, no need to think at all when seeing arises. Just attend to its characteristic: it is a type of nama that knows visible object, different from rupa. Seeing does not experience people or things in the visible object, that is thinking, not seeing. Then hearing arises, it experiences sound. It does not experience birds in the sound, people in the sound, just what can be heard. -------- Ym:& also to contemplate on the phenomena as Anicca.. as Dukkha .. as Anatta. ------ N: First whatever appears now has to be understood as only a conditioned dhamma. Only later on pa~n~na will know the three general characteristics more clearly. That is, not just knowing their names, but realizing them without having to think about them. We are so used to think of terms and naming realities, but that is not direct understanding of the characteristics of realities. -------- Nina. #123916 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 12:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 1- arising and falling of citta moellerdieter Dear Sarah, D:I understand that the citta or consciousness is aware about the changing 6senses media, but it is not part of it. > In other words the fact of being conscious, knowing about ...... is rising and falling only in case of unconsciousness, isn't it? .... S: The citta which arises and falls away at each moment is the leader in experiencing its object. For example, at a moment of seeing consciousness, this citta experiences visible object and then it, the seeing consciousness, falls away. At a moment of thinking, the thinking citta experiences a concept and then falls away. Each citta arises, falls away and conditions the next citta to arise. D: not really clear to me .. I would assume citta/vinnana as momentary awareness of the 6 senses , which as a frame wouldn't rise and cease but its content seeing , hearing etc. , taking into consideration e.g. 'DN 28, in which Ven. Sariputta states that, through the arduous development of concentration, one can know the uninterrupted "stream of consciousness" (viññāṇa-sota) that spans multiple lives; as well as, ' .... >>S: On account of ignorance and continuity of experience, of namas and rupas, it seems there are whole pictures, stories, people and things. In reality, there are just a succession of cittas arising and falling away:> >> AN, Ones (1, V, 8), The Buddha says:> >> "No other thing do I know, O monks, that so quickly changes as the mind:Inasmuch that it is not easy to give an illustration for the mind's quick > change." D: .. I have always difficulties to follow sources by PTS index , which sutta of AN I do you refer to? ... > D: I assume the mind = nama/mano : perception, feeling and mental formation) - cetasikas > (we need to check the pali) .... S: Yes, Mano (mind) is the same as citta. Again it is the citta (mano) that changes quicker than anything we can imagine. Each citta/mano is accompanied by the cetasikas as we know, at least seven in each case. So as the citta arises and falls away, so do the accompanying cetasikas. Mind/citta/mano is often used to refer to citta + accompanying cetasikas. .... D: confusing when we we take nama (identical with mano?) to involve citta and cetasika compared with the usual D.O. formula : vinnanna conditions nama /rupa The distinction of vinnana ,mano,nama and citta seems to be a matter of unsolved dispute . (I noted that Howard, Jon and I discussed the issue a couple of years ago) Perhaps we must conclude that a general definition isn't possible because it depends on the context (sutta-Abh.) S:Other parts later! Thx for your detailed response and interest D:dito , Sarah. It may not surprise us that even this single part involves such big background (see examples below) with Metta Dieter The consciousness (vinnana) and the mind (citta) in Buddhism http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Talk/talk.religion.buddhism/2007-12/msg0\ 0663.html THE 17 PROPRIETARY DECLARATIONS MADE IN SUTTA ABOUT THE CITTA ALONE http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Talk/talk.religion.buddhism/2007-12/msg0\ 0129.html Bhikkhu Bodhi's quote from the commentary to the Assutava Sutta (SN 12.61): in the Nikayas they are [citta, mano, viññana] generally used in distinct contexts. As a rough generalization, viññana signifies the particularizing awareness through which a sense faculty (as in the standard sixfold division of viññana into eye-consciousness, etc.) as well as the underlying stream of consciousness, which sustains personal continuity through a single life and thread together suscessive lives (emphasized at SN 12.38-40). Mano serves as the third door of action (along with body and speech) and as the sixth internal sense base (along with the five physical sense bases); as the mind base it coordiantes the data of the other five senses and also cognizes mental phenonema (dhamma), its own special class of objects. Citta signifies mind as the centre of personal experience, as the subject of thought, voliton and emotion. According to Bodhi (2005), p. 310, based on the Sutta pitaka description of the six sense bases: "... On this interpretation, 'mind' [mano] might be taken as the passive flow of consciousness from which active conceptual consciousness emerges, and 'phenomena' [dhammā] as purely mental objects such as those apprehended by introspection, imagination, and reflection. The Abhidhamma and the Pāli commentaries, however, interpret the two terms [mano and dhammā] differently. They hold that the mind base comprises all classes of consciousness. They also hold that all actual entities not comprised in the other sense bases constitute the phenomena base. The phenomena base, then, includes the other three mental aggregates [khandha] — feeling, perception, and volitional formations — as well as types of subtle material form not implicated in experiences through the physical senses. Whether this interpretation conforms to the meaning intended in the oldest Buddhist texts is an open question." In Ven. Narada's Abh. manual it is said: 'Citta, Ceta, Cittupada , Nama , Mano,Vinnaya are all used as synonymous terms in Abh. Hence from the Abh. point of view no distinctionis made between mind and consciousness. When the so-called being is divided into its constituent parts, Nama (mind) is used . When its is divided into 5 aggregates (Pancakkhanda) Vinnaya is used. ' SN 12.61 Assutavā Sutta: The Spiritually-Unlearned (1) footnote by K. Nizamis http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.061.niza.html "Yañca kho etaṃ, bhikkhave, vuccati cittaṃ itipi, mano itipi, viññāṇaṃ itipi..." The quotation marks placed around each term in the translation are justified by the fact that the Pali has "vuccati cittaṃ iti pi, mano iti pi, viññāṇaṃ iti pi", "It is called "citta" or "mano" or "viññāṇa"": the particle iti after each term functions as a "quotation marker", corresponding to the verb vuccati, "it is called...". These three terms demand a very detailed, comprehensive and lengthy analysis; which, of course, cannot possibly be provided in a footnote. If this sutta were presenting a more detailed technical and theoretical discussion, such as we do indeed find in many other suttas, then it would be more appropriate to translate these terms more precisely: for example, citta as "subjective mind", mano as "cognitive faculty", and viññāṇa as "sensory consciousness" (that is, consciousness when functioning in the mode of the six sense bases (saḷāyatana), although viññāṇa also has two further special technical senses and uses in the suttas). But the present sutta is very clearly not intended to be technically and theoretically precise about this particular subject. In fact, one of the points that the sutta seems to suggest is that for the ordinary, unlearned person these three terms are quite interchangeable: "six of one and half a dozen of the other", as the English idiom goes. For this reason, it is much more appropriate to translate these three terms more loosely and ambiguously; but this is somewhat difficult to do in English because, unlike Sanskrit and Pali, English does not have a very extensive vocabulary with which to indicate the subtleties of "consciousness" or "mind". We can see from the context in which these three terms are actually used in this sutta that what is in question here is the way in which the unlearned or uninformed person thinks of these terms: how he or she conflates them due to lack of analytical understanding, and how he or she relates to what he or she thinks of as his or her "own mind": namely, identifying it and cherishing as the private, personal "self" (attā). This partial statement, "cittaṃ itipi, mano itipi, viññāṇaṃ itipi", is very frequently quoted — in isolation, out of context — by proponents and commentators of the Abhidhamma and of Abhidhamma-influenced schools, in support of the stereotypical Abhidhamma view that the terms citta, mano, and viññāṇa are somehow "synonymous". Only one other similar passage can be found in the Suttanta Piṭaka, in DN 1 (Brahmajāla Sutta; PTS DN i.1), at DN i.21, but this passage is rarely cited, for an obvious reason: "Yaṃ ca kho idaṃ vuccati cittanti vā mano’ti vā viññāṇanti vā..." "That which is called ‘citta’ or ‘mano’ or ‘viññāṇa’..." There, in DN 1, it is put into the mouth of the kind of "reasoner" (takkī) who wrongly argues that "mind" is a permanent, eternal, unchanging "self" (attā). It is therefore very interesting and very important to note that here, too, in SN 12.61, this same formula occurs in the context of a description of the way of thinking of the "tatrāssutavā puthujjano", the "in every way spiritually-unlearned ordinary person". This crucial matter is too detailed and complex to discuss here in a brief footnote, but it can hopefully be addressed in detail and in depth on a different occasion. Suffice it to say that I am not asserting that citta, mano, and viññāṇa are distinct and separate "things", but that they refer to quite distinct and non-inter-reducible functions and properties of "mind" as such. To claim that they are "mere synonyms" is, very crudely speaking, rather like claiming that the words "steam", "liquid", and "ice" are all "mere synonyms". To be sure, they may all refer to forms of "water"; but it would be plainly and simply wrong to claim that they are therefore merely "synonymous". #123917 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 2:01 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Rob E. (Howard), you wrote: > Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out.> > D: well said , with one suggestion to change: .."that points to the unsatisfying [self-delusioned] nature of samsara " Not sure why you would prefer self-delusioned to non-self. I think the fact of the non-self nature of phenomena is more essential that merely delusion. D: you said " unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara " ...which I consider contradictory to what is meant by "saṃsāra : 'round of rebirth', lit. perpetual wandering', is a name by which is designated the sca of life ever restlessly heaving up and down, the symbol of this continuous process of ever again and again being born, growing old, suffering and dying." (Nyanatiloka) The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself' , otherwise we wouldn't speak of samsara anymore. You will probably agree that samsara is described by the Law of Dependent Orgination, which involves avijja -ignorance and its offspring moha (delusion) , the I/Self identification by attachment . The stream of mental and corporal phenomena appears to us 'coloured' by ignorance/delusion , in particular: the 5 senses media (sensuality ,kama tanha) . The conditions are described by the links of D.O. Anatta has to be realized and that happens only at the Arahant state .. the intellectual understanding respectively simply reason is not enough to liberate the mind. RE: Do you think there is a non-deluded self that becomes enlightened D: sorry, Robert , that is a foolish rhetorical question RE: You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding? D: see my comments above (D:> and of course , we may not forget nibbana ... ;-) RE:I am not sure if nibbana is anything but a dream for most Buddhists. It is important to know it is there, of course, but I think that suffering and the nature of suffering are more important for actually engaging the path. What is the relationship you propose we should have with nibbana? D: I recall that a wellknown monk said: "In fact, without this business of Nibbana, Buddhism would be as good as dead. When nobody is interested in Nibbana, then nobody is genuinely interested in Buddhism. When nothing about Nibbana interests us, then we can't get any benefits at all from Buddhism. " I fully agree with that . ..there have been countless discussion about nibbana , about a topic which is all , what samsara is not. I prefer to leave it like that. with Metta Dieter #123918 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 2:46 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 - welfare for the householders moellerdieter Dear Sarah, you wrote: (D: I think it is the arising and cessation of phenomena /dhammas..not their 'abstract classification ' ..> (pls compare Ven.Nyanatiloka : Khanda -excerpt ) > > 'The fact ought to be emphasized here that these 5 groups, correctly speaking, merely form an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence, <....> ... S: I think this is incorrect. The khandhas are dhammas, realities, just as the dhatus, ayatanas, namas or rupas are dhammas. This is why the suttas (as well as the Abhidhamma) refer to the arising and falling away of the khandhas, as in the quote I just sent you in the last message; "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why?Because they rise and fall and change, or be cause of their absence after having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after having been. "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words `what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. "But the same five aggregates are no-self because of the words `what is painful is no-self' (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self." .... S: The khandhas as discussed here are clearly not "an abstract classification by the Buddha, but that they as such, i.e. as just these 5 complete groups, have no real existence". Quite the contrary, the khandhas refer to all the dhammas arising and falling away now as we write - the visible object experienced now, the seeing, the likes, dislikes and so on. Also, from the beginning of the Upanissa Sutta which you've been quoting recently: "The destruction of the cankers, monks, is for one who knows and sees, I say, not for one who does not know and does not see. Knowing what, seeing what does the destruction of the cankers occur? 'Such is material form, such is the arising of material form, such is the passing away of material form. Such is feeling... perception... mental formations... consciousness; such is the arising of consciousness, such is the passing away of consciousness' â€" for one who knows and sees this, monks, the destruction of the cankers occurs." S: Nothing abstract about the khandhas as discussed here. They can be known right now as they appear, one khandha, one dhamma, at a time. D: without doubt :good support for your point ;-) Still, I understand the point of classification , Nyanatiloka is speaking of, the name which given to a certain specified group of phenoma (khanda) is abstract. To quote further: "since only single representatives of these groups, mostly variable, can arise with any state of consciousness. For example, with one and the same unit of consciousness only one single kind of feeling, say joy or sorrow, can be associated and never more than one. Similarly, two different perceptions cannot arise at the same moment. Also, of the various kinds of sense-cognition or consciousness, only one can be present at a time, for example, seeing, hearing or inner consciousness, etc. Of the 50 mental formations, however, a smaller or larger number are always associated with every state of consciousness, as we shall see later on.Some writers on Buddhism who have not understood that the five khandha are just classificatory groupings, have conceived them as compact entities ('heaps', 'bundles'), while actually, as stated above, the groups never exist as such, i.e. they never occur in a simultaneous totality of all their constituents. Also those single constituents of a group which are present in any given body- and -mind process, are of an evanescent nature, and so also their varying combinations. Feeling, perception and mental formations are only different aspects and functions of a single unit of consciousness. They are to consciousness what redness, softness, sweetness, etc. are to an apple and have as little separate existence as those qualities." I like to emphasise 'only single representatives of these groups ..can arise ' , i.e. not the whole group. Possibly this issue has been discussed before? with Metta Dieter #123919 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:31 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Jon) - > > In a message dated 4/23/2012 1:56:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > epsteinrob@... writes: > > Yet it seems to be a point that is made many times in order to emphasize > the importance of dhammas that there is "no conventional object, just > dhammas!" > ============================== > Well, considering the Sabba Sutta (SN 35.23), that is a position > difficult to argue with, don't you think? The so-called conventional objects are > mere collections of the dhammas that comprise "the all", collections > mistakenly viewed as entities. Moreover, if one adds to this such teachings as > copied at the end of this post, does not emptiness reign supreme? To both what you have said and the quotes below, I believe this warrants further discussion to examine what is meant by "mere collections of dhammas" and the metaphors that are used in the suttas to define the unreality of life as we know it. There is a difference between seeing objects incorrectly, or indirectly, and them not existing at all. Though a chariot is always reduceable to smaller and smaller parts, it does not mean the chariot does not carry people and roll down the street. It means that it cannot be defined as an absolute object that is not interconnected with everything with which it interacts both microscopically and macroscopically. The fact that dhammas arise and fall and that this is the ultimate reality is one thing, but if they rise and fall in a context of a larger order, that larger order exists, it just does not exist as a static whole as we imagine it to. So there are many issues such as these that would pertain to the type of reality that objects and people have, as opposed to saying that they do or don't exist, or that they are merely imagined. Is it your view that when we play tennis, there are no rackets and no balls, and that no back and forth is actually taking place, or just that the way we perceive these and talk about them is a deluded view of them? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #123920 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:10 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna upasaka_howard Hi, Robert - In a message dated 4/24/2012 4:31:45 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Howard. --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Jon) - > > In a message dated 4/23/2012 1:56:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > epsteinrob@... writes: > > Yet it seems to be a point that is made many times in order to emphasize > the importance of dhammas that there is "no conventional object, just > dhammas!" > ============================== > Well, considering the Sabba Sutta (SN 35.23), that is a position > difficult to argue with, don't you think? The so-called conventional objects are > mere collections of the dhammas that comprise "the all", collections > mistakenly viewed as entities. Moreover, if one adds to this such teachings as > copied at the end of this post, does not emptiness reign supreme? To both what you have said and the quotes below, I believe this warrants further discussion to examine what is meant by "mere collections of dhammas" and the metaphors that are used in the suttas to define the unreality of life as we know it. There is a difference between seeing objects incorrectly, or indirectly, and them not existing at all. -------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I agree. The collections are not arbitrary, but, rather are dynamic systems of closely interrelated phenomena that function in concert. And they exist as such. But, still, they are collections and not individual entities. ------------------------------------------------- Though a chariot is always reduceable to smaller and smaller parts, it does not mean the chariot does not carry people and roll down the street. It means that it cannot be defined as an absolute object that is not interconnected with everything with which it interacts both microscopically and macroscopically. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Okay. I think we agree. Note my mentioning "phenomena that function in concert". ----------------------------------------------- The fact that dhammas arise and fall and that this is the ultimate reality is one thing, but if they rise and fall in a context of a larger order, that larger order exists, it just does not exist as a static whole as we imagine it to. ---------------------------------------------- HCW: That's correct, it is not an individual existent. ------------------------------------------------ So there are many issues such as these that would pertain to the type of reality that objects and people have, as opposed to saying that they do or don't exist, or that they are merely imagined Is it your view that when we play tennis, there are no rackets and no balls, and that no back and forth is actually taking place, or just that the way we perceive these and talk about them is a deluded view of them? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: They exist each as a system of phenomena acting in concert, phenomena more closely related to each other than to phenomena outside the system. But, not to beat a dead horse, I think it is important to emphasize that any such system/complex is not an individual entity. ------------------------------------------------- Best, Rob E. ================================ With metta, Howard Emptiness /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./ (From the Uraga Sutta) #123921 From: "philip" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:37 am Subject: SPD#4 (ditthi that is akusala kamma pattha) philofillet Dear Group Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket (translated by Nina Van Gorkom), Dhamma Study and Support Foundation, 2005: "Not every kind of wrong view is akusala kamma patha. Wrong view that is akusala kamma-patha are the three following views: 1. Natthika ditthi, which is the denial of the result of kamma; any result that arises does not originate from kamma. 2.Ahetuka ditthi, which is the denial of both kamma and result. Kamma does not produce result, whatever arises has no condition, no cause. 3. Akirya ditthi, which is the denail of the efficacy of kamma. Kamma (action) is merely a behaviour by way of the body; there are no good and bad actions that produce results.. When the akusala citta that motivates akusala kamma patha has fallen away, the cetanaa cetasika (volition) which arose and fell away together with the akusala citta is kamma condition (kamma paccaya) for the arising of akusala vipaakacitta. There are seven types of akusala vipaakacittta which are the the results of kamma and which arise when it is the appropriate time. (end of passage) Phil p.s I hope my comments about not wanting to discuss with the Kalagang will not prohibit them and others from discussing these passages when an interest arises, I will continue to act as passage poster, exclusively, to stay out of trouble. p.p.s don't worry, I am not insane. Honestly. (((:*))) <<< this smiley figure is a representation of me in yogic bliss.) #123922 From: "ymanatta" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:03 am Subject: Re: Sakkaya Ditthi vv Kamma ymanatta Dear Nina, Thank you for the explanation. It helps & also i am able to benefit from the Q&A of this discussion group. Sadhu.. Sadhu.. Sadhu.. With Metta, ym --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear "ymanatta" > > My delay is due to a week's vacation. Sarah answered already most of > your points. I will see whether I can add something. <...> #123923 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 3:39 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > > Hi Rob E. (Howard), > > you wrote: > > > Perhaps it is as simple as the fact of suffering supporting a system of liberation that is based solely on the elimination of suffering. If the fact of dukkha -- the essential dissatisfaction/suffering/stress that points to the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara -- is faced squarely, perhaps that is what leads to the inevitable conclusion [faith] that the Four Noble Truths and the Eightfold Noble Path are the only way out.> > > D: well said , with one suggestion to change: .."that points to the unsatisfying [self-delusioned] nature of samsara " > > Not sure why you would prefer self-delusioned to non-self. I think the fact of the non-self nature of phenomena is more essential that merely delusion. > > > > D: you said " unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara " ...which I consider contradictory to what is meant by > "saṃsāra : 'round of rebirth', lit. perpetual wandering', is a name by which is designated the sca of life ever restlessly heaving up and down, the symbol of this continuous process of ever again and again being born, growing old, suffering and dying." (Nyanatiloka) > > The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself' , otherwise we wouldn't speak of samsara anymore. What I meant by the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara is that samsara is shown to be anatta because it is unsatifying and not amenable to control. The nature of every dhamma -- which comprises the All -- is anatta, whether that is realized or not. To say that it is self-deluded is to imply that there is a self that is deluded. You may find that silly, but I think it's worth clarifying. The realization of anatta causes detachment from samsara, but there is no self-nature in samsara even for one who is deluded. Self is the delusion of samsara, but not the true nature of samsara. > You will probably agree that samsara is described by the Law of Dependent Orgination, which involves avijja -ignorance and its offspring moha > (delusion) , the I/Self identification by attachment . Yes, delusion leads to the illusion of self identification through attachment. This does not change the fact that all things within samsara are not-self, anatta, in truth. There is a difference between saying what really is and what is believed by one who is deluded. I am not saying that delusion does not lead to self-identification. I am just saying that this is an illusion, and in fact, as the Buddha pointed out, the nature of all dhammas is anatta. > The stream of mental and corporal phenomena appears to us 'coloured' by ignorance/delusion , in particular: the 5 senses media (sensuality ,kama tanha) . The conditions are described by the links of D.O. > Anatta has to be realized and that happens only at the Arahant state .. the intellectual understanding respectively simply reason is not enough to liberate the mind. I agree, but we do talk about many things that are not yet directly realized, otherwise we would be extremely quiet. I was talking about the fact of anatta, not its realization. > RE: Do you think there is a non-deluded self that becomes enlightened > > D: sorry, Robert , that is a foolish rhetorical question I'm sorry you feel that way. I meant it as a serious question, not as a smart remark, or a rhetorical question. I did not understand why you replaced anatta with self-deluded. Anatta is the fact of samsara's nature; delusion is the condition of the mind that does not realize the nature of samsara, but instead relates to it through clinging, etc. > RE: You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding? > > > D: see my comments above See my response as well. > (D:> and of course , we may not forget nibbana ... ;-) > > > > RE:I am not sure if nibbana is anything but a dream for most Buddhists. It is important to know it is there, of course, but I think that suffering and the nature of suffering are more important for actually engaging the path. What is the relationship you propose we should have with nibbana? > > > D: I recall that a wellknown monk said: > "In fact, without this business of Nibbana, Buddhism would be as good as dead. When nobody is interested in Nibbana, then nobody is genuinely interested in Buddhism. When nothing about Nibbana interests us, then we can't get any benefits at all from Buddhism. " > > I fully agree with that . ..there have been countless discussion about nibbana , about a topic which is all , what samsara is not. I understand the importance of nibbana, but if one focuses on it too much, it becomes a kind of removed goal that one strives for, rather than something that is realized through mindfulness in the present moment. > I prefer to leave it like that. That's fine, but your seeming conclusion that I am not interested in Nibbana, or that I discount it in some way, is not correct. Nice to talk to you anyway. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #123924 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 3:55 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > Is it your view that when we play tennis, there are no rackets and no > balls, and that no back and forth is actually taking place, or just that the > way we perceive these and talk about them is a deluded view of them? > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > They exist each as a system of phenomena acting in concert, phenomena > more closely related to each other than to phenomena outside the system. > But, not to beat a dead horse, I think it is important to emphasize that any > such system/complex is not an individual entity. It is an interesting distinction to make between an organized system and an entity. In a sense it is an entity, that is, in the sense that it is an organized operation. But I think what makes it 'non-entity' which is the same as 'non-self' is the fact that there is no conscious being that is central to that system. It is the presumption of an overseeing self that creates the sense of entity as we understand it, and it is that which does not exist. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #123925 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 4:25 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna jonoabb Hi Rob E (123901) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > RE: BTW, as an aside regarding the contemplation of the Dhamma any place, any time - I am currently on the train from New York back to Washington, D.C. after a memorial. ... > =============== J: Thanks for sharing this. Will comment further when responding to the last part of your post (i.e not in this message). > =============== > RE: RE: Anyway, your point appears to be that the existence of "whole conventional objects" that might or might not exist independent of what we experience is irrelevant to the path, as the path concerns only a direct understanding of that which can be directly experienced, and the nature of that by which it is experienced at a given single moment. So what is happening in the 6 doorways at any given moment is all that can be the object of the path. I hope that is an accurate paraphrase of part of your point. > =============== J: Regarding <>. If you mean that question, that issue (i.e., the so-called existence or otherwise of whole conventional objects), then I know of nothing in the teachings that addresses that question (do you?). Regarding <>. I would put it like this: - the path concerns the understanding of things as they are in truth and reality - that understanding is an understanding gained by, and built upon, the direct experience (with panna) of those things that have an inherent, unchangeable characteristic (the Buddha called them 'dhammas', or khandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, namas and rupas, etc.) - only a dhamma that is currently arising can be directly experienced. I do not find it useful to think in terms of single moment experience in the context of the development of the path (that is far too advanced for the likes of you and me :-)) Regarding << the path concerns only a direct understanding of that which can be directly experienced>>. The six doorways and 'what is happening' there is one of the ways in which dhammas are classified by the Buddha (see ayatanas above). Of course, concepts could also be mentioned in the context of the 6 doorways but, not being dhammas, they do not form part of the ayatanas. > =============== > RE: At a moment when we experience the concept of a house, it is irrelevant whether there really is a house that this concept is referencing, because what is important for the path with regard to this concept is that we understand that for the experience of the moment the mind door is entertaining a concept for a single moment, and we focus on the nature of the mind door and its accompanying cetasikas, etc., rather than on anything having to do with the concept, which would be a distraction from understanding the nature of the operation taking place in the moment. I hope that is also a somewhat accurate rendition of your point about the irrelevance of conventional objects and their purported existence or nonexistence for the development of the path. > =============== J: Regarding << At a moment when we experience the concept of a house, it is irrelevant whether there really is a house that this concept is referencing>>. What I said in my earlier message was that the existence or otherwise of something that we know of and refer to as a house cannot be confirmed by direct experience, given that the world is experienced one doorway at a time. Regarding <>. While the single-moment nature of dhammas is part of the description we have of the way things are, direct confirmation of that aspect of things is not for the likes of you and me. Regarding <>. There is no 'focussing on' things (whether dhammas or concepts) to be done. > =============== > RE: So, for the path, the less one pays any attention to the purported existence of conventional objects, which are only delivered via conceptual thinking, and the more we pay attention to what we actually experience, which is always by way of a citta apprehending what is taking place through one of the six doorways, the better for the development of sati and panna, and the better for the development of the path. > =============== J: Again, it's not a matter of paying attention to one thing in preference to another, but of there being a better and better understanding, developing gradually and naturally from an interest in the teachings (rather than from a 'practice'), about what can be the object of panna and why. Jon #123926 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:42 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Rob E. (Howard) you wrote: (The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself' , otherwise we wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) What I meant by the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara is that samsara is shown to be anatta because it is unsatifying and not amenable to control. The nature of every dhamma -- which comprises the All -- is anatta, whether that is realized or not. To say that it is self-deluded is to imply that there is a self that is deluded. You may find that silly, but I think it's worth clarifying. The realization of anatta causes detachment from samsara, but there is no self-nature in samsara even for one who is deluded. Self is the delusion of samsara, but not the true nature of samsara. D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds similar to 'an undeluded wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is abolished by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . D:> You will probably agree that samsara is described by the Law of Dependent Orgination, which involves avijja -ignorance and its offspring moha > (delusion) , the I/Self identification by attachment . RE:Yes, delusion leads to the illusion of self identification through attachment. This does not change the fact that all things within samsara are not-self, anatta, in truth. There is a difference between saying what really is and what is believed by one who is deluded. I am not saying that delusion does not lead to self-identification. I am just saying that this is an illusion, and in fact, as the Buddha pointed out, the nature of all dhammas is anatta. D:> The stream of mental and corporal phenomena appears to us 'coloured' by ignorance/delusion , in particular: the 5 senses media (sensuality ,kama tanha) . The conditions are described by the links of D.O. > Anatta has to be realized and that happens only at the Arahant state .. the intellectual understanding respectively simply reason is not enough to liberate the mind. R:E.I agree, but we do talk about many things that are not yet directly realized, otherwise we would be extremely quiet. I was talking about the fact of anatta, not its realization. D: I think a lot of misunderstandings in discussions occur due to the exclusion of our conventional reality . The delusion is real until its nature is fully penetrated . The term 'absolute' or 'ultimate ' in respect to truth sometimes missing.... > RE: Do you think there is a non-deluded self that becomes enlightened > > D: sorry, Robert , that is a foolish rhetorical question R.E.I'm sorry you feel that way. I meant it as a serious question, not as a smart remark, or a rhetorical question. I did not understand why you replaced anatta with self-deluded. Anatta is the fact of samsara's nature; delusion is the condition of the mind that does not realize the nature of samsara, but instead relates to it through clinging, etc. D: perhaps Howard may mediate here, though not sure on which side ;-) ("nibbana is samsara misperceived") > RE: You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding? > > > D: see my comments above RE:See my response as well. D: well , anatta is the outstanding distinction in comparison to other teachings. You may agree that without the factor 'suffering' anatta would be irrelevant > (D:> and of course , we may not forget nibbana ... ;-) > > > > RE:I am not sure if nibbana is anything but a dream for most Buddhists. It is important to know it is there, of course, but I think that suffering and the nature of suffering are more important for actually engaging the path. What is the relationship you propose we should have with nibbana? > > > D: I recall that a wellknown monk said: > "In fact, without this business of Nibbana, Buddhism would be as good as dead. When nobody is interested in Nibbana, then nobody is genuinely interested in Buddhism. When nothing about Nibbana interests us, then we can't get any benefits at all from Buddhism. "> > I fully agree with that . ..there have been countless discussion about nibbana , about a topic which is all , what samsara is not. R:E.:I understand the importance of nibbana, but if one focuses on it too much, it becomes a kind of removed goal that one strives for, rather than something that is realized through mindfulness in the present moment. D:> I prefer to leave it like that. RE:That's fine, but your seeming conclusion that I am not interested in Nibbana, or that I discount it in some way, is not correct. D: for those haven't had a chance of a glimpse (Jhana) , nibbana is a great mystery . My impression is that some interpreters see it as total extinction, not that the extinction (of the fire) is refered to , i.e of thirst. RE: Nice to talk to you anyway. D: dito.. let us try to clear the misunderstanding with Metta Dieter #123927 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 10:38 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Robert) - Dieter, later in this post you write . So, I'm inserting some comments in your discussion, though I admit from the outset that I am confused by it. In a message dated 4/25/2012 5:42:37 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Rob E. (Howard) you wrote: (The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself' , otherwise we wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Dieter, do you mean by "self deluded" being deluded by a sense of self? If that is what you mean, I'm sure that Robert would agree. It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta. ----------------------------------------------- What I meant by the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara is that samsara is shown to be anatta because it is unsatifying and not amenable to control. The nature of every dhamma -- which comprises the All -- is anatta, whether that is realized or not. To say that it is self-deluded is to imply that there is a self that is deluded. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Robert, I'm guessing that by samsara being "self-deluded," Dieter means "being deluded by a sense of self and even a belief in self". ------------------------------------------------- You may find that silly, but I think it's worth clarifying. The realization of anatta causes detachment from samsara, but there is no self-nature in samsara even for one who is deluded. Self is the delusion of samsara, but not the true nature of samsara. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes. ---------------------------------------------- D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds similar to 'an undeluded wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is abolished by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . --------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. Such mentality is conditioned, changeable, and anatta. ----------------------------------------------- D:> You will probably agree that samsara is described by the Law of Dependent Orgination, which involves avijja -ignorance and its offspring moha > (delusion) , the I/Self identification by attachment . RE:Yes, delusion leads to the illusion of self identification through attachment. This does not change the fact that all things within samsara are not-self, anatta, in truth. There is a difference between saying what really is and what is believed by one who is deluded. I am not saying that delusion does not lead to self-identification. I am just saying that this is an illusion, and in fact, as the Buddha pointed out, the nature of all dhammas is anatta. D:> The stream of mental and corporal phenomena appears to us 'coloured' by ignorance/delusion , in particular: the 5 senses media (sensuality ,kama tanha) . The conditions are described by the links of D.O. > Anatta has to be realized and that happens only at the Arahant state .. the intellectual understanding respectively simply reason is not enough to liberate the mind. R:E.I agree, but we do talk about many things that are not yet directly realized, otherwise we would be extremely quiet. I was talking about the fact of anatta, not its realization. D: I think a lot of misunderstandings in discussions occur due to the exclusion of our conventional reality . The delusion is real until its nature is fully penetrated . ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, delusion is present (or, better, able to arise/occur) until it is not [Even delusion is conditioned], but what one is deluded *about*, the content of delusion, is only imagined and not truly existent. ------------------------------------------------ The term 'absolute' or 'ultimate ' in respect to truth sometimes missing.... > RE: Do you think there is a non-deluded self that becomes enlightened > > D: sorry, Robert , that is a foolish rhetorical question ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Again, a language usage problem I think. --------------------------------------------------- R.E.I'm sorry you feel that way. I meant it as a serious question, not as a smart remark, or a rhetorical question. I did not understand why you replaced anatta with self-deluded. Anatta is the fact of samsara's nature; delusion is the condition of the mind that does not realize the nature of samsara, but instead relates to it through clinging, etc. D: perhaps Howard may mediate here, though not sure on which side ;-) ("nibbana is samsara misperceived") ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: I'm trying, though I doubt it is very helpful. :-) --------------------------------------------------- > RE: You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding? > > > D: see my comments above RE:See my response as well. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Uh, oh! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- D: well , anatta is the outstanding distinction in comparison to other teachings. You may agree that without the factor 'suffering' anatta would be irrelevant > (D:> and of course , we may not forget nibbana ... ;-) > > > > RE:I am not sure if nibbana is anything but a dream for most Buddhists. It is important to know it is there, of course, but I think that suffering and the nature of suffering are more important for actually engaging the path. What is the relationship you propose we should have with nibbana? > > > D: I recall that a wellknown monk said: > "In fact, without this business of Nibbana, Buddhism would be as good as dead. When nobody is interested in Nibbana, then nobody is genuinely interested in Buddhism. When nothing about Nibbana interests us, then we can't get any benefits at all from Buddhism. "> > I fully agree with that . ..there have been countless discussion about nibbana , about a topic which is all , what samsara is not. R:E.:I understand the importance of nibbana, but if one focuses on it too much, it becomes a kind of removed goal that one strives for, rather than something that is realized through mindfulness in the present moment. D:> I prefer to leave it like that. RE:That's fine, but your seeming conclusion that I am not interested in Nibbana, or that I discount it in some way, is not correct. D: for those haven't had a chance of a glimpse (Jhana) , nibbana is a great mystery . My impression is that some interpreters see it as total extinction, not that the extinction (of the fire) is refered to , i.e of thirst. RE: Nice to talk to you anyway. D: dito.. let us try to clear the misunderstanding with Metta Dieter ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123928 From: "ptaus1" Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:06 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna ptaus1 Hi Jon and Sarah, Thanks for your replies on this topic. I'm not sure how to continue the discussion at the moment, I think I need to read a bit first, so will return later to this if possible. Best wishes pt > J: The actual moment(s) of any 'interaction' between 2 persons/streams of cittas, whatever/whenever that may be in terms of dhammas, would be no different from any other moment. Just conditioned dhammas arising. > > If your question is whether the cittas of A can condition the cittas of B (or the object of such cittas), I can only say I know of no such conditioning described in the texts. To my understanding, the pleasant or unpleasant objects experienced by B, and the term of B's lifespan, are conditioned by past kamma (in conjunction with other conditions). #123929 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Apr 25, 2012 11:28 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] new audio uploaded nilovg Dear Sarah and Jon, Thank you very much for all the trouble. It must take a lot of time. I copied them on my computer. Anumodana, Nina. Op 24-apr-2012, om 8:26 heeft sarah abbott het volgende geschreven: > The rest of the KK 2011 audio series (work in progress) has been > uploaded on www.dhammastudygroup.org: #123930 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 12:12 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat ptaus1 Hi RobE, On re-reading, my reply below might be a bit harsh. I guess I was trying to keep the discussion focused. > RE: On the other hand, Buddha praised jhana in particular as the very way in which the stages of practice were constructed, in my view. As I said, there are exceptions, but he talked about developing insight leading to enlightenment within the stages of the jhanas an awful lot, so I don't think it has the same status as general non-path kusala. pt: I think this (and other similar stuff) is a matter of interpretation, and we all have one. E.g. mine is that triple knowledge is actually the original path (e.g. the Buddha's case and many of his disciples) and it is way far above and beyond all the jhana stuff. But jhana enthusiasts don't talk about it much because jhanas don't really get you there, or it's just too weird to talk about the triple knowledge stuff nowadays. So, since you know what your interpretation is, and I know what's mine, perhaps let's just limit ourselves to learning what the abhidhamma and the commentaries (abhi/comm) say, as a starting point. I mean, I think our particular interpretations will probably change over time so I feel they have little use to anyone here. Afaik, and keeping this short, abhi/comm say that jhana citta doesn't strictly constitute the path, and that insight cannot occur during a jhana citta (I hope that's clear from our discussion of objects of citta). Not that insight cannot happen in the very next (process of) citta(s), which is perhaps what your sutta is alluding to, or not, depending on the interpretation. But anyway, that's what abhi/comm say afaik. We each can then make of this what we want, but I don't see much point in expressing those opinions unless someone specifically asks - "what is your opinion on abhi/comm view of the jhanas and insight"? I don't see anyone asking that here, so perhaps let's not go there. > RE: True, but that would go for the illusion that one is developing insight as well, not just mistaking fake calm for samatha, or mistaking jhana for enlightenment, etc. There are traps on the road of dry insight too! pt: That's for sure. > RE: But I don't think it's a good idea to have a partial context or to put jhana in a non-path category as many people here do. pt: It's a question whether they're expressing their opinions or whether that's what abhi/comm say. Again, I think it'd be useful to dispense with our opinions for now and simply focus on learning what abhi/comm say. > RE: Sure, it makes sense to say that "for one who can cultivate jhana and not confuse it with insight, jhana with insight is the supreme path, but since I don't have the accumulations for it, I'm not focusing on jhana in this lifetime." If anyone said that, including me, I would be extremely happy, because it would take place within the full acknowledgment of the teachings as they actually appear, while still being realistic about one's current "practice." pt: I'm not quite sure what you're saying above. > RE: Fine with me, pt. I have just found a lot of disparagement and dismissal of jhana as a false path, not part of the path, and not really a mainstay of the Buddha's plan. pt: Well, it's not his mainstay, the triple knowledge is :) I guess what I'm trying to say is that expressing our opinions won't get us very far in the discussion which has learning of a different perspective (of abhi/comm) as aim. > RE: I just think those kinds of characterizations of jhana - and meditation - are untrue and cause the rest of the Dhamma to land in a partial, rather than a full and correct, context. pt: Again, for the purposes of our discussion, the main thing is to be clear on what abhi/comm say. What we then think about it all is our private business so to speak, not much use in voicing it at this stage I feel. I mean, there's a lot of stuff I don't quite get in abhi/comm and I have my own opinions about these things, but they generally hinder in learning what is it that abhi/comm actually say. > RE: I am anxious to look into the difference between panna of samatha kind vs. panna of vipassana kind. That is an important issue, I agree. pt: I hope to reply to that bit soon. Best wishes pt #123931 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:01 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard and Rob E. you wrote: Dieter, later in this post you write . So, I'm inserting some comments in your discussion, though I admit from the outset that I am confused by it. D: thanks for prompt reaction ... as confusion is concerned it may possible for the three of us .. as who will claim to be free of confusion ;-) ) (The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself' , otherwise we wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Dieter, do you mean by "self deluded" being deluded by a sense of self? If that is what you mean, I'm sure that Robert would agree. D: I mean the I /Self delusion (the identification like I am, ..want,..don't want,etc. ) - self deluded obviously not a proper choice of words HCW: It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta. ----------------------------------------------- D: nay ...Samsara means our wandering (kamma) in these lasting rounds of births and deaths, conditioned by ignorance/delusion, doesn't it? (In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of ever changing phenomena of dependent orgination driven by ignorance) The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be found nevertherless is present.. Samsara isn't anatta.. anatta means the wandering /kamma ceased ..and then we can of course not talk anymore of samsara RE:What I meant by the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara is that samsara is shown to be anatta because it is unsatifying and not amenable to control. The nature of every dhamma -- which comprises the All -- is anatta, whether that is realized or not. To say that it is self-deluded is to imply that there is a self that is deluded. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Robert, I'm guessing that by samsara being "self-deluded," Dieter means "being deluded by a sense of self and even a belief in self". ------------------------------------------------- D: I hope with above we come closer to an understanding The exception is 'not even a belief in self ' , a belief in self the rule ( the delusion sticks to the bone, only deep penetration can liberate from attachment) Instead of denial of a self(doer --see sutta) , there is D.O. RE.You may find that silly, but I think it's worth clarifying. The realization of anatta causes detachment from samsara, but there is no self-nature in samsara even for one who is deluded. Self is the delusion of samsara, but not the true nature of samsara. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes. ---------------------------------------------- D: no ;-) it is the true nature of our wandering and that is samsara D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds similar to 'an undeluded wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is abolished by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . --------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. Such mentality is conditioned, changeable, and anatta. ----------------------------------------------- D: I consider that the main problem lies in a different understanding of what is samsara (see definition) D: I think a lot of misunderstandings in discussions occur due to the exclusion of our conventional reality . The delusion is real until its nature is fully penetrated . ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, delusion is present (or, better, able to arise/occur) until it is not [Even delusion is conditioned], but what one is deluded *about*, the content of delusion, is only imagined and not truly existent. ------------------------------------------------ D:if you see a fata morgana in the desert , it is real for you until you discover the mirage, likewise enlightenment. Until then that what you called 'not truly existent' is a concept. HCW: I'm trying, though I doubt it is very helpful. :-) --------------------------------------------------- D: never mind .. good trying to get a mutual unnderstanding > RE: You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding?> > D: see my comments above RE:See my response as well. ----------------------------------------------- HCW:Uh, oh! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- D: I think it looks worse than it was meant ;-) closing with the question back to Robert: do you agree that without the factor 'suffering' the issue of anatta would be irrelevant? with Metta Dieter #123932 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:35 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Robert) - In a message dated 4/25/2012 1:02:03 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard and Rob E. you wrote: Dieter, later in this post you write . So, I'm inserting some comments in your discussion, though I admit from the outset that I am confused by it. D: thanks for prompt reaction ... as confusion is concerned it may possible for the three of us .. as who will claim to be free of confusion ;-) ) (The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself' , otherwise we wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Dieter, do you mean by "self deluded" being deluded by a sense of self? If that is what you mean, I'm sure that Robert would agree. D: I mean the I /Self delusion (the identification like I am, ..want,..don't want,etc. ) - self deluded obviously not a proper choice of words ------------------------------------------------ HCW: Ah, yes, that's what I thought you must mean. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta. ----------------------------------------------- D: nay ...Samsara means our wandering (kamma) in these lasting rounds of births and deaths, conditioned by ignorance/delusion, doesn't it? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Well, yes, but that means it is a compound of many conditioned phenomena, largely involving ignorance and the resultant craving and aversion, and all anatta. ------------------------------------------------- (In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of ever changing phenomena of dependent orgination driven by ignorance) The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be found nevertherless is present.. Samsara isn't anatta.. anatta means the wandering /kamma ceased ..and then we can of course not talk anymore of samsara ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Samsara as a single thing is mere convention. It is actually a complex of a multitude of rising and falling phenomena, all anicca, anatta, and conditioned - most importantly by ignorance. ------------------------------------------------- RE:What I meant by the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara is that samsara is shown to be anatta because it is unsatifying and not amenable to control. The nature of every dhamma -- which comprises the All -- is anatta, whether that is realized or not. To say that it is self-deluded is to imply that there is a self that is deluded. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Robert, I'm guessing that by samsara being "self-deluded," Dieter means "being deluded by a sense of self and even a belief in self". ------------------------------------------------- D: I hope with above we come closer to an understanding The exception is 'not even a belief in self ' , a belief in self the rule ( the delusion sticks to the bone, only deep penetration can liberate from attachment) Instead of denial of a self(doer --see sutta) , there is D.O. RE.You may find that silly, but I think it's worth clarifying. The realization of anatta causes detachment from samsara, but there is no self-nature in samsara even for one who is deluded. Self is the delusion of samsara, but not the true nature of samsara. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes. ---------------------------------------------- D: no ;-) it is the true nature of our wandering and that is samsara --------------------------------------------------- HCW: Dieter, I'm getting lost in a forest of words. ;-) --------------------------------------------------- D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds similar to 'an undeluded wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is abolished by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . --------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. Such mentality is conditioned, changeable, and anatta. ----------------------------------------------- D: I consider that the main problem lies in a different understanding of what is samsara (see definition) D: I think a lot of misunderstandings in discussions occur due to the exclusion of our conventional reality . The delusion is real until its nature is fully penetrated . ------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, delusion is present (or, better, able to arise/occur) until it is not [Even delusion is conditioned], but what one is deluded *about*, the content of delusion, is only imagined and not truly existent. ------------------------------------------------ D:if you see a fata morgana in the desert , it is real for you until you discover the mirage, likewise enlightenment. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: What is seen, is seen; what it is perceived as may or may not properly represent what is seen, typically not. ------------------------------------------------- Until then that what you called 'not truly existent' is a concept. HCW: I'm trying, though I doubt it is very helpful. :-) --------------------------------------------------- D: never mind .. good trying to get a mutual unnderstanding > RE: You do not agree that anatta is the most essential ingredient of Buddhist understanding?> > D: see my comments above RE:See my response as well. ----------------------------------------------- HCW:Uh, oh! ;-)) ----------------------------------------------- D: I think it looks worse than it was meant ;-) -------------------------------------------------- HCW: :-) -------------------------------------------------- closing with the question back to Robert: do you agree that without the factor 'suffering' the issue of anatta would be irrelevant? -------------------------------------------------- HCW: If I may butt in: Relevant to what? I think it would still be important, for truth is important. -------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123933 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:57 am Subject: SPD#5 (sense door vipaaka cittas) philofillet Dear group, Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "The five pairs of sense-door cognitions, such as seeing or hearing, are contiguity condition ( anantara-paccaya) for the arising of the succeeding citta, the receiving conscioysness that receives the object. Receiving conscioysness is vipaaka citta, it is the result of the same kamma that produced the preceding sense consciousness. When the receiving-conscioysness has fallen away, the same kamma produces the investigating consciousness, which is also vipaaka-citta and which performs the function of investigating, after the function of receiving has been performed." (p.110) (end of passage) Phil #123934 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:01 am Subject: Re: SPD#5 (sense door vipaaka cittas) philofillet Hello again > "The five pairs of sense-door cognitions, Correction, "five pairs of sense-cognitions..." Phil #123935 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: >> S: At the present moment, there is only ever a single citta arising and falling away experiencing its object. <..> >> On account of ignorance and continuity of experience, of namas and rupas, it seems there are whole pictures, stories, people and things. In reality, there are just a succession of cittas arising and falling away: > >> AN, Ones (1, V, 8), The Buddha says: > >> "No other thing do I know, O monks, that so quickly changes as the mind:Inasmuch that it is not easy to give an illustration for the mind's quick > change." <...> > From the commentary to the Vibhanga, transl as `Dispeller of Delusion' (PTS), which I've quoted before: > *** > 242: "For the making known of the characteristic of no-self is not the province of anyone else; it is the province of the Fully Enlightened Ones > only. ... > D: the authority is with the Buddha Dhamma , the canon, to explain anatta.. one may ask why then a commentary? .... S: The commentary elaborates on what is found in the suttas and Abhidhamma. It is BuddhaDhamma, just as the ancient commentaries on what the Buddha taught, such as the elaborations by Maha Kaccayana were said to be "the word of the Buddha". (see more in 'useful posts' under "Commentaries", "Abhidhamma-origins" etc for more detail - I'd rather leave it there). .... >S: Thus the characteristic of no-self is unobvious...........but here it should be understood that he taught it by means of both impermanence > and pain. > .... > D: yes, that is important .. anicca and dukkha provide reasons for disenchantment as a prerequisite for detachment. ... S: What is inherently impermanent and unsatisfactory is clearly not in anyone's control as indicated in the Anattalakkhana Sutta. ... >S: "But it is owing to not keeping in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment by what that these characteristics do not appear? > Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the rise and fall owing to its being > concealed by continuity (santati). ... > D:concealed by the stream of rising and falling dhammas ... S: Yes - always another citta arising, so we don't appreciate that each one falls away as soon as it has arisen, like the flim clips you mentioned. ... >S: "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)." > > [S: rather than being aware of postures, it is the idea of postures that conceals the truths about the elements as dukkha.. When there is > awareness, there's no idea of posture at all] > > D: why concealed by postures (only), the position in which you hold your body when standing or sitting ... ? > I don't think the idea is meant .. perhaps relation to meditation? (recalling that in meditation retreats one is told if pain is arising , preferably not to change the posture in order to see the nature of pain..) .... S: There is no 'posture' in reality. Whether one is told not change ones posture or not has nothing to do with the understanding of dhammas as dukkha. We think in terms of 'self', 'body' and 'posture' and it is such ignorance the hides the truth of the arising and falling away of dhammas now. What arises and falls away is inherently dukkha. ... >S: "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." > > [S: When there is an idea of `wholes' such as posture, chariot or self, there is no understanding of dhatus (elements) and no way to understand > anatta.] >D:>.. One may possibly say in the case of a person/ individuum it is the emergence of interacting mental and corporal phenomena/dhammas in a stream of dependent orgination . > ( posture isn't a whole as the only element is the body ). ... S: person, interatctions, postures and so on are just ideas, not realities, not dhammas. ... <....> >>S: "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why?Because they rise and fall and change, or be cause of their absence after > having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after > having been. .... > D: there is no doubt that the khandas are impermanent , obvious at the moment of death , not to talk about the moments of nibbana experience . > I have difficulties to see the impermanence related to the moment as mentioned above .... S: Even now, the khandhas are impermanent. Citta now is different from citta a moment ago. The same applies to all the other dhammas. Feeling now is different from feeling a moment ago. One moment pleasant, the next moment unpleasant or neutral, on and on. ... >S: "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words `what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. > The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. > "But the same five aggregates are no-self because of the words `what is painful is no-self' (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power > over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self." > > [S: `no exercising power over them', neither the khandhas or any ideas about them, such as postures, are at one's command]. ... > D: well , posturers are at one's command , aren't they? ... S: It's just an illusion that in reality there are postures and that those postures are subject to the command of a Self. In truth, there are just elements, just dhammas, which arise by conditions and fall away by conditions without any Self being able to exercise any power over them. Without an understanding of present dhammas as anatta, there will always be the idea of people, things and postures subject to one's command and wishes. The ti-lakkhana of dhammas can only be known by understanding dhammas deeper and deeper as they really are - mere namas and rupas with distinct characteristics. Metta Sarah ===== #123936 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:46 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi sarahprocter... Dear Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > What is wrong with doing good works in conventional life? How does that harm the understanding of the Dhamma? Why should metta not be expressed as caring about people's well-being? ... S; As a lay people, we can be involved in any social work projects we like and there can be understanding of the Dhamma at any time at all. Metta can also be expressed as caring at these or any other times when we associate with people. Monks have given up the home life and the homeless life doesn't include working on community development projects or fighting for social justice which are worldly goals. The duties concern the teaching and understanding of Dhamma. ... > What is the historical or other evidence that the Buddha personally spoke/taught the Abhidhamma? Who is it that passed on the account of his delivering of the Abhidhamma in the arupa planes? What is the source for that? .... S: See lots of detail in U.P. under "Abhidhamma - origins". Actually, Abhidhamma is nothing more than seeing now, visible object now, all the dhammas arising and falling away now. Metta Sarah ===== #123937 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:55 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi sarahprocter... Hi Phil, Appreciating the extracts from SPD. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > Yes, thinking now, a lot of it. All sorts of stories about people I dislike. Funny that this only goes on with Dhamma, I tend to be very open-minded about people in general. At work I have a gift for befriending and supporting the students other teachers shun, but when it comes to Dhamma, so much attachment, I guess. Thus the bizarre intensity of my aversions. That can be understood. ... S: You've mentioned this a few times and you're obviously a wonderful teacher. I think it's like the syndrome of the student or worker who is popular, kind and helpful at school or in the office, but comes home and is crabby with family members, who of course will put up with any amound of crabbiness:-) "Unfair", as K.Sujin would say, but just the way the conditioned dhammas are. It seems like all the child or worker's goodwill has been exhausted at school or in the workplace! ... > >S: As for any shortcomings, and "neo-commentaries" , again it's a test of our understanding and equanimity when we read them - just like here! The problem is never in what anyone else says or does - it's the citta being born now! > > > >P: Right you are. I'm sure the new anthology with its relatively short suttas will bring a lot of people into the door, and then if there are conditions for panna, there will be a seeing through shortcomings. Or not. That goes for everything of course. Its why I've always questioned your statement "I'd rather have never heard the DHamma than hear the wrong Dhamma", or something like that, ... S: I think it was a line that K.Sujin often says - "better not to hear the Dhamma than to hear the wrong Dhamma". No reply called for! Metta Sarah ===== #123938 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:58 pm Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > S: It is the attachment and other kilesas (defilements) that are "left behind", eradicated at stages of enlightenment. It is not the 4 Noble Truths or the Dhamma which are left behind. > > > D: Sarah ,please read the concerned text again: > "And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?' In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas." .. S: All attachment is left behind, eradicated. For the arahat, there is no more attachment at all. Metta Sarah ===== #123939 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:14 pm Subject: Fw: [dsg] Re: Cetasika in daily life -project -viriya 1 sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > S:I'm not sure I follow you. When there is awareness of seeing or hearing, for example, at such moments the awareness arises with the javana cittas. At such moments of awareness, viriya is there, supporting those cittas with awareness in a wholesome way. It just occurs naturally, not by any intention to be aware or have energy arise. > > Pls ask me more if this is not clear. > > > D: not yet clear ..I had to look for 'javana'..(Nyanatiloka) .... S: In the sense-door and mind-door processes, there are javana cittas which "run through" the object. It is at these moments that kusala and akusala cittas (wholesome and unwholesome consciousness) arises. Viriya, sati and many other mental factors don't arise at moments of seeing or hearing, but do arise with all kusala and akusala cittas (in the case of viriya) and with all kusala cittas (in the case of sati). ... >D: so far I understand by "it is in the seven mind moments that are termed javana that wholesome and unwholesome volition takes place, and kamma is made" , javana means the 7 moments of mind /citta states of impulsion in which action (kamma ) takes place. > > A categorization of the citta , but not to be mistaken with volition or kamma force (sankhara) ..but not sure how far it fits with your statement. ... S: We were discussing viriya. So sticking to viriya, I mentioned that it arises with most cittas, including all akusala as well as kusala cittas. Let's leave it there for now. ... > S: Again, good qus. I think that what Mendis is referring to is (wholesome) viriya as an indriya (faculty). The controlling faculty of viriya (such as when satipatthana has been developed), controls or inhibits idleness/laziness, the defilement opposed to wholesome viriya. > >S: We have to know the context as to whether viriya in general or samma vayama/viriya is being referred to. > ... ... > D: we are talking within the context of the cetasika viriya which developed is samma vayama /viriya, isn't it? ... S: We need to be specific about whether we are talking about viriya in general or samma vayama/viriya. You introduced the cetasika viriya, but your references were almost all to samma viriya, so I was indicating this, as I recall. This was to show that viriya arises even now at almost every instant without any Self trying to do anything. Metta Sarah ==== #123940 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:27 pm Subject: Re: eating animal corpses sarahprocter... Dear Dieter & all, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > D: I agree there is no compassion towards meat ..but sometimes the pictures of industrial stock raising is difficult to suppress, in particular as poultry is concerned. > We have a big stock farmer here who calls his cattles and pigs 'happy meat ' , because, so he argues, though they are all facing the slaughter house , at least during life time he provides them the best environment to enjoy . > Unfortunately -as we know- that is more the exception than the rule..and I.MO. very worthwhile to support ,leaving aside the possibility of joining the vegetarians ( no fish ,no meat ), which I postponed to future . .... S: I understand what you're saying, but these are really all our ideas, our thinking. We may think that by not eating meat, it'll lead to less killing, but as we know, if there is the tendency to kill, the tendency to harm others not yet eradicated, there will be conditions to kill and harm. The cause of all wrong action is ignorance and attachment, not the way that others behave. ... > > extract: > The background Story of # 157 ,The Story of Bodhirajakumara) is an aspect of the topic to be considered ( copied from Han's postings on Triple Gem) > > "While residing at the Bhesakala wood, the Buddha uttered Verse (157), with reference to Prince Bodhi (Bodhirajakumara): > To him, the Buddha said that he and his wife were not going to have any children because of their past evil deeds. The Buddha then related their past story. > In one of their past existences, the prince and his wife were the sole survivors of a shipwreck. They were stranded on a deserted island, and there they lived by eating birds' eggs, fledglings and birds, without any feeling of remorse at any time. For that evil deed, they would not be blessed with any children. If they had felt even a slight remorse for their deed at any stage of their lives, they could have a child or two in this existence. Then turning to the prince, the Buddha said, "One who loves himself should guard himself in all stages of life, or at least, during one stage in his life." > > Obviously (the killing of the animals ) without remorse is the issue here.. not the eating (for reasons of survival ) ... S: Yes, it is the intentional killing that brought the results. We are all heirs to our own kamma, we're not the cause of others' unwholesome tendencies. Metta Sarah ==== #123941 From: "philip" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:27 pm Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi philofillet Hi Sarah > ... > S: You've mentioned this a few times and you're obviously a wonderful teacher. I think it's like the syndrome of the student or worker who is popular, kind and helpful at school or in the office, but comes home and is crabby with family members, who of course will put up with any amound of crabbiness:-) "Unfair", as K.Sujin would say, but just the way the conditioned dhammas are. It seems like all the child or worker's goodwill has been exhausted at school or in the workplace! > ph: Not crabby at home either (btw Naomi is in Thailand right now, on her first international business trip for Greenpeace, she overcame her fear of flying to get there, I'm so proud of her!) It's only here. I think it is related to not wanting to be online combined with wanting something closer to the BKK talks, so all kinds of attachments and aversions mixed up. I'm pretty sure the fellows I rail against don't care much, it's so utterly silly, they can see that. I do feel badly towards Nina, I wish I could participate in a friendly, active way that would do honour to the gratitude I feel for her wonderful books etc, but it can't be helped now. Conditions, a friendlier Phil may re-emerge someday, no way to know. In the meantime I'll keep posting the passages, I like typing them out, I feel I learn more from repeating valuable teachings than discussion/debate. That extends to my approach to teaching ESL, I value "shadowing", and of course chorusing, which some might call parroting! Thanks Sarah, and Nina. Phil Phil #123942 From: Lukas Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 8:31 pm Subject: vipaka szmicio Dear friends, There is a quotation from Cetasikas, on phassa, contact. It includes a sutta, that I have a question with. L: In a moment of seeing, there arises 3 elements, eye-base, visible object and seeing-consciouseness. This is a vipaka citta, associated with indifferent feeling. There is also a phassa. L: I consider this pleasing and displeasing objects as vipaka and ruupa that is conditioned by kamma, that is accordingly kusala and akusala vipaka. But why is mentioned indifferent effect? Indifferent vipaaka? But there is no such things as indifferent vipaka. I would like to hear more on this. Best wishes Lukas #123943 From: "norbert_jakaoemo" Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 10:22 pm Subject: How to develop understanding?? norbert_jaka... Dear all, After listening for a few days to some discussions 2 questions arise for now. 1 How to develop understanding? Sometimes it is said that right understanding cannot be developed because it depends on conditions and sometimes it is said that Panna must be developed. 2 What does nimita means? Please can you answer in a way a 15yr old would be able to understand it? With metta and repect, Norbert #123944 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How to develop understanding?? nilovg Dear Norbert, appreciating your questions. Op 26-apr-2012, om 14:22 heeft norbert_jakaoemo het volgende geschreven: > 1 How to develop understanding? Sometimes it is said that right > understanding cannot be developed because it depends on conditions > and sometimes it is said that Panna must be developed. ------ Nina:Certainly, it depends on conditions: listening, considering, intellectual understanding of what the objects of right understanding are, namely whatever dhamma appaers now through one of the six doors, one at a time. For example, hardness may appear and its characteristic can be directly understood without having to think about it. It is not a thing or a person, only a type of rupa experienced through the bodysense. When we htink of something like a table, this is not an object of right understanding. A table is a concept we think of, not a reality that can be object of mindfulness and right understanding. Know the difference between realities and concepts. Now, listening and considering are also conditioned, you were interested in the dhamma in the past, otherwise you would not listen. Pa~n~naa should be developed, do not be neglectful of the present moment. This exhortation given by the Buddha is certainly helpful, a condition for the listeners not to be lazy. We should be grateful that there are conditions to listen or read such exhortations; pa~n~na should be developed. -------- > > Norbert:2 What does nimita mean? ------ N: When you see something you may be infatuated with the whole impression, the image (nimitta) and the details. This happens all the time. We think of a whole like a table instead of being mindful of elements, one at a time, such as hardness, through touch, visible object or colour through the eyes, odour through the nose. Nimitta can also mean an object of jhaana like a kasina. A mental object, used for meditation. Then another meaning: colour is seen, but it falls away immediately, we cannot catch it. We do not realize yet its impermanence, and all that remains is the nimitta or sign of it. We believe that we experience colour that is still present, but it is only a sign of it that is experienced. It has fallen away immediately. A detailed subject and it takes long to explain all. See the file U.P. under nimitta. Nina. #123945 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Apr 26, 2012 11:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi nilovg Dear Phil, Op 26-apr-2012, om 11:27 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > I'm pretty sure the fellows I rail against don't care much, it's so > utterly silly, they can see that. I do feel badly towards Nina, I > wish I could participate in a friendly, active way that would do > honour to the gratitude I feel for her wonderful books etc, but it > can't be helped now. Conditions, a friendlier Phil may re-emerge > someday, no way to know. In the meantime I'll keep posting the > passages, I like typing them out, I feel I learn more from > repeating valuable teachings than discussion/debate. -------- N: Very useful, your typing out. Kind of meditation, you know. All about paramattha dhammas, so real. That is why I mentioned before: no use for name dropping or referring to particular persons, imitating their writing style. All that matters: understanding reality now. This by itself can condition more metta, no specific effort needed, not forcing your nature. It can all be very natural. Like your friendliness at school. You do not have to think about it. A person writes this or that, but the cittas that motivated such writings have fallen away immediately. Why trying to keep it in memory? Of course this goes for the writer of a post and for the reader of a post. Think of Ken H, constantly reminding us that there are only dhammas rolling on, no person who stays. No Phil, but nice talking to you ;-)) ------- Quote: The five pairs of sense-cognitions, such as seeing or hearing, are contiguity condition ( anantara-paccaya) for the arising of the succeeding citta, the receiving consciousness that receives the object. Receiving conscioysness is vipaaka citta, it is the result of the same kamma that produced the preceding sense consciousness. When the receiving-conscioysness has fallen away, the same kamma produces the investigating consciousness, which is also vipaaka-citta and which performs the function of investigating, after the function of receiving has been performed." (p.110) ------- N: On a Thai recording Kh Sujin gives more details. Remember all this is not theory, they are realities of daily life. The purpose of studying Abhidhamma is not more knowledge, but it should help us to have more understanding of conditions, of anatta. Receiving consciousness just receives visible object and the other sense objects, it does not see, hear, etc. Then it is followed by santiira.nacitta, investigating consciousness, and this vipakacitta is already stronger. It investigates more the object. Different from the preceding citta that merely receives the object. ----- Nina. #123946 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 3:12 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard, All, you wrote: It is ironic, Phil, that the post of Ken's (in his discussion with Dieter) to which you are replying, impressed me quite favorably. I thought that what Ken had to say, and how he said it, was excellent! D: mana let me ask: what about my part ? ;-) H: Now I'll get to you, Phil - you, who are annoying me greatly with this post. I would appreciate it if you would restrict yourself to discussing the Dhamma without getting persona;l and without your snide "Kalama Crew" references. If, as you say, you want to "avoid discussion with (what you sneeringly call) the Kalama Crew," you might try harder! No one here, so far as I can see, is "insist(ing) on imposing their way on our way"! And, BTW, who is the "our" in that "our way"? Do you consider that folks here who are in "your group" are owners and others are outsiders who are imposing? The list owners do not!" D: no , they are not ! And I like to support your point. Sarah and Jon never gave any doubt that they stand up for the DSG philosophy, which obviously is still not yet understood by everybody: The commonness of this group is the Buddha Dhamma , the Tipitaka . I.M.O. the (friendly) sharing of understanding and discussion of different approaches has basically positive aspects: if not learning from eachother, then at least one needs to refresh , review one's own point of view , which is always good for contemplation, isn't it? with Metta Dieter #123947 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 3:43 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/26/2012 1:12:18 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard, All, you wrote: It is ironic, Phil, that the post of Ken's (in his discussion with Dieter) to which you are replying, impressed me quite favorably. I thought that what Ken had to say, and how he said it, was excellent! D: mana let me ask: what about my part ? ;-) ----------------------------------------------- HCW: LOL! (I don't want to tempt conceit on your part! ;-) ----------------------------------------------- H: Now I'll get to you, Phil - you, who are annoying me greatly with this post. I would appreciate it if you would restrict yourself to discussing the Dhamma without getting persona;l and without your snide "Kalama Crew" references. If, as you say, you want to "avoid discussion with (what you sneeringly call) the Kalama Crew," you might try harder! No one here, so far as I can see, is "insist(ing) on imposing their way on our way"! And, BTW, who is the "our" in that "our way"? Do you consider that folks here who are in "your group" are owners and others are outsiders who are imposing? The list owners do not!" D: no , they are not ! And I like to support your point. Sarah and Jon never gave any doubt that they stand up for the DSG philosophy, which obviously is still not yet understood by everybody: The commonness of this group is the Buddha Dhamma , the Tipitaka . I.M.O. the (friendly) sharing of understanding and discussion of different approaches has basically positive aspects: if not learning from eachother, then at least one needs to refresh , review one's own point of view , which is always good for contemplation, isn't it? -------------------------------------------------- HCW: I certainly think so! I've gained tremendously from Nina's and Sarah's and Jon's and Ken's (!!) and, indirectly, Khun Sujin's insights, and I've also gained in testing my own perspectives against the ideas and challenges of these. It's not about clinging to views, but about exchanging views and learning. ------------------------------------------------ with Metta Dieter ============================= With metta, Howard Admirable Friendship "If wanderers who are members of other sects should ask you, 'What, friend, are the prerequisites for the development of the _wings to self-awakening_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/glossary.html#bodhi-pakkhiya-dhamma) ?' you should answer, 'There is the case where a monk has admirable people as friends, companions, & colleagues. This is the first prerequisite for the development of the wings to self-awakening.'" — _AN 9.1_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an09/an09.001.than.html) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "And what is meant by admirable friendship? There is the case where a lay person, in whatever town or village he may dwell, spends time with householders or householders' sons, young or old, who are advanced in _virtue_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/index.html) . He talks with them, engages them in discussions. He emulates consummate conviction [in the principle of _kamma_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-ditthi/kamma.html) ] in those who are consummate in conviction, consummate _virtue_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/sila/index.html) in those who are consummate in virtue, consummate _generosity_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/dhamma/dana/index.html) in those who are consummate in generosity, and consummate discernment in those who are consummate in discernment. This is called admirable friendship." — _AN 8.54_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an08/an08.054.than.html) #123948 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 5:14 am Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > RE: BTW, as an aside regarding the contemplation of the Dhamma any place, any time - I am currently on the train from New York back to Washington, D.C. after a memorial. ... > > =============== > > J: Thanks for sharing this. Will comment further when responding to the last part of your post (i.e not in this message). > > > =============== > > RE: RE: Anyway, your point appears to be that the existence of "whole conventional objects" that might or might not exist independent of what we experience is irrelevant to the path, as the path concerns only a direct understanding of that which can be directly experienced, and the nature of that by which it is experienced at a given single moment. So what is happening in the 6 doorways at any given moment is all that can be the object of the path. I hope that is an accurate paraphrase of part of your point. > =============== > > J: Regarding <>. > > If you mean that question, that issue (i.e., the so-called existence or otherwise of whole conventional objects), then I know of nothing in the teachings that addresses that question (do you?). Well there are certainly suttas like the ones that Howard often quotes that talk about the fact that we do not understand or perceive reality or the All as it really is, and there is the analysis of the chariot that says that every whole can be reduced to further smaller parts, suggestive of a relationship between dhammas and the whole conventional view that we have of the object, ie, that we see a whole, a concept, when in fact there are unlimited changing configurations of dhammas that create the illusion of the whole unchanging chariot through conceptual interpretation of what we actually perceive. In addition, there are suttas where the Buddha appears to be saying that the conceptual objects, bodies and people that we experience should really be viewed in terms of the khandas, which breaks such objects down into experiential components rather than "objective" components. Again, that suggests to me that there is a relationship between conceptual objects [deluded view] and understanding of the components of "experience" such as contact, vedana, consciousness, etc. that form up the experience of the object [correct view, if understood correctly.] So I would say: a. That the Buddha moves in the direction that you say in this sense, that he refocuses us on the components of sense and mind-door experience rather than on an external conceptual view of the existence of object, and b. He suggests that the reality of the object, whatever it may be, is not understood correctly if seen as a static whole, and is understood more correctly if seen as a conglomerate of smaller, more dynamic components which are directly experienced only in aspects or parts, rather than in wholes. I guess that he does not really ever say "objects as such do not exist" but I am not sure about that. > Regarding <>. > > I would put it like this: > - the path concerns the understanding of things as they are in truth and reality > - that understanding is an understanding gained by, and built upon, the direct experience (with panna) of those things that have an inherent, unchangeable characteristic (the Buddha called them 'dhammas', or khandhas, ayatanas, dhatus, namas and rupas, etc.) > - only a dhamma that is currently arising can be directly experienced. > > I do not find it useful to think in terms of single moment experience in the context of the development of the path (that is far too advanced for the likes of you and me :-)) What is the difference between "the direct experience...of dhammas...that are currently arising" as you said, and "a single moment experience" which you said is too advanced for "us?" Aren't they the same thing? > Regarding << the path concerns only a direct understanding of that which can be directly experienced>>. > ... > J: Regarding << At a moment when we experience the concept of a house, it is irrelevant whether there really is a house that this concept is referencing>>. > > What I said in my earlier message was that the existence or otherwise of something that we know of and refer to as a house cannot be confirmed by direct experience, given that the world is experienced one doorway at a time. Right, but my emphasis was on the point that it doesn't matter whether there is a house or not, in addition to the fact that we can't confirm it by direct experience. Whether it matters or not would have to do with whether understanding the nature of reality "as it is" is part of the path, or whether it is only concerned with understanding the nature of human experience, ie, that which can be experienced directly, etc., and is not based on speculation or inference. It means basically that the path has nothing at all to do with the world. Would you agree? > Regarding <>. > > While the single-moment nature of dhammas is part of the description we have of the way things are, direct confirmation of that aspect of things is not for the likes of you and me. Well that confuses me. If you talk about direct experience and I talk about the experience of the moment, I believe we're talking about the exact same thing. What is the difference? > ...it's not a matter of paying attention to one thing in preference to another, but of there being a better and better understanding, developing gradually and naturally from an interest in the teachings (rather than from a 'practice'), about what can be the object of panna and why. What is the basis for the "interest in the teachings?" I'm sure in most cases it is because of an interest in liberation from suffering or delusion, which is more than just an interest, but has some powerful goal-orientation involved. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #123949 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:17 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Howard, and Dieter. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > (The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself', otherwise we > wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) Dieter, it sounds like you see anatta as a point to be achieved, where one realizes that there is no self. The way that I use anatta is to say that it is the fact of no-self, not the realization. When one realizes anatta, one realizes the reality of no-self, but anatta exists either way. Buddha stated that all dhammas were anatta, anicca and dukkha. This is to be realized, but it is also to be known as a fact. I guess it is just a different way of talking about this reality. There is still no self, even when one is deluded into thinking there is a self. > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Dieter, do you mean by "self deluded" being deluded by a sense of self? If > that is what you mean, I'm sure that Robert would agree. > > D: I mean the I /Self delusion (the identification like I am, > ..want,..don't want,etc. ) - self deluded obviously not a proper choice of words > ------------------------------------------------ > HCW: > Ah, yes, that's what I thought you must mean. > ------------------------------------------------- I see how we had some confusion on this point too, but understand what Dieter meant now. > > HCW: It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta. > ----------------------------------------------- > > D: nay ...Samsara means our wandering (kamma) in these lasting rounds of > births and deaths, conditioned by ignorance/delusion, doesn't it? > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Well, yes, but that means it is a compound of many conditioned > phenomena, largely involving ignorance and the resultant craving and aversion, and > all anatta. > ------------------------------------------------- > > (In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of > ever changing phenomena of dependent origination driven by ignorance) > The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be > found nevertherless is present.. When you say the deluded self is present, what does that mean? There is no deluded self created when delusion is present, but there is a deluded mind or deluded consciousness. It may be the language again that is confusing, but it seems to me that you think a deluded self is created by delusion - I'm not saying that is true, just questioning. To me, delusion is just a state of consciousness but it does not create a complex, or whole, which could be called a "deluded self." > Samsara isn't anatta.. anatta means the wandering /kamma ceased ..and then > we can of course not talk anymore of samsara > ------------------------------------------------- I don't see anatta as a point at which samsara has ceased - that would be nibbana, or enlightenment. Anatta is one of the properties of samsara that is realized in insight or awakening. > HCW: > Samsara as a single thing is mere convention. It is actually a complex > of a multitude of rising and falling phenomena, all anicca, anatta, and > conditioned - most importantly by ignorance. > ------------------------------------------------- > > RE:What I meant by the unsatisfying [non-self] nature of samsara is that > samsara is shown to be anatta because it is unsatifying and not amenable to > control. The nature of every dhamma -- which comprises the All -- is > anatta, whether that is realized or not. To say that it is self-deluded is to > imply > that there is a self that is deluded. > ----------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Robert, I'm guessing that by samsara being "self-deluded," Dieter means > "being deluded by a sense of self and even a belief in self". > ------------------------------------------------- Yes, but there seems to be an association of anatta with nibbana or enlightenment, as though anatta was the experience of having awakened. > D: I hope with above we come closer to an understanding > The exception is 'not even a belief in self ' , a belief in self the rule > ( the delusion sticks to the bone, only deep penetration can liberate from > attachment) > Instead of denial of a self(doer --see sutta) , there is D.O. > > RE.You may find that silly, but I think it's worth clarifying. The > realization of anatta causes detachment from samsara, but there is no self-nature > in > samsara even for one who is deluded. Self is the delusion of samsara, but > not the true nature of samsara. > ------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Yes. > ---------------------------------------------- > > D: no ;-) > it is the true nature of our wandering and that is samsara > --------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Dieter, I'm getting lost in a forest of words. ;-) > --------------------------------------------------- Yes, I don't understand that either. What is the difference between samsara and wandering? Isn't wandering a metaphor for samsara? > D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds > similar to 'an undeluded > wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is > abolished > by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . Yes, by realization of anatta, but not by anatta itself, which is a property of samsara, not liberation from samsara. Anatta is the fact, not the realization of that fact. > --------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to > mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. Such mentality is conditioned, > changeable, and anatta. > ----------------------------------------------- > > D: I consider that the main problem lies in a different understanding of > what is samsara > (see definition) > > D: I think a lot of misunderstandings in discussions occur due to the > exclusion of our conventional reality . The delusion is real until its nature > is fully penetrated . > ------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Yes, delusion is present (or, better, able to arise/occur) until it is not > [Even delusion is conditioned], but what one is deluded *about*, the > content of delusion, is only imagined and not truly existent. > ------------------------------------------------ ... > closing with the question back to Robert: do you agree that without the > factor 'suffering' the issue of anatta would be irrelevant? > -------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > If I may butt in: Relevant to what? I think it would still be > important, for truth is important. > -------------------------------------------------- Without suffering, there would be no issue of delusion or attachment. Anatta would still be a fact, but would already be understood. And I agree with what you said, Howard, as well. Knowledge of the components of reality is significant whether there is suffering or not. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #123950 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:20 am Subject: Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > What is wrong with doing good works in conventional life? How does that harm the understanding of the Dhamma? Why should metta not be expressed as caring about people's well-being? > ... > S; As a lay people, we can be involved in any social work projects we like and there can be understanding of the Dhamma at any time at all. Metta can also be expressed as caring at these or any other times when we associate with people. > > Monks have given up the home life and the homeless life doesn't include working on community development projects or fighting for social justice which are worldly goals. The duties concern the teaching and understanding of Dhamma. A related question - since the vinaya is so concerned with conventional rules and activities, how does that work with the understanding that such conventional actions have no relation to the path? > > What is the historical or other evidence that the Buddha personally spoke/taught the Abhidhamma? Who is it that passed on the account of his delivering of the Abhidhamma in the arupa planes? What is the source for that? > .... > S: See lots of detail in U.P. under "Abhidhamma - origins". Thank you, I will look at those posts. > Actually, Abhidhamma is nothing more than seeing now, visible object now, all the dhammas arising and falling away now. No problem with that - always back to the source... Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #123951 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:49 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Dieter) - In a message dated 4/26/2012 4:17:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: > > (In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of > ever changing phenomena of dependent origination driven by ignorance) > The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be > found nevertherless is present.. When you say the deluded self is present, what does that mean? There is no deluded self created when delusion is present, but there is a deluded mind or deluded consciousness. It may be the language again that is confusing, but it seems to me that you think a deluded self is created by delusion - I'm not saying that is true, just questioning. To me, delusion is just a state of consciousness but it does not create a complex, or whole, which could be called a "deluded self." ========================== It seems to me that Dieter typed a bit too quickly: Where he wrote "the delusion self" in "The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be found nevertherless is present..," I'm sure he meant to write "the delusion of self". The delusion of self exists, though no self does. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123952 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:16 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Robert (and Dieter) - > > In a message dated 4/26/2012 4:17:42 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > epsteinrob@... writes: > > > > > (In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of > > ever changing phenomena of dependent origination driven by ignorance) > > The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be > > found nevertherless is present.. > > When you say the deluded self is present, what does that mean? There is no > deluded self created when delusion is present, but there is a deluded mind > or deluded consciousness. It may be the language again that is confusing, > but it seems to me that you think a deluded self is created by delusion - > I'm not saying that is true, just questioning. To me, delusion is just a > state of consciousness but it does not create a complex, or whole, which could > be called a "deluded self." > ========================== > It seems to me that Dieter typed a bit too quickly: Where he wrote > "the delusion self" in "The whole process signifies the delusion self of which > no core can be found nevertherless is present..," I'm sure he meant to > write "the delusion of self". The delusion of self exists, though no self > does. That's very probable. I'll be interested to hear what Dieter says about it. It's a tricky business to discuss what aspects of samsara are real, or just imagined, in any case! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #123953 From: Alex Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:33 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How to develop understanding?? norbert_jaka... Hi Nina, Thanks for answering and showing me the use of the UP. There is enough material to read there so i'll will be busy for some time. Metta, Norbert 2012/4/26 Nina van Gorkom > ** > > > Dear Norbert, > appreciating your questions. > Op 26-apr-2012, om 14:22 heeft norbert_jakaoemo het volgende geschreven: > > > > 1 How to develop understanding? Sometimes it is said that right > > understanding cannot be developed because it depends on conditions > > and sometimes it is said that Panna must be developed. > ------ > Nina:Certainly, it depends on conditions: listening, considering, > intellectual understanding of what the objects of right understanding > are, namely whatever dhamma appaers now through one of the six doors, > one at a time. For example, hardness may appear and its > characteristic can be directly understood without having to think > about it. It is not a thing or a person, only a type of rupa > experienced through the bodysense. When we htink of something like a > table, this is not an object of right understanding. A table is a > concept we think of, not a reality that can be object of mindfulness > and right understanding. Know the difference between realities and > concepts. > Now, listening and considering are also conditioned, you were > interested in the dhamma in the past, otherwise you would not listen. > Pa~n~naa should be developed, do not be neglectful of the present > moment. This exhortation given by the Buddha is certainly helpful, a > condition for the listeners not to be lazy. We should be grateful > that there are conditions to listen or read such exhortations; > pa~n~na should be developed. > -------- > > > > Norbert:2 What does nimita mean? > ------ > N: When you see something you may be infatuated with the whole > impression, the image (nimitta) and the details. This happens all the > time. We think of a whole like a table instead of being mindful of > elements, one at a time, such as hardness, through touch, visible > object or colour through the eyes, odour through the nose. > Nimitta can also mean an object of jhaana like a kasina. A mental > object, used for meditation. > Then another meaning: colour is seen, but it falls away immediately, > we cannot catch it. We do not realize yet its impermanence, and all > that remains is the nimitta or sign of it. We believe that we > experience colour that is still present, but it is only a sign of it > that is experienced. It has fallen away immediately. A detailed > subject and it takes long to explain all. See the file U.P. under > nimitta. > Nina. > > > > > -- Met liefdevolle vriendelijkheid en respect. With lovingkindness and respect. Norbert Jakaoemo #123954 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:34 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >That's very probable. I'll be interested to hear what Dieter says >about it. It's a tricky business to discuss what aspects of samsara >are real, or just imagined, in any case! >================================================== Dukkha is experienced. Real or not real, touching hot stove hurts! Anger or lust does lead to more problems regardless of metaphysical views we have on them. 4NT do matter. With metta, Alex #123955 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:11 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobE, > > On re-reading, my reply below might be a bit harsh. I guess I was trying to keep the discussion focused. Duly noted. I will "practice" not being reactive - we'll see how that works out. :-) > > RE: On the other hand, Buddha praised jhana in particular as the very way in which the stages of practice were constructed, in my view. As I said, there are exceptions, but he talked about developing insight leading to enlightenment within the stages of the jhanas an awful lot, so I don't think it has the same status as general non-path kusala. > > pt: I think this (and other similar stuff) is a matter of interpretation, and we all have one. E.g. mine is that triple knowledge is actually the original path (e.g. the Buddha's case and many of his disciples) and it is way far above and beyond all the jhana stuff. But jhana enthusiasts don't talk about it much because jhanas don't really get you there, or it's just too weird to talk about the triple knowledge stuff nowadays. I don't know much about the conditions leading to direct knowledge of karma, rebirth and the 4 noble truths in any cogent way, but it seems to me that the triple knowledge is the result of the process, whatever it is, rather than the process itself. So it does not speak directly to whether jhana, insight or a combination of both, is the correct way to view the path. The final result is enlightenment, which is supreme knowledge and peace, represented by insight and cessation. Cessation is most ably represented within the path by jhana, which I think is the reason that Buddha paid close attention to all the stages of the jhanas. > So, since you know what your interpretation is, and I know what's mine, perhaps let's just limit ourselves to learning what the abhidhamma and the commentaries (abhi/comm) say, as a starting point. I mean, I think our particular interpretations will probably change over time so I feel they have little use to anyone here. Fine with me, I guess. I don't remember if we had already decided to deal with such issues later or not, but I have no problem with that. > Afaik, and keeping this short, abhi/comm say that jhana citta doesn't strictly constitute the path, and that insight cannot occur during a jhana citta (I hope that's clear from our discussion of objects of citta). Not that insight cannot happen in the very next (process of) citta(s), which is perhaps what your sutta is alluding to, or not, depending on the interpretation. But anyway, that's what abhi/comm say afaik. We each can then make of this what we want, but I don't see much point in expressing those opinions unless someone specifically asks - "what is your opinion on abhi/comm view of the jhanas and insight"? I don't see anyone asking that here, so perhaps let's not go there. Okay. I accept your note above as a good placeholder. We can discuss it later if desired. > > RE: True, but that would go for the illusion that one is developing insight as well, not just mistaking fake calm for samatha, or mistaking jhana for enlightenment, etc. There are traps on the road of dry insight too! > > pt: That's for sure. > > > > RE: But I don't think it's a good idea to have a partial context or to put jhana in a non-path category as many people here do. > > pt: It's a question whether they're expressing their opinions or whether that's what abhi/comm say. Again, I think it'd be useful to dispense with our opinions for now and simply focus on learning what abhi/comm say. When we talk about the different kinds of kusala and the types of insight that arise with samatha and satipatthana, I think it may be important to look at jhana in that context - what do you think about that? > > RE: Sure, it makes sense to say that "for one who can cultivate jhana and not confuse it with insight, jhana with insight is the supreme path, but since I don't have the accumulations for it, I'm not focusing on jhana in this lifetime." If anyone said that, including me, I would be extremely happy, because it would take place within the full acknowledgment of the teachings as they actually appear, while still being realistic about one's current "practice." > > pt: I'm not quite sure what you're saying above. I'm saying that one should acknowledge the detailed attention that the Buddha paid to the stages and attributes of the jhanas, and not dismiss all that as unimportant. To me that seems like ignoring something that is a prominent part of the sutta body, and I don't see the justification for that. If the commentaries say that it is not the direct path to insight, okay, fine, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Buddha seemed to think it was a very worthy setting for the development of insight, and everyone acknowledges that at the very least jhana creates supporting conditions for enlightenment and in fact leads to a deeper enlightenment than dry insight. So there are implications there. I realize I am going on about it, but that is what I was pointing to. If we don't discuss it now, that's okay, but in context of kusala and development of insight, perhaps it will be clearer. > > RE: Fine with me, pt. I have just found a lot of disparagement and dismissal of jhana as a false path, not part of the path, and not really a mainstay of the Buddha's plan. > > pt: Well, it's not his mainstay, the triple knowledge is :) I guess what I'm trying to say is that expressing our opinions won't get us very far in the discussion which has learning of a different perspective (of abhi/comm) as aim. I don't see paying attention to a large portion of what the Buddha talked about and giving it some weight to be mere opinion. Buddha taught the development of insight in tandem with jhana, and entered the jhanas and then exited this life through the jhanas in his parinibbana. I think that has some significance, but I'm happy to shelve it if it is not in the purview of our basic discussion. > > RE: I just think those kinds of characterizations of jhana - and meditation - are untrue and cause the rest of the Dhamma to land in a partial, rather than a full and correct, context. > > pt: Again, for the purposes of our discussion, the main thing is to be clear on what abhi/comm say. What we then think about it all is our private business so to speak, not much use in voicing it at this stage I feel. I mean, there's a lot of stuff I don't quite get in abhi/comm and I have my own opinions about these things, but they generally hinder in learning what is it that abhi/comm actually say. I will follow your lead on that. We could discuss each aspect and try to draw it out, but that is fine. > > RE: I am anxious to look into the difference between panna of samatha kind vs. panna of vipassana kind. That is an important issue, I agree. > > pt: I hope to reply to that bit soon. Okay, thanks, pt - I don't think this post was harsh at all. I think you just had a firm view of how to proceed and explained it quite well. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #123956 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:34 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > >That's very probable. I'll be interested to hear what Dieter says >about it. It's a tricky business to discuss what aspects of samsara >are real, or just imagined, in any case! > >================================================== > > > Dukkha is experienced. Real or not real, touching hot stove hurts! Anger or lust does lead to more problems regardless of metaphysical views we have on them. 4NT do matter. No doubt. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #123957 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 12:36 pm Subject: Re: How to develop understanding?? kenhowardau Hi Norbet, ---- > N: After listening for a few days to some discussions 2 questions arise for now. > 1 How to develop understanding? Sometimes it is said that right understanding cannot be developed because it depends on conditions and sometimes it is said that Panna must be developed. ---- KH: I had exactly the same problem when I first started at DSG. Just when I thought I understood what people here were saying, those same people seemed to be saying the opposite! There is no simple way around this problem. You need to develop a firm theoretical grasp of how anatta means no-control. Until then you will inevitably get confused by Dhamma explanations, even when they are given by experts. Just understand how the confusion happens (by conditions) and enjoy it. :-) Ken H PS: I'll leave your question about nimita to the more experienced DSG members: I've only been here about twelve years. #123958 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 1:54 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat ptaus1 Hi RobE, > RE: When we talk about the different kinds of kusala and the types of insight that arise with samatha and satipatthana, I think it may be important to look at jhana in that context - what do you think about that? pt: Yes, we can do that. > RE: I'm saying that one should acknowledge the detailed attention that the Buddha paid to the stages and attributes of the jhanas, and not dismiss all that as unimportant. To me that seems like ignoring something that is a prominent part of the sutta body, and I don't see the justification for that. If the commentaries say that it is not the direct path to insight, okay, fine, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Buddha seemed to think it was a very worthy setting for the development of insight, and everyone acknowledges that at the very least jhana creates supporting conditions for enlightenment and in fact leads to a deeper enlightenment than dry insight. So there are implications there. I realize I am going on about it, but that is what I was pointing to. If we don't discuss it now, that's okay, but in context of kusala and development of insight, perhaps it will be clearer. pt: Yes, needs to be discussed later, in particular whether the texts indeed imply that: - jhana was a very worthy setting for the development of insight, - jhana creates supporting conditions for enlightenment (and what's the meaning of "supporting" conditions), - jhana in fact leads to a deeper enlightenment than dry insight. My starting position on all of the above would be more or less a "no", though the issues are certainly worthy of more closer examination later. Best wishes pt #123959 From: "ptaus1" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 2:10 pm Subject: Dhs ptaus1 Hi all, I started going through dhammasangani slowly, I hope it's alright to post a few questions about it now and then. 1. In the matrix, the third triplet is: (ka) vipākā dhammā.
(kha) vipākadhammadhammā.
(ga) nevavipākanavipākadhammadhammā. The translation (Rhys Davids): States that are results; that have resultant quality; that are neither. I read the commentary on that triplet, but to get a better understanding: - an example of the first verse (results) would be basically all vipaka cittas, right? Basically eye-consciousness, ear-consciousness, etc? And would it also include the cetasikas that arise with them? - an example of the second verse (resultant quality) would be all kusala and akusala cittas and cetasikas, right? Or would it only refer to a/kusala cetana with javana cittas? 2. Every triplet in the matrix in pali is preceded by ka (first verse), kha (second verse), ga (third verse). What do these ka, kha and ga stand for? Best wishes pt #123960 From: "philip" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:34 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi philofillet Dear Nina, > N: Very useful, your typing out. Kind of meditation, you know. All > about paramattha dhammas, so real. Yes, sometimes when we are writing, or just after, everything is so clear for a moment, just a moment of understanding without attachment, and then the attachment comes back in. > No Phil, but nice talking to you ;-)) Ph: No Phil? I take that personally!!! haha.I still don't feel it is a "cold shower" though, because we like to think we understand "no Phil", it feels good to understand something so deep....the cold shower would be if there was truly a moment of insight of "no Phil", a deep penetration of the truth, that has not happened "for" me. > N: On a Thai recording Kh Sujin gives more details. Remember all this > is not theory, they are realities of daily life. The purpose of > studying Abhidhamma is not more knowledge, but it should help us to > have more understanding of conditions, of anatta. Receiving > consciousness just receives visible object and the other sense > objects, it does not see, hear, etc. Then it is followed by > santiira.nacitta, investigating consciousness, and this vipakacitta > is already stronger. It investigates more the object. Different from > the preceding citta that merely receives the object. > Ph: We can't experience these dhammas directly, so some might wonder at the use of studying them. But it a) indicates the great depth of the Buddha's understanding and b) drives home the anattaness of all sense door and mind door processes. I don't remember if it was this year or last year at KK, but A. Sujin talked about how amazing all this was, a miracle. I (typically) protested the use of the word "miracle" because it could condition even more lobha and hints at some kind of divine plan, but it is amazing, miraculous, how the amazingly complex sense door processes work so perfectly, or fail to do so. Recently I enjoyed reading in SPD about vitthi processes that fail, the object is not enough, or something like that. I think I will post that today. If you can occasionally add comments to the SPD passages I post it would be appreciated but I don't mind if no one comments on them, they are pretty clear, speak for themselves.... Phil #123961 From: "philip" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 6:36 pm Subject: Re: Dhs philofillet Hi pt > I started going through dhammasangani slowly, I hope it's alright to post a few questions about it now and then. Thanks for this, perhaps you will help me get those books off the shelf, but probably not this year. But I will follow your questions and the answers with interest. Phil #123962 From: "philip" Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 7:11 pm Subject: spd 6 (atiparitta and the futile course) philofillet Dear group, Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "In the case of the futile course, when a ruupa impinges on a sense-base, the bhavanga-citta that arises at that moment, i.e, the atita bhavanga, is not succeeded immediately by the bhavanga calana (the vibrating bhavanga). There are several moments of atita bhavanga arising and falling away before the bhavanga calana, which is stirred by the object arises and this citta is then succeeded by several more moments of bhavanga calana, arising and falling away. Since the object, which is ruupa impinging (on) the sense base, is about to fall away (lasting not longer than seventeen moments of citta), there are no conditions for viithi cittas to arise and to experience the object that impinged on one of the sense bases. In that case, it is a futile course. The futile course of a process can be compared to the situation when someone who is fast asleep and is stirred in order to be woken up, does no wake up, and who, when stirred again with force, still does not wake up. In the case of the futile course, the adverting-consciousness does not arise; there are only the atita bhavanga and the bhavanga calana. the object that impinges when there is a futile course is called 'very slight' (atiparitta). Because it impinges on the sense-base and only affects bhavanga-cittas, it does not condition the arising of vithi-cittas; it falls away before there is an opportunity for their arising." (end of passage) Phil #123963 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 7:43 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: The Complete English Translation of the A. N. by Bhikkhu Bodhi nilovg Dear Phil, Op 27-apr-2012, om 10:34 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > Recently I enjoyed reading in SPD about vitthi processes that > fail, the object is not enough, or something like that. I think I > will post that today. ------ N: Quote: The futile course of a process can be compared to the situation when someone who is fast asleep and is stirred in order to be woken up, does no wake up, and who, when stirred again with force, still does not wake up. In the case of the futile course, the adverting-consciousness does not arise; there are only the atita bhavanga and the bhavanga calana. the object that impinges when there is a futile course is called 'very slight' (atiparitta). Because it impinges on the sense-base and only affects bhavanga-cittas, it does not condition the arising of vithi-cittas; it falls away before there is an opportunity for their arising." -------- Just this morning I listened and Kh Sujin quoted from the Expositor II, p. 360, the simile of the mango that fell down while someone was fast asleep. In this case he does not wake up, nor opens his eyes and looks. No viithi process as explained. The ruupa does not last longer than 17 moments of citta, and since it impinged before while there were several bhavangacittas the time was up. She stressed again: daily life, sometimes the object is not so clear. The Expositor reminds us of citta niyama; a fixed order of cittas in a process which nobody can change. There is no doer or instigator saying: "Be thou life-continuum, be thou adverting..." It all shows anattaness. ----- Nina. #123964 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 7:44 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Dhs nilovg Dear pt, I like your project. Op 27-apr-2012, om 6:10 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > > 1. In the matrix, the third triplet is: > > (ka) vipākā dhammā.
> (kha) vipākadhammadhammā.
> (ga) nevavipākanavipākadhammadhammā. > > The translation (Rhys Davids): > States that are results; that have resultant quality; that are > neither. > ------- N: U Kyaw Khine translates: dhammaa which cause resultants. I have some trouble with the Pali construction in no 2, but I can ask the Pali list. Obviously, vipaakadhamma in this compound is and attribute to dhammaa. ------ > > pt: I read the commentary on that triplet, but to get a better > understanding: > - an example of the first verse (results) would be basically all > vipaka cittas, right? Basically eye-consciousness, ear- > consciousness, etc? And would it also include the cetasikas that > arise with them? > -------- N: Yes, also rebirth-consciousness etc. Always the accompanying cetasikas are included when we speak about citta. ------ > > pt: - an example of the second verse (resultant quality) would be > all kusala and akusala cittas and cetasikas, right? Or would it > only refer to a/kusala cetana with javana cittas? > ------- N: Generally all kusala cittas and cetasikas with the accompanying cetrasikas are meant. When we are more precise: kamma is cetanaa. Not all akusala cittas have the intensity of akusala kamma producing results. Mostly kusala cittas are of the intensity to produce result. Kh Sujin explained; except: someone intends to give, but does not come to it to give. This is very weak. -------- > > pt:2. Every triplet in the matrix in pali is preceded by ka (first > verse), kha (second verse), ga (third verse). > > What do these ka, kha and ga stand for? > ------- N: In my hardcover copy, there are not these letters. ------ Nina. #123965 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 8:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] vipaka nilovg Dear Lukas, Op 26-apr-2012, om 12:31 heeft Lukas het volgende geschreven: > There is a quotation from Cetasikas, on phassa, contact. It > includes a sutta, that I have a question with. > ------- > N: S IV, 112 (Ghosita sutta). ------ > L: process of cittas. It is understood that the pleasant feeling and > unpleasant feeling > referred to do not arise at the moment of seeing-consciousness, but > later on in the > process.> > --------- N: right, Ven. Bodhi refers to the co: Contact as associated with eye- consciousness that functions as a condition by way of decisive support (upanissaya) for a pleasant feeling in the javana. Evenso for unpleasant feeling and also for upekkhaa, indifferent feeling. In the co. no further details on upekkhaa. Here realities as elements are stressed. We find feelings so important, but they are only elements devoid of self. > ------- > L: In a moment of seeing, there arises 3 elements, eye-base, > visible object and seeing-consciouseness. > This is a vipaka citta, associated with indifferent feeling. There > is also a phassa. > > eyeconsciousness > occur together, housefather, owing to the pleasurable contact > there arises pleasant feeling. > > When the elements of eye, objects that > are displeasing and eye-consciousness occur together, owing to the > unpleasant > contact resulting there arises painful feeling. > > When the elements > of eye, objects that are of indifferent effect and eye- > consciousness occur > together, owing to neutral contact resulting, there arises feeling > that is > neutral.> > > L: I consider this pleasing and displeasing objects as vipaka > ------- N: No, the experience of these objects is vipaaka. We have to be very precise. -------- > L: and ruupa that is conditioned by kamma, that > is accordingly kusala and akusala vipaka. > ------ N: Again, ruupa is not vipaaka. Ruupas of the body can be conditioned by kamma, citta, temperature or nutrition. When the beautiful colour of a flower is experienced, the colour is conditioned by temperature, not by kamma. Vipaaka is said only of citta and accompanying cetasikas. ------- > L: But why is mentioned indifferent effect? Indifferent vipaaka? > But there is no such things as indifferent vipaka. I would like to > hear more on this. > ------- N: Vipaakacitta experiences only a pleasant object or an unpleasant object, it is either the result of kusala kamma or of akusala kamma, as you suggest. The upekkhaa is just conditioned by the seeing, the vipaakacitta, by way of dependence-condition. ----- Nina. #123966 From: Alex Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:55 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to develop understanding?? norbert_jaka... Hi Ken, 2012/4/26 Ken H > ** > > > > Hi Norbet, > > ---- > >> N: After listening for a few days to some discussions 2 questions arise > for now. > > > >> 1 How to develop understanding? Sometimes it is said that right > understanding cannot be developed because it depends on conditions and > sometimes it is said that Panna must be developed. > ---- > > >KH: I had exactly the same problem when I first started at DSG. Just when > I thought I understood what people here were saying, >those same people > seemed to be saying the opposite! > > >There is no simple way around this problem. You need to develop a firm > theoretical grasp of how anatta means no-control. Until >then you will > inevitably get confused by Dhamma explanations, even when they are given by > experts. > NJ: And how do i develop this firm theoretical understanding of annata? Obviously a lot of reading, listening and considering and i also understands that this development also depends on "my" previous conditions, but are there good books to read and audio to listen about this subject?? > > >Just understand how the confusion happens (by conditions) and enjoy it. > :-) > NJ: I will :) > > Ken H > > >PS: I'll leave your question about nimita to the more experienced DSG > members: I've only been here about twelve years. > NJ: Is there really no simple way to explain nimita for a person with totaly no conditions of understanding (probably like me)? Norbert > > _,_.___ > Reply to sender| Reply > to group| Reply > via web post| Start > a New Topic > Messages in this topic( > 4) > Recent Activity: > > - New Members > 1 > - New Links > 1 > > Visit Your Group > [image: Yahoo! Groups] > Switch to: Text-Only, > Daily Digest > Unsubscribe Terms > of Use > . > > > -- Met liefdevolle vriendelijkheid en respect. With lovingkindness and respect. Norbert Jakaoemo #123967 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Apr 27, 2012 11:27 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to develop understanding?? nilovg Dear Norbert: Op 27-apr-2012, om 14:55 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > NJ: And how do i develop this firm theoretical understanding of > annata? > Obviously a lot of reading, listening and considering and i also > understands that this development also depends on "my" previous > conditions, > but are there good books to read and audio to listen about this > subject?? ----- N: Good question, very much to the point. The Tipitaka, including the abhidhamma. Audio: see audios that Jon and Sarah place on DSG.org, whatever Kh Sujin explains, it all amounts to anatta. But it goes right against our nature, we love self so much. Nina. #123968 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:04 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi pt. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > Hi RobE, > > > RE: When we talk about the different kinds of kusala and the types of insight that arise with samatha and satipatthana, I think it may be important to look at jhana in that context - what do you think about that? > > pt: Yes, we can do that. > > > RE: I'm saying that one should acknowledge the detailed attention that the Buddha paid to the stages and attributes of the jhanas, and not dismiss all that as unimportant. To me that seems like ignoring something that is a prominent part of the sutta body, and I don't see the justification for that. If the commentaries say that it is not the direct path to insight, okay, fine, but that doesn't take away from the fact that Buddha seemed to think it was a very worthy setting for the development of insight, and everyone acknowledges that at the very least jhana creates supporting conditions for enlightenment and in fact leads to a deeper enlightenment than dry insight. So there are implications there. I realize I am going on about it, but that is what I was pointing to. If we don't discuss it now, that's okay, but in context of kusala and development of insight, perhaps it will be clearer. > > pt: Yes, needs to be discussed later, in particular whether the texts indeed imply that: > - jhana was a very worthy setting for the development of insight, > - jhana creates supporting conditions for enlightenment (and what's the meaning of "supporting" conditions), > - jhana in fact leads to a deeper enlightenment than dry insight. > My starting position on all of the above would be more or less a "no", though the issues are certainly worthy of more closer examination later. Well, I will leave you with a quote from Ven. Gunaratana for now, perhaps to be considered among other sources when we get to it: "The Buddha is constantly seen in the suttas encouraging his disciples to develop jhana. The four jhanas are invariably included in the complete course of training laid down for disciples.[1] They figure in the training as the discipline of higher consciousness (adhicittasikkha), right concentration (sammasamadhi) of the Noble Eightfold Path, and the faculty and power of concentration (samadhindriya, samadhibala). Though a vehicle of dry insight can be found, indications are that this path is not an easy one, lacking the aid of the powerful serenity available to the practitioner of jhana. The way of the jhana attainer seems by comparison smoother and more pleasurable (A.ii,150-52). The Buddha even refers to the four jhanas figuratively as a kind of Nibbana: he calls them immediately visible Nibbana, factorial Nibbana, Nibbana here and now (A.iv,453-54)." From: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/gunaratana/wheel351.html#ch1.1 So there certainly are respectable teachers and scholars in the Buddhist community who support the view that jhana is not only a vehicle for development of the path, but emulates nibbana in its qualities. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #123969 From: "connie" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 12:25 am Subject: Re: Dhs nichiconn hi pt, > -------- > > > > pt:2. Every triplet in the matrix in pali is preceded by ka (first > > verse), kha (second verse), ga (third verse). > > > > What do these ka, kha and ga stand for? > > > ------- they are like i, ii, iii. connie #123970 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 7:21 am Subject: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... epsteinrob Hi Dieter, and Howard. Note: the original post of Dieter's did not make it dsg for some reason, so this is Dieter's message including some of Howard's comments, plus my reply, as part of this thread. > Hi Rob E and Howard, > you wrote: D:(The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself', otherwise we > wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) >> Rob E:: Dieter, it sounds like you see anatta as a point to be achieved, where one realizes that there is no self. The way that I use anatta is to say that it is the fact of no-self, not the realization. When one realizes anatta, one realizes the reality of no-self, but anatta exists either way. Buddha stated that all dhammas were anatta, anicca and dukkha. This is to be realized, but it is also to be known as a fact. I guess it is just a different way of talking about this reality. There is still no self, even when one is deluded into thinking there is a self. > D: a fact in the Teaching is something " When you know for yourselves " . Do we know anatta though knowing not having achieved/realized that yet ? (Arahant) A fact cannot be disputed. Now , how do you prove anatta to an opponent who claims: cogito ergo sum (..he would insist on 'here speaks atta about anatta') or even worse : meet a solipsist. So it is a matter of belief: we are are believing (and following ) the Teacher because his anatta doctrine makes ' more sense' than atta(because of anicca, dukkha) and we can get an idea what indeed is going on, i.e. the Law of Dependent Origination. D.O. isn't anatta , it is a 'middle between a lasting soul and no soul at all' Rob E: Anatta is part of the analysis of Buddhism, that all conditioned dhammas are anatta, anicca and dukkha. Of course we have to learn about this and consider it before we can ever experience it directly. Part of the Buddha's teaching is that if we don't understand what the 4 Noble Truths and the other aspects of the teaching consist of, we cannot ever experience them correctly. That is why hearing the Teachings is a prerequisite for enlightenment according to Theravada. You are right we should not confuse knowing about anatta with knowing it directly, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't understand or acknowledge it if we have that understanding. Some of us may have even had a direct experience of anatta to one extent or another, as I believe I have. So it is not impossible to talk about it. In any case, anatta is not enlightenment, it is not a state to be achieved, it is a fact to be realized. So we shouldn't say, in my view, that anatta doesn't exist when we are deluded and that it comes into being in enlightenment. No-self is not created by enlightenment; it is realized by enlightenment. >>> (D:In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of > ever changing phenomena of dependent origination driven by ignorance) > The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be > found nevertheless is present.. >> R.E.When you say the deluded self is present, what does that mean? There is no deluded self created when delusion is present, but there is a deluded mind or deluded consciousness. It may be the language again that is confusing, but it seems to me that you think a deluded self is created by delusion - I'm not saying that is true, just questioning. To me, delusion is just a state of consciousness but it does not create a complex, or whole, which could be called a "deluded self." > D: the delusion (in) Self, I is the assumption of 'this I am, this is mine ' etc. , the identification with the khandas, conditioned by ignorant kamma force. (avijja sankhara ) . We speak of a sentient being when the 5 khandas are present . And this being is 'posessed' by delusion (in Self/I), which 'works through' the elements of the D.O. chain. Rob E.: There is in fact no coherent being that is a 'sentient being.' Sentient being is a shorthand for physical organism + experience that is processed by consciousness in association with that organism, but there is no "being" created by either than organism or those experiences. The understanding of anatta is that there is just impersonal consciousness having those experiences, not a being or a person. Do you agree that there is no coherent "entity" within the human organism, but just a series of processes? Deluded mind or consciousness [citta] could be called a deluded self, but that can also lead to a lot of confusion, particularly if you think that such a creation really does constitute a kind of self, even if temporary. That is why I don't choose to say "deluded self" because it creates the impression that an entity is created and then dissolved in Nibbana, when in fact there is no entity per se at all, ever, no matter what delusion consciousness is entertaining that there is such a self. If there is a deluded self, it is easy to also think there must be an enlightened self as well. This is not so odd, as some people have suggested that nibbana is a kind of enlightened self. >>> (D:..: Samsara isn't anatta.. anatta means the wandering /kamma ceased ..and then > we can of course not talk anymore of samsara > ------------------------------------------------- >> R.E.:I don't see anatta as a point at which samsara has ceased - that would be nibbana, or enlightenment. Anatta is one of the properties of samsara that is realized in insight or awakening > D:Anatta is not a property of samsara .. I think we need to be clear , what samsara means and I like to repeat Nyanatiloka : saṃsāra : 'round of rebirth', lit. perpetual wandering', is a name by which is designated the sca of life ever restlessly heaving up and down, the symbol of this continuous process of ever again and again being born, growing old, suffering and dying. More precisely put, saṃsāra is the unbroken chain of the five-fold khandha-combinations, which, constantly changing from moment to moment follow continuously one upon the other through inconceivable periods of time snip It is our wandering within these rounds of death ,birth , death .. it is the (deluded) being in action .. (of D.O.) By enlightenment the chain is broken .. samsara ade .. >> HCW:> Robert, I'm guessing that by samsara being "self-deluded," Dieter means > "being deluded by a sense of self and even a belief in self". > ------------------------------------------------- >> RE.:Yes, but there seems to be an association of anatta with nibbana or enlightenment, as though anatta was the experience of having awakened. > D: yes, anatta is fully realized only by the Arahant , who abolishes the residue of self : mana >> HCW:> Dieter, I'm getting lost in a forest of words. ;-) > --------------------------------------------------- >> RE:Yes, I don't understand that either. What is the difference between samsara and wandering? Isn't wandering a metaphor for samsara? > D: no difference : samsara is the wandering , the Arahant stops wandering (cessation of kamma) >>> D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds > similar to 'an undeluded > wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is > abolished > by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . >> RE:Yes, by realization of anatta, but not by anatta itself, which is a property of samsara, not liberation from samsara. Anatta is the fact, not the realization of that fact. > --------------------------------------------- > D: 'anatta itself' ? you call that a pleonasm, don't you? I would say "the fact of anatta itself" which is what I mean, not that 'anatta' is a 'thing.' But it is a characteristic or property of all dhammas. > the anatta realization happens when the mind is purified from the I delusion . Only then it can become a fact (the reasons I tried to explain above) ( in Christianty the anatta realization stands for Jesus at the moment of death , in Buddhism the realization of the (Holy ) Noble Path ) Rob E.: I don't agree with you on this. Anatta is still a fact before enlightenment. Yes, we don't realize it directly yet, but there is still no self, even in delusion, even if we think there is. It's confusing to say that anatta is created by realization. That is not so. Anatta is not a realization; it is a stable characteristic of dhammas that is realized by insight and wisdom. You would not say that microbes/bacteria were created by the invention of the microscope; they were discovered by the microscope. It is similar. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #123971 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 3:25 pm Subject: Re: Just checking re concepts and panna jonoabb Hi Rob E (123902) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > Pt. II :-) > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > The existence of the conventional object is not something that can be established by direct experience in the way that the (momentary) existence, and true/inherent nature of, the object of the current seeing consciousness or visible object can. Nor is the nature of any such 'existence' of any relevance to the development of that kind of understanding. > > R: I also have another question about the existence of conventional objects. It seems that despite the irrelevance of the existence or nonexistence of conventional objects for the path, a number of people make statements that clearly indicate that they believe that conventional objects do not exist. You have said that there is no direct statement in the Dhamma as to whether conventional objects ultimately exist or not, so it should not be a matter of Buddhist debate, unless it has some relevance to the path. Yet it seems to be a point that is made many times in order to emphasize the imporance of dhammas that there is "no conventional object, just dhammas!" If one were to follow your lead in this current statement, it might be more accurate and less controversial to say "We only experience dhammas, not conventional objects." In other words, to emphasize experience, rather than existence or non-existence. Would you agree hat such a distinction would represent the Dhamma more directly, and lead to less debate and confusion about a kind of "dhammas versus conventional objects" argument? > =============== J: I think a lot depends on the context, and on the perspective of the speaker. For example, to a speaker who is thinking only in terms of the development of the path, and is having a discussion in that context, anything having existence in the ultimate sense is, by definition, to be classed as a dhamma, and anything else does not come into consideration. So as far as any question of existence is concerned there are just 'dhammas' and 'everything else'. Of course, for those who wish to keep open the possibility of there being a form of 'existence' of conventional objects, there will be the need to classify things differently: dhammas, conventional objects, the rest (I suppose). The distinction you are drawing here between "there is no conventional object" and "conventional object cannot be directly experienced as object of consciousness" reminds me of the distinction between "there is no self" and "all dhammas are not-self": technically a valid distinction but for ease of reference the looser form is more commonly used. Jon #123972 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhs nilovg Dear pt and Connie, When looking at the Pali alphabeth: not counting the long vowels, they are no 6,7,8. Nina. Op 27-apr-2012, om 16:25 heeft connie het volgende geschreven: > What do these ka, kha and ga stand for? > > > > > ------- > > they are like i, ii, iii. #123973 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 3:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How to develop understanding?? moellerdieter Dear Norbert, you wrote: NJ: Is there really no simple way to explain nimita for a person with totaly no conditions of understanding (probably like me)? D: one way is that you read the suttas , where nimita (sign) is mentioned (see link below) and quote what you don't understand. http://www.google.com/cse?cx=016191283175230797672%3Akqievqd5qf4&q=nimitta&sa=Se\ arch#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=nimitta&gsc.page=1 Possibly some members may help , possibly with sources from the commentaries. with Metta Dieter #123974 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:32 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 3 - Concentration, Satipattthana Sutta sarahprocter... Dear Dieter, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Dieter Moeller" wrote: > S: In the Maha Satipatthana Sutta, when it refers to: > > "((3) He further clearly perceives and understands any state of consciousness or mind (cittanupassana), whether it is greedy or not, hateful or not, deluded > or not, cramped or distracted, developed or undeveloped, surpassable or unsurpassable, concentrated or unconcentrated, liberated or unliberated > (Nyanatiloka)"> > >S: Here, the "concentrated or unconcentrated" mind refer to samaahita citta and asamaahita citta - from the comy: "samaahita.m citta.m = 'The quieted state of consciousness.' It refers to the conscious state of him who has full or partial absorption. [S: access or jhana]." "asamaahita.m citta.m = 'The state of consciousness not quieted.' It refers to the conscious state without either absorption." > > D: I think one needs to distinguish between laying the foundation of mindfulness , i.e. the contemplation with a quieted state of consciousness > (calm of body and mind as stated in the sutta ) and the application of sati in daily life which works due to the foundation. ... S: The section we're discussing particularly refers to "any state of consciousness or mind (cittanupassana)", regardless of "whether it is greedy or not, hateful or not, deluded or not, cramped or distracted, developed or undeveloped, surpassable or unsurpassable, concentrated or unconcentrated, liberated or unliberated" In other words, there is no suggestion about laying any prior foundation such as "the contemplation with a quieted state of consciousness ". When there is awareness and right understanding, the calm "of body and mind", i.e. of citta and cetasikas is there already. There is already calm at any moments of wholesome consciousness. While we keep thinking in terms of having "to do something first", we keep forgetting about dhammas as anatta, as conditioned realities. ... > S:Now, there is no jhana, but there is citta arising with greed, hate, distraction or kusala of some kind - with each of these cittas, along with moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas, there is always ekaggata cetasika (one-pointedness) and manasikara (attention). There is momentary concentration at each instant now, otherwise citta could not experience its object. There is no self to concentrate or attend ever. > > D: there is -as I see it - the intention of a focus ...attention towards x...and a difference between looking at -let us say- the forest or a leaf , > a difference due to the influence by the cetasikas , isn't it? ... S: Still, ekaggata (one-pointedness/concentration) arises momentarily with the citta and performs its function of focussing. Manasikara arises with the citta and attends to the object. (More detail when we come to them in the cetasikas corner). When we talk about attending to the forest or leaf, it's a whole story involving many, many cittas with a lot of thinking about concepts. It's true that the cetasikas all influence each other at each moment, however, and the particular nature of the ekaggata is different accordingly. For example, ekaggata that arises with a moment of kindness is different from ekaggata which arises with a moment of greed. ... ..... > S: Effort can also be kusala or akusala. It is the effort itself which 'practices' or 'develops' when it arises. Right effort only develops with right understanding, not by any self deciding to have it arise or practise it. > > D: well, understanding what means right effort.. ... S: Right effort is effort which arises with moments of kusala citta. If it is right effort which arises with right understanding of realities, then it is samma vayama, right effort of the path. ... > >D: I wonder why the 5 hindrances are mentioned under contemplation of mental formation and not under mind in the Sutta . > ... > S: Because they are not cittas, but cetasikas. Dhammanupassana includes all dhammas not yet referred to under the other headings (as well as them). So cetasikas, such as the 5 hindrances, are included here. > >D: not clear , e.g. hate and greed are cetasikas , belonging to mental formation .. but mentioned under mind .. ... ... S: Because in the earlier example discussed at the start of this post it is the mind, the citta which is being referred to. Each citta is different - it may be a kusala, an akusala, a vipaka or kiriya citta which is the object of mindfulness. In this example, it is the citta rooted in hate or greed that was being referred to. When it comes to the section on the hindrances, it is the cetasikas that are being discussed as objects of awareness. We never know what may appear from moment to moment - citta, cetasika or rupa. Completely out of anyone's control. Metta Sarah ===== #123975 From: "Ken H" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 6:18 pm Subject: Re: How to develop understanding?? kenhowardau Hi Norbert, ----------- > NJ: And how do i develop this firm theoretical understanding of annata? Obviously a lot of reading, listening and considering and i also understands that this development also depends on "my" previous conditions, but are there good books to read and audio to listen about this subject?? ------------ KH: As you have already realised, studying the Dhamma is just like studying any other difficult topic. You have to do a lot of it, and the way you do it will depend on your own inclinations. Speaking for myself, I have several excellent books that have been given to me by friends, but I'm not much of a reader. DSG's daily messages and its Useful Posts file provide for most of my needs. Any beginner books I would recommend (such as K Sujin's Concepts and Realities) just contain more of the same high quality material. So there is no shortage in that department. Right understanding of the *present* reality is most important thing. ----------- > NJ: Is there really no simple way to explain nimita for a person with totaly no conditions of understanding (probably like me)? ----------- KH: I don't know about you but I doubt there is a simple way for me. Nimita is one of the things I have read about many times at DSG without remembering much next time the subject comes up. Cuti citta is another one. There are lots of them! But I don't worry; clever or stupid, there are only dhammas. Ken H #123976 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 3:09 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Rob E and Howard, you wrote: (The nature of Samsara is self deluded not 'nonself', otherwise we > wouldn't speak of samsara anymore.) Dieter, it sounds like you see anatta as a point to be achieved, where one realizes that there is no self. The way that I use anatta is to say that it is the fact of no-self, not the realization. When one realizes anatta, one realizes the reality of no-self, but anatta exists either way. Buddha stated that all dhammas were anatta, anicca and dukkha. This is to be realized, but it is also to be known as a fact. I guess it is just a different way of talking about this reality. There is still no self, even when one is deluded into thinking there is a self. D: a fact in the Teaching is something " When you know for yourselves " . Do we know anatta though knowing not having achieved/realized that yet ? (Arahant) A fact cannot be disputed. Now , how do you prove anatta to an opponent who claims: cogito ergo sum (..he would insist on 'here speaks atta about anatta') or even worse : meet a solipsist. So it is a matter of belief: we are are believing (and following ) the Teacher because his anatta doctrine makes ' more sense' than atta´(because of anicca, dukkha) and we can get an idea what indeed is going on, i.e. the Law of Dependent Origination. D.O. isn't anatta , it is a 'middle between a lasting soul and no soul at all' (D:In detail : D.O. , the sentient being ( Khanda) inmidst this stream of > ever changing phenomena of dependent origination driven by ignorance) > The whole process signifies the delusion self of which no core can be > found nevertherless is present.. R.E.When you say the deluded self is present, what does that mean? There is no deluded self created when delusion is present, but there is a deluded mind or deluded consciousness. It may be the language again that is confusing, but it seems to me that you think a deluded self is created by delusion - I'm not saying that is true, just questioning. To me, delusion is just a state of consciousness but it does not create a complex, or whole, which could be called a "deluded self." D: the delusion (in) Self, I is the assumption of 'this I am, this is mine ' etc. , the identification with the khandas, conditioned by ignorant kamma force. (avijja sankhara ) . We speak of a sentient being when the 5 khandas are present . And this being is 'pocessed'by delusion (in Self/I) , which 'works through' the elements of the D.O. chain. (D:..: Samsara isn't anatta.. anatta means the wandering /kamma ceased ..and then > we can of course not talk anymore of samsara > ------------------------------------------------- R.E.:I don't see anatta as a point at which samsara has ceased - that would be nibbana, or enlightenment. Anatta is one of the properties of samsara that is realized in insight or awakening D:Anatta is not a property of samsara .. I think we need to be clear , what samsara means and I like to repeat Nyanatiloka : saṃsāra : 'round of rebirth', lit. perpetual wandering', is a name by which is designated the sca of life ever restlessly heaving up and down, the symbol of this continuous process of ever again and again being born, growing old, suffering and dying. More precisely put, saṃsāra is the unbroken chain of the five-fold khandha-combinations, which, constantly changing from moment to moment follow continuously one upon the other through inconceivable periods of time snip It is our wandering within these rounds of death ,birth , death .. it is the (deluded) being in action .. (of D.O.) By enlightenment the chain is broken .. samsara ade .. HCW:> Robert, I'm guessing that by samsara being "self-deluded," Dieter means > "being deluded by a sense of self and even a belief in self". > ------------------------------------------------- RE.:Yes, but there seems to be an association of anatta with nibbana or enlightenment, as though anatta was the experience of having awakened. D: yes, anatta is fully realized only by the Arahant , who abolishes the residue of self : mana > HCW:> Dieter, I'm getting lost in a forest of words. ;-) > --------------------------------------------------- RE:Yes, I don't understand that either. What is the difference between samsara and wandering? Isn't wandering a metaphor for samsara? D: no difference : samsara is the wandering , the Arahant stops wandering (cessation of kamma) > D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds > similar to 'an undeluded > wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is > abolished > by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . RE:Yes, by realization of anatta, but not by anatta itself, which is a property of samsara, not liberation from samsara. Anatta is the fact, not the realization of that fact. > --------------------------------------------- D: 'anatta itself' ? you call that a pleonasm, don't you? the anatta realization happens when the mind is purified from the I delusion . Only then it can become a fact (the reasons I tried to explain above) ( in Christianty the anatta realization stands for Jesus at the moment of death , in Buddhism the realization of the (Holy ) Noble Path ) (D:do you agree that without the > factor 'suffering' the issue of anatta would be irrelevant? > -------------------------------------------------- > HCW:> If I may butt in: Relevant to what? I think it would still be > important, for truth is important. RE:Without suffering, there would be no issue of delusion or attachment. Anatta would still be a fact, but would already be understood. And I agree with what you said, Howard, as well. Knowledge of the components of reality is significant whether there is suffering or not. D: It would be irrelevant because we would rely on what appears to us as cogito ergo sum.....assumed as truth since long long time , only the connection anicca dukkha carries anatta 'on stage' .. B.T.W. the issue of anatta is probably the most frequent topic of discussion in Buddhism. So I don't necessarily expect a a consens understanding by trying to present my view .. ;-) with Metta Dieter #123977 From: "sarah" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 5:56 pm Subject: Re: eating animal corpses sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: I agree with Vince. There cannot be compassion and metta towards meat. At the moment of eating meat, there is no distress for the animal as it's no longer alive. The Buddha stressed the importance of understanding the present citta, the present states of mind. As Vince says, in the case of the meat, we are using our imaginations, remembering the sufferings of animals and so on. More precious is a moment of direct understanding of the reality at such a time - thinking, aversion and so on. > > > > As Vince quoted, the Buddha was very specific about the circumstances under which bhikkhus could not eat meat. ... >R: That is why I said in my response to Howard that I think what we might do in conventional living may not be the same as the Buddha's teaching in an area. As far as the conventional world goes, however, where we do encounter beings, bodies, even industries, it makes sense for someone who cares about animal to think about the way animals are raised, killed and marketed. It's not compassion for the meat, but you are right, it is not a direct view of what is arising in the moment either. So our conceptual life has a purpose in making wise choices in everyday living, even though that may not be the most direct view of dhammas at that time. ... S: Yes, conventional understanding and viewing of the world and issues is very different from the direct understanding of dhammas and the entire path as taught by the Buddha. There is nothing wrong with following conventional/worldly ways of behaviour as you indicate - but none of it has anything to do with the Dhamma. Choosing the vegetarian option in the restaurant or not printing out posts - all good from a "conventional world" perspective, but nothing to do with eradicating defilements. The cittas at such times may be kusala or akusala just as at any other time. .... > Can you we have metta for the animals who are being slaughtered, even though we are not right in front of them at that moment, and can that lead to choices about whether or what kind of meat to eat? I think it is possible. Isn't metta in relation to a conceptual object, the idea of a being who is suffering? ... S: Usually when we think about the animals being slaughtered, isn't there distress, unease? Often what we take for metta or compassion is attachment or dosa. Again, it comes back to the present citta and only awareness and understanding now can know the present mental states. When there is metta, the citta is friendly, the feeling is never unhappy. Often when people think they are concerned about the suffering animals, it is really just their own discomfort that is of concern. ... > In any case, I understand the distinction between being present to what is arising now, and dealing with concepts, but the concept of animals in slaughterhouses represents a conceptual reality that may be worth considering in conventional reality. ... S: What is more meaninful, more precious, is the understanding of the thinking as a reality at such moments, arising and passing away. Usually we're lost in stories about people, things, animals without any awareness at all. This is why the Buddha's Teaching really goes against the grain, against the conventional way of seeing the world and its problems. Metta Sarah ===== #123978 From: upasaka@... Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 9:59 pm Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Dieter) - In a message dated 4/28/2012 1:37:12 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Dieter, and Howard. Note: the original post of Dieter's did not make it dsg for some reason, so this is Dieter's message including some of Howard's comments, plus my reply, as part of this thread. -------------------------------------------- HCW: Thanks for sending this on, Robert. To save space, reading time, and bandwidth, I won't repeat the rest of your post here, Robert. What I will do instead is provide some additional content below from our off-list conversations. ================================ With metta, Howard *************************** *************************** D: probably a language problem. to me speaking of nonself samsara sounds similar to 'an undeluded wordling'.Samsara signifies the round of birth and death , which is abolished by realization of anatta (Arahantship) . --------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. Such mentality is conditioned, changeable, and anatta. ****************************** D: I mean the I /Self delusion (the identification like I am, ..want,..don't want,etc. ) - self deluded obviously not a proper choice of words ------------------------------------------------ HCW: Ah, yes, that's what I thought you must mean. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta. ----------------------------------------------- D: nay ...Samsara means our wandering (kamma) in these lasting rounds of births and deaths, conditioned by ignorance/delusion, doesn't it? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Well, yes, but that means it is a compound of many conditioned phenomena, largely involving ignorance and the resultant craving and aversion, and all anatta. ******************************** Hi, guys - In a message dated 4/27/2012 4:25:16 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: D: 'anatta itself' ? you call that a pleonasm, don't you? the anatta realization happens when the mind is purified from the I delusion . Only then it can become a fact (the reasons I tried to explain above) ... Robert: I don't agree with you on this. Anatta is still a fact before enlightenment. Yes, we don't realize it directly yet, but there is still no self, even in delusion, even if we think there is. It's confusing to say that anatta is created by realization. That is not so. =============================== I agree with Robert on this matter. There is a difference between a fact and a known fact, and I think this is a distinction you are not making, Dieter. A fact is a truth, a true statement, or an actual state of affairs. Whatever is a fact is so whether we know it to be or not. I believe that nothing has self/own being/separate identity - that is, I believe it to be a fact that all phenomena are anatta. ****************************** ****************************** #123979 From: "philip" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:34 pm Subject: spd 8 (the colour and the concept) philofillet Dear group Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "When we see colours such as red, green, grey, blue or white we should know that colour is only the reality that appears through the eyes. Nevertheless, we like the colours of eyes, nose, and mouth. Thus, we like concepts. Paramattha dhammas are real. However, when we like something we like both the paramattha dhamma and the concept, which is formed up on account of that paramattha dhamma." (end of passage) Phil #123980 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Sat Apr 28, 2012 10:43 pm Subject: Mission Impossible yawares1 Dear Members, No no no , this is not Tom Cruise's movie!! This Uposatha Day, I would love to tell you the story of Kisagotami's mission impossible, sad but quite impressive.Theri Kisagotami was declared "etadagga" among bhikkhunis with respect to the wearing of coarse robes (luukhaciivara-dharaanam). ******************* Kisagotami: Mission Impossible [Translated from the Pali by Daw Mya Tin, MA] While residing at the Jetavana monastery, thc Buddha uttered Verse (114) of this book, with reference to Kisagotami. Kisagotami came from a poor family in Saavatthi. Gotami was her name; she was called Kisa because of her thinness. She was married into a rich family, by whom she was disdainfully treated; but as soon as she bore a son she was shown respect. The boy died when he was just a toddler and Kisagotami was stricken with grief. Carrying the dead body of her son, she went about asking for medicine that would restore her son to life from everyone she happened to meet. People began to think that she had gone mad. But a wise man seeing her condition thought that he should be of some help to her. So, he said to her, "The Buddha is the person you should approach, he has the medicine you want; go to him." Thus, she went to the Buddha and asked him to give her the medicine that would restore her dead son to life. The Buddha told her to get some mustard seeds from a house where there had been no death. Carrying her dead child in her bosom. Kisagotami went from house to house, with the request for some mustard seeds. Everyone was willing to help her, but she could not find a single house where death had not occurred. Then, she realized that hers was not the only family that had faced death and that there were more people dead than living. As soon as she realized this, her attitude towards her dead son changed; she was no longer attached to the dead body of her son. She left the corpse in the jungle and returned to the Buddha and reported that she could find no house where death had not occurred. Then the Buddha said, "Gotami, you thought that you were the only one who had lost a son. As you have now realized, death comes to all beings; before their desires are satiated death takes them away." On hearing this, Kisagotami fully realized the impermanence, unsatisfactoriness and insubstantiality of the aggregates and attained Sotapatti Fruition. Soon afterwards, Kisagotami became a bhikkhuni. One day, as she was lighting the lamps she saw the flames flaring up and dying out, and suddenly she clearly perceived the arising and the perishing of beings. The Buddha, through supernormal power, saw her from his monastery, and sent forth his radiance and appeared to her in person. Kisagotami was told to continue meditating on the impermanent nature of all beings and to strive hard to realize Nibbana. Then the Buddha spoke in verse as follows Verse 114.Better than a hundred years in the life of a person who does not perceive the Deathless (Nibbana), is a day in the life of one who perceives the Deathless (Nibbana). At the end of the discourse Theri Kisagotami attained arahatship. ******************** Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya [:heart:] #123981 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 1:27 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His Kokanada Palace) moellerdieter Hi Ken H, you wrote: 'KH: That would be good. There certainly are different angles of view at DSG. And there are misunderstandings between the people who hold those views. But what are the misunderstandings? Some of us might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have all been talking about the same thing; we have just been viewing it from different angles." Others might say, "Eventually we will realise that we have been talking about two very different things." I belong to the second group. I believe the first group misunderstands the misunderstandings. :-) ---------------------------- D: you mean like talking about carts , chariots or wheels , axes ? (> D: We need to get an understanding first what means faith (in Buddhism) . It concerns as you know , the cetasika saddha , belonging to the so-called 19 Beautiful Universals of the 25 Beautiful Mental Factors group. (Sobhana Cetasikas) The discussion about 'suffering conditions faith' (pls compare with my recent postings ) fits indeed to the 'cetasika in daily life' -project. ---------------------------- KH: I agree: faith concerns the cetasika, saddha. In your recent postings you (and Ven Buddhadasa) seemed to make too much of the fact that faith was conditioned by suffering. Certainly if there was no suffering there would be no right understanding of suffering, and so there would be no Way Out of suffering. But that's as far as it goes, isn't it? It doesn't mean suffering is good. If I break my leg, and a doctor fixes it, that means the doctor was good; it doesn't mean my broken leg was good. ------------------ D: No Ken, it concerns the level of understanding of the first Noble Truths ( and ff...) <. . .> > D: You say 'Panna performs that function ..without any help (..from a controlling self.) But how can wisdom develop , if is not fed by insights? ------------------ KH: What is the connection between those two sentences? Are you suggesting the development of panna requires input from a controlling self? -------------------------------- D:hunting the heretics , Ken ? ;-) > D: Insight or Vipassana is an application of mindfulness , i.e. the Path factor Sati , usually mentioned as the second of the mentioned Beautiful Factors Group ( the cetasika Panna last ) -------------------------------- KH: Insight and panna are one and the same. Panna arises with the other path factors, but it is their leader. Without panna (samma-ditthi) sati would not be samma-sati and viriya would not be samma-viriya (etc). D: well it depends.. as so often when meeting terms . Engl. Dict. : insight 1 [uncountable] (approving) the ability to see and understand the truth about people or situations 2 [countable, uncountable] insight (into something) an understanding of what something is like wisdom: 1 the ability to make sensible decisions and give good advice because of the experience and knowledge that you have 2. wisdom of something/of doing something how sensible something is 3. the knowledge that a society or culture has gained over a long period of time as panna is a cetasika , a bit more info: Panna in respect to the 3fold training includes right understandingt/view and right thought /intention do you see PTS definition of Panna and Vipassana synonym?. PTS: Paññā (f.) [cp. Vedic prajñā, pa+jñā] intelligence, com- prising all the higher faculties of cognition, "intellect as conversant with general truths" (Dial. ii.68), reason, wisdom, insight, knowledge, recognition. See on term Mrs. Rh. D. "Buddhism" (1914) pp. 94, 130, 201; also Cpd. 40, 41, 102 and discussion of term at Dhs. trsl. 17, 339, cp. scholastic definition with all the synonyms of intellectual attainment at Nd2 380=Dhs 16 (paññā pajānanā vicayo etc.). As tt. in Buddhist Psych. Ethics it comprises the highest and last stage as 3rd division in the standard "Code of religious practice" which leads to Arahantship or Final Emancipation. These 3 stages are: (1) sīla -- kkhandha (or ˚sampadā), code of moral duties; (2) samādhi -- kkhandha (or cittasampadā) code of emotional duties or practice of con centration & meditation; (3) paññā -- kkhandha (or ˚sampadā) code of intellectual duties or practice of the attainment of highest knowledge. (See also jhāna1.) They are referred to in almost every Suttanta of Dīgha 1. (given in extenso at D i.62 -- 85) and frequently mentioned elsewhere, cp. D ii.81, 84, 91 (see khandha, citta & sīla). -- D i.26=162 (˚gatena caranti diṭṭhigatāni), 174 (˚vāda), 195 (˚pāripūrin); ii.122 (ariyā); iii.101, 158, 164, 183, 230, 237, 242, 284 sq.; S i.13=165 (sīla, citta, paññā), 17, 34, 55; ii.185 (sammā˚), 277; v.222 (ariyā); M i.144 (id.); iii.99 (id.), 245 (paramā), 272 (sammā˚); A i.61, 216; ii.1 (ariyā); iv.105 (id.); iii.106 (sīla, citta, p.), 352 (kusalesu dhammesu); iv.11 (id.); v.123 sq.; It 35, 40 (˚uttara), 51 (sīlaṃ samādhi p. ca), 112 (ariyā˚); Sn 77, 329, 432, 881, 1036 and passim; Dh 38, 152, 372; Nd1 77; Nd2 380; Ps i.53, 64 sq., 71 sq., 102 sq., 119; ii.150 sq., 162, 185 sq.; Pug 25, 35, 54 (˚sampadā); Dhs 16, 20, 555; Nett 8, 15, 17, 28, 54, 191; VbhA 140, 396; PvA 40 (paññāya abhāvato for lack of reason); Sdhp 343. On paññāya see sep. article. See also adhipanna (adhisīla, adhicitta+). Vipassanā (f.) [fr. vi+passati; BSk. vipaśyanā, e. g. Divy 44, 95, 264 etc.] inward vision, insight, intuition, introspection D iii.213, 273; S iv.195, 360; v.52 (samatha+); A i.61 (id.), 95; ii.140, 157 (samatha+); iv.360; v.99, 131; Ps i.28, 57 sq., 181; ii.92 sq.; Pug 25; J i.106; Dhs 55, 1356; Nett 7, 42 sq., 50, 82, 88 sq., 125 sq., 160, 191; Miln 16; Vism 2 (with jhāna etc.), 289 (+samādhi), 628 sq. (the 18 mahā˚); PvA 14 (samāhita -- citta˚), 167; VvA 77; Sdhp 457, 466. a few quotations following: in Dhamma Wheel forum ( http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=5696&start=0 ) is has been asked :Are vipassana ( insight ) and panna ( wisdom ) basically the same thing? And if not, what's the difference? 'Unspoken': Can be same, can be not same. Depends on what you think it is. If you think that insight and wisdom is different because insight born wisdom, then you have a part of wisdom. If you think both can gained through meditation only, you are partially correct and you need more study. If you think that both of it is same where wisdom will born insight and insight will born wisdom, then i can tell you that you are a person who is well thought of something. If you do not think the ways as above, then you need to find out what makes you thinks that its something else or irrelevant or so on. As both is dependant ( what I've been learned and noticed), only happiness is independant. 'thereductor': Insight is when the implication of your observation becomes clear to you. Wisdom is the change in how you think due to that insight. If you want to go further then we might say that previous insight makes you wiser, and as a wiser person you are more skilled in analyzing your experience and are thus more likely to have future insights." Robert K quotes in http://www.abhidhamma.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=3&mode=threaded : "Khun sujin described the experience of vipassana. At those moments the sense door and mindoor are known as they are. Now we are experiencing colour and sound but the sense door is hidden. During the minddoor processes when vipassana nana occur the sense-door is revealed, at those moments there is the deep understanding of the difference between rupa and nama. This is nama-rupa paricchedda nana. She says that the theory is completely true. This experience of vipassana is not, as some think, just knowing in a vague way that rupa is rupa and nama is nama. Vipassana actually distinguishes. It cannot be made to happen; imagine how fast the processes are changing. Even when we think we are feeling the actual rupas in the body they have long since passed away. But when vipassana arises, which includes the cetasikas of panna(wisdom) sati, concentration and other factors of the eightfold path panna supported by the other factors is able to distinguish. So completely anatta. After that there is no doubt about nama and rupa but there has to be more development before there can be understanding of the arising and passing away. Now concept, nama, and rupa are mixed up and they remain this way until vipassana occurs. Nevertheless, there is some untangling taking place at every moment of satipatthana, every time that sati and panna take a paramattha dhamma as object. The difference between concept and paramattha dhamma does become clearer; but not clear until vipassana. When will vipassana happen? When the conditions are fulfilled, this life or future lives. When it is the right time it will occur even if we don't want it. We might be surprised. I think it is not something to wish for so much- it means one will see, really see, that there is no one. Not only no friends or relatives, there is not even us. How can we have faith that this is the right way if we have to wait, maybe until next life, before true vipassana occurs to make it clear? I think a little understanding of the moment goes a long way. It is like being at the bottom of the ocean looking up at the light. It is hazy and yet we know that as we get closer to the surface the light becomes brighter." Nina in http://www.vipassana.info/asoka4.htm : "During this journey Khun Sujin stressed time and again the immense difference between theoretical understanding and direct understanding. We may have learnt that citta and cetasika are different. Citta is the leader in knowing an object and cetasikas have each their own characteristic and function. Citta and cetasikas arise together, but they have different characteristics. We may believe that we notice akusala citta with anger, but that is only thinking, and there is still an idea of “my anger”. Theoretical knowledge is not the direct understanding of realities. When panna has been developed in vipassana there can be direct understanding of the nature of citta and cetasika, of kusala and akusala, without an idea of self. It takes an endlessly long time, many lives, to develop satipatthana, but even if there is a short moment of right understanding of nama and rupa we are on the right way. Ven. Jagaro in : http://www.jagaro.net/2011/01/what-is-contemplation-insight-and-wisdom-part-3/ : " we said right back at the beginning that thought formations (sankhara) are one of the heaps (aggregates) that creates the sense of self. While we think we use thought to contemplate upon an object there is really something else going on that is at the heart of the process. It is mindfulness and discernment at the heart of contemplation that allows this resolving of opposites to happen. When these opposites are resolved there is a clear seeing (insight) and hence a wisdom of knowing.The thought-forms that we engage induring the contemplation are the arising conditions about the nature of the object that we seek to understand. In essence we are chasing the tail of the snake in an attempt to catch the head. Thought is just what arises immediately after the direct cognition of the object (nature of reality) upon which we are contemplating, which eventually leads us to direct experience and hence direct understanding (insight and wisdom). wisdom is synonymous with discernment and is the intuitive knowing of reality (which came from the insight) to understand it’s nature – how it arises, how it passes and the characteristics of suffering, impermanence, and not-self. I also said that wise thought is just a thought expression of wisdom, an expression about this clear discernment of reality" . ------------------ > D: You suggest an automatic as far as I understand , please explain.. ------------------ KH: By "automatic" I think you mean "without assistance from a controlling self." So, yes, that is exactly what I am suggesting. That's the whole point of the Dhamma. -------------------------- D:the whole point is of the Dhamma is ( the) suffering (being ) and cessation of suffering .. there is no automatic for 'right effort' <. . .> D: the dhammas which are arising now are first of all those of previous kamma (vipaka) , aren't they? The action (or re-action on vipaka -) here and now is future kamma . -------------------------- KH: I think I know what you mean, but for the sake of clarity I would add that there is only one citta any one time. That citta can be either a vipakka citta, or a kammicly active citta, or a neutral (purely functional) citta. (I am not sure why you use the term "future kamma" but let's not worry about that now.) D: SN 35 /145 http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.wlsh.html 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, namely..snip ---------- > D: To understand the wholesome or unwholesome nature of mind here and now , the foundation must be laid. That is , for example, the topic of knowing the cetasikas , which 'color' the citta , besides application of training in order to keep the necessary level of attention/concentration. ---------- KH: Yes, but instead of saying the foundation must be laid I think you should have said the foundation must *have been* laid." How else could something happen here and now? If the foundations for its happening here and now have not been laid then it is simply not going to happen, is it? D: what I meant is the knowledge about the unwholesome or wholesome states of mind.. <. . .> >> KH: Meditators insist on seeing Buddhism as a conventional teaching. In a conventional teaching there is a sentient being that does the work. That's very comforting to someone who clings to the idea of his own existence. >> > D: sorry , Ken.. I can't take this seriously You would have to rewrite the canon and its commentaries --------------------- KH: I know you can't take it seriously: there are very few people (Buddhist or non-Buddhist) in the world today who can take it seriously. That is why I said at the beginning of this post we must accept we are talking about two very different ways of understanding. Nearly everyone assumes the Buddha's teaching was a conventional one. A conventional teaching says "Follow these instructions and you will get from A to B." Just a few people believe it was an unconventional teaching. It said there was no permanent entity capable of getting from A to B. (There was a path, but no traveller on it.) D: mana is greeting ..;-) I think there are a lot of Dhamma students who aware that the teaching involves a conventional and an absolute approach. KH:As for "You will have to rewrite the Canon and its commentaries," may I point out who is doing the rewriting? It is always meditators (the followers of a conventional path) who insist the Buddha did not teach the Abhidhamma, or who insist the commentaries are "not the Buddha's words." D: a bit too much generalization , Ken -------------- <. . .> > D: well , the intellectual understanding of no self , is one thing , its penetration another.. because that means (khanda) detachment , a process of disentchantment and dispassion . For that the Buddha instructed us to apply the (training of the) 8fold Path . -------------- KH: If we have heard the teaching and considered it wisely then right understanding of a presently arisen dhamma might occur. Right understanding (which arises purely by conditions) *is* the training. D: if your moral (sila ) is ok and your contemplation /concentration(samadhi ) what you have heard/read then the conditions for right understanding and right thought may arise ( ah yes, I wanted to quote about the path training) with Metta Dieter #123982 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 3:48 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Rob E and Howard, hopefully a readable edition ... ;-) you wrote: D: a fact in the Teaching is something " When you know for yourselves " . Do we know anatta though knowing not having achieved/realized that yet ? (Arahant) A fact cannot be disputed. Now , how do you prove anatta to an opponent who claims: cogito ergo sum (..he would insist on 'here speaks atta about anatta') or even worse : meet a solipsist. So it is a matter of belief: we are are believing (and following ) the Teacher because his anatta doctrine makes ' more sense' than atta(because of anicca, dukkha) and we can get an idea what indeed is going on, i.e. the Law of Dependent Origination. D.O. isn't anatta , it is a 'middle between a lasting soul and no soul at all' Rob E: Anatta is part of the analysis of Buddhism, that all conditioned dhammas are anatta, anicca and dukkha. Of course we have to learn about this and consider it before we can ever experience it directly. Part of the Buddha's teaching is that if we don't understand what the 4 Noble Truths and the other aspects of the teaching consist of, we cannot ever experience them correctly. That is why hearing the Teachings is a prerequisite for enlightenment according to Theravada. D: yes R.E.You are right we should not confuse knowing about anatta with knowing it directly, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't understand or acknowledge it if we have that understanding. Some of us may have even had a direct experience of anatta to one extent or another, as I believe I have. So it is not impossible to talk about it. D: yes RE:In any case, anatta is not enlightenment, it is not a state to be achieved, it is a fact to be realized. So we shouldn't say, in my view, that anatta doesn't exist when we are deluded and that it comes into being in enlightenment. No-self is not created by enlightenment; it is realized by enlightenment. D: Anatta is not enlightenment . But I said that the last residue of atta -which is mana -is acc. to the teaching the fetter just abolished with the entrance to Arahantship. By direct experience , would you say that wasn't a state of consciousness (....citta accompanied by cetasika panna and others) ? R.E. No-self is not created by enlightenment; it is realized by enlightenment. D: yes , anatta isn't created by enlightenment; enlightenment concerns the uncreated ,unconditioned (nibbana) It is realized by enlightenment, because the I-delusion - abolishes, dissolves , extinguishes ( the 3 fires , in partic.moha respectively bhava tanha ) Now is anatta a fact or a theory for us to be realized? I suggest that anatta isn't a fact , because the term 'fact' ' is a thing that is known to be true, especially when it can be proved' But are we in the situation to prove ( i.e.shows others) that anatta is a fact? It is a fact for the arahant and a theory to be believed by those not yet (fully) liberated, isn't it? The disapperance of the fetter personality belief (Sotapanna) does not mean that detachment is completed. > D: the delusion (in) Self, I is the assumption of 'this I am, this is mine ' etc. , the identification with the khandas, conditioned by ignorant kamma force. (avijja sankhara ) . We speak of a sentient being when the 5 khandas are present . And this being is 'posessed' by delusion (in Self/I), which 'works through' the elements of the D.O. chain. Rob E.: There is in fact no coherent being that is a 'sentient being.' Sentient being is a shorthand for physical organism + experience that is processed by consciousness in association with that organism, but there is no "being" created by either than organism or those experiences. The understanding of anatta is that there is just impersonal consciousness having those experiences, not a being or a person. Do you agree that there is no coherent "entity" within the human organism, but just a series of processes? D: Robert you seem now taking a postion , which I - in discussion wth other members - try again and again to explain is impossible. There is a reality which is mundane ..the conventional R. und D. , this communication ..this kamma and there is a reality of the supermundane , that concerns this mental corporal consciousness, i.e. the khandas embedded in the D.O. dynamic of dhammas. Both are valid in their own domain , like classical and nuclear physics. If you deny the mundane truth ( there is mother and father ..etc.) you imprison yourself in an ivory tower. Please see as well the Sutta The Self Doer R.E:Deluded mind or consciousness [citta] could be called a deluded self, but that can also lead to a lot of confusion, particularly if you think that such a creation really does constitute a kind of self, even if temporary. That is why I don't choose to say "deluded self" because it creates the impression that an entity is created and then dissolved in Nibbana, when in fact there is no entity per se at all, ever, no matter what delusion consciousness is entertaining that there is such a self. If there is a deluded self, it is easy to also think there must be an enlightened self as well. This is not so odd, as some people have suggested that nibbana is a kind of enlightened self. D: deluded self would here mean a pleonasm , wouldn't it? The idea of a transcendental Self comes up from time to time , the argument if I recall correctly - the Buddha only stated that no self or I can be found , not that there is no self . The No I- and Not I discussion comes into my mind. In Germany we had a split in the Buddhist community last century due to the so-called anatta controversy. > D: 'anatta itself' ? you call that a pleonasm, don't you? I would say "the fact of anatta itself" which is what I mean, not that 'anatta' is a 'thing.' But it is a characteristic or property of all dhammas. > the anatta realization happens when the mind is purified from the I delusion . Only then it can become a fact (the reasons I tried to explain above) ( in Christianty the anatta realization stands for Jesus at the moment of death , in Buddhism the realization of the (Holy ) Noble Path ) Rob E.: I don't agree with you on this. Anatta is still a fact before enlightenment. Yes, we don't realize it directly yet, but there is still no self, even in delusion, even if we think there is. D: 'I don't agree ..' says Robert ....;-) yes we disagree by the resons I explained above R.E. : It's confusing to say that anatta is created by realization. That is not so. D: confusing is that you imply that I stated 'anatta is created by realization' , R.E:Anatta is not a realization; it is a stable characteristic of dhammas that is realized by insight and wisdom. D: well, before you said ' No-self is not created by enlightenment; it is realized by enlightenment.' (realization or not ? ) and I answered: yes , anatta isn't created by enlightenment; enlightenment concerns the uncreated ,unconditioned (nibbana) It is realized by enlightenment, because the I-delusion - abolishes, dissolves , extinguishes ( the 3 fires , in partic.moha respectively bhava tanha ) RE:You would not say that microbes/bacteria were created by the invention of the microscope; they were discovered by the microscope. It is similar. D: clarified now? ;-) with Metta Dieter #123983 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 5:12 am Subject: nimitta nilovg Dear Norbert, you had a question on nimitta and I quote from an old post I conveniently found on Rob K's web Abhidhammavipassana (a forum with a lot of info, worth while for you). The last and more difficult meaning: sankhaara nimitta, nimitta of the five khandhas, all conditioned realities. N: Different meanings of nimitta in different contexts. Nimitta as object of jhaana such as a kasina is one thing. (end quote) Nina. #123984 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 6:07 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/28/2012 1:48:24 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Now is anatta a fact or a theory for us to be realized? I suggest that anatta isn't a fact , because the term 'fact' ' is a thing that is known to be true, especially when it can be proved' ------------------------------------------------ HCW: No, a fact is something true. It may be known to be true or not, but it is a fact if and only if it is actually true, regardless of our knowledge. If it is known to be true, then it is not only a fact but a KNOWN fact. -------------------------------------------------- But are we in the situation to prove ( i.e.shows others) that anatta is a fact? It is a fact for the arahant and a theory to be believed by those not yet (fully) liberated, isn't it? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: IF, what is said about anatta and about arahants is actually so, THEN 1) Anatta is a fact (period), whether we know it or not, and 2) It is a known fact for arahant. Any assertion that is true is a fact, *whether one knows it or not*. Should something, more strongly, be *known* to be true, then it is not only a fact but a known fact. ---------------------------------------------- The disapperance of the fetter personality belief (Sotapanna) does not mean that detachment is completed. =========================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #123985 From: "philip" Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:41 am Subject: spd 7 (know your defilements, and that you often want them) philofillet Dear Group Here is today's passage from Survey of Paramattha Dhammas by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "We may believe that we want to be without defilements, but when defilements actually arise it seems that we wish to have them. We may have conceit, we may find ourselves important, or we may be jealous. Someone else may say that such defilements should be eradicated, that one should rejoince in someone else's happiness or that one should have loving-kindness towardes a disagreeable person, but are we able to follow such advice? People who want to be angry, who want to have contempt for others, who want to be arrogant or jealous, cannot follow the adivce to cultivate wholesomeness. This shows that the eradication of defilements cannot occur immediately, that it can only be accomplished very gradually. Panna can gradually be developed so that it can arise from time to time. If we really want to eradicate defilements we should know that all kinds of kusala should be developed. It is not right to just perform daana, generosity, and pay no attention to the defilements which still arise. It is essential to know one's defilements." (end of passage) Phil #123986 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 8:46 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: How to develop understanding?? jonoabb Hi Norbert Appreciating your questions. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Alex wrote: > > NJ: Is there really no simple way to explain nimita for a person with > totaly no conditions of understanding (probably like me)? > =============== J: What is the context in which you have come across the term 'nimitta' (that would help make it easier to explain)? Jon #123987 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 9:38 pm Subject: Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi Nina and connie, Thanks very much for your replies. I was wondering what's the best way to translate "dhamma" into English when referring to cittas and cetasikas? Or at least, what's your preferred translation? The translations I saw so far - state, phenomenon, reality, thing. Best wishes pt > N: U Kyaw Khine translates: dhammaa which cause resultants. > I have some trouble with the Pali construction in no 2, but I can ask > the Pali list. Obviously, vipaakadhamma in this compound is and > attribute to dhammaa. #123988 From: "ptaus1" Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 10:03 pm Subject: Re: Dhs ptaus1 Hi Phil, Yes, it would be great if you could join at some point. But I know it's difficult with work and time constraints - I usually only have time to read books while having dinner. Thanks for your KS quotes project. Best wishes pt > Thanks for this, perhaps you will help me get those books off the shelf, but probably not this year. But I will follow your questions and the answers with interest. #123989 From: Alex Date: Sun Apr 29, 2012 11:31 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] nimitta norbert_jaka... Hi Nina, Thank you for this email.. More than one question is answered here.. I'll have to read/study this email a few time more but all together with the UP it already becomes a littlebit more clear.. i'll be chewing on this subject for some time, i think.. Metta, Norbert 2012/4/28 Nina van Gorkom > Dear Norbert, > you had a question on nimitta and I quote from an old post I > conveniently found on Rob K's web Abhidhammavipassana (a forum with a > lot of info, worth while for you). The last and more difficult > meaning: sankhaara nimitta, nimitta of the five khandhas, all > conditioned realities. > N: Different meanings of nimitta in different contexts. Nimitta as > object of jhaana such as a kasina is one thing. > > whole and the details. We take what is seen for persons or things. > Another meaning of nimitta. > > Then there is sa"nkhara nimitta, nimitta of the khandhas. Nimitta of > ruupa, of feeling etc. > > N: I shall now requote from my 'Alone with Dhamma' (Ch on the present > moment): > > translated by Ven. Bodhi) that a bhikkhu asked the Buddha whether > there is one thing through the abandoning of which ignorance is > abandoned and true knowledge arises. > We read that the Buddha answered: Ignorance, bhikkhu, is that one > thing through the abandoning of which ignorance is abandoned by a > bhikkhu and true knowledge arises. > > Ven. Bodhi states in a note to this passage: Though it may sound > redundant to say that ignorance must be abandoned in order to abandon > ignorance, this statement underscores the fact that ignorance is the > most fundamental cause of bondage, which must be eliminated to > eliminate all the other bonds. > > We read further on: > > Here, bhikkhu, a bhikkhu has heard, Nothing is worth adhering to. > When a bhikkhu has heard, Nothing is worth adhering to, he directly > knows everything. Having directly known everything, he fully > understands everything. Having fully understood everything, he sees > all signs (nimitta) differently. He sees the eye differently, he sees > forms differently...whatever feeling arises with mind-contact as > condition... that too he sees differently... > > As to the term adhere, this pertains to clinging with wrong view. > The Commentary explains the words, he sees all signs differently > (sabbanimittni aato passati) as follows: He sees all the signs > of formations (sakhranimittni) in a way different from that of > people who have not fully understood the adherences. For such people > see all signs as self, but one who has fully understood the > adherences sees them as non-self, not as self. Thus in this sutta the > characteristic of non-self is discussed. > > In this Commentary the word sa"nkhra-nimitta, the nimittas, signs > or mental images, of conditioned dhammas, is used. When we were > returning from the Bodhitree walking up the long stairways, a friend > asked Acharn Sujin about this term. Nimitta has different meanings in > different contexts. The nimitta or mental image in samatha refers to > the meditation subject of samatha. We also read in some texts that > one should not be taken in by the outward appearance of things > (nimitta) and the details. However, the term sa"nkhranimitta has a > different meaning as I shall explain further on. > Acharn Sujin emphasized that whatever we read in the texts about > nimitta should be applied to our life now. What we read is not > theory she often explains. > > We read in the Mahvedallasutta (Middle Length Sayings, no 43), > about freedom of mind that is signless, and we read that there are > two conditions for attaining this: non-attention (amansikra) to > all signs and attention to the signless element. The Commentary > states that the signs, nimittas, are the objects such as visible > object, etc. and that the signless is nibbna. The signless > liberation of mind is explained in a way that clearly connects it > with the fruition of arahantship: lust, hatred and delusion are > declared to be "sign-makers" (nimittakarana), which the arahant has > totally abandoned. > When we read about object (rammaa) as a sign, we should remember > that this is not theory. An object is what citta experiences at this > moment. When the rpa that is the eyebase has not fallen away yet and > colour or visible object impinges on it, there are conditions for the > arising of seeing. If there were no citta which sees visible object > could not appear. > > When we asked Acharn Sujin whether the impression or sign (nimitta) > of a dhamma is a concept or a reality she answered: These are only > words. If we use the word concept there is something that is > experienced by thinking. We should not just know words, but > understand the reality that appears right now. There is not merely > one moment of experiencing visible object, but many moments arising > and falling away. When right understanding arises we do not have to > use any term. > She repeated that there is the impression of visible object right > now. She said: It is this moment. Visible object impinges on the > eyesense and after it has fallen away, what is left is the impression > or sign, nimitta of visible object. > It seems that visible object lasts for a while, but in reality it > arises and falls away. Acharn Sujin used the simile of a torch that > is swung around. In this way, we have the impression of a whole, of a > circle of light. > We know that seeing arises at this moment, but we cannot pinpoint the > citta which sees, it arises and falls away very rapidly and another > moment of seeing arises. We only experience the sign of seeing. > The notion of nimitta can remind us that not just one moment of > seeing appears, but many moments that are arising and falling away. > Also visible object is not as solid as we would think, there are many > moments arising and falling away which leave the sign or impression > of visible object. > Visible object that was experienced by cittas of a sense-door process > has fallen away; sense-door processes and mind-door processes of > cittas alternate very rapidly. Visible object impinges again and > again and seeing arises again and again. When their characteristics > appear we cannot count the different units of rpa or the cittas that > see, they arise and fall away; the impression of what is seen and of > the seeing appears. > Acharn Sujin said: No matter whether we call it nimitta or not, it > is appearing now. Whatever appears is the sign or nimitta of the > dhamma that arises and falls away. > We cling to what appears for a very short moment, but is does not > remain. It is the same with sa, there is not one moment of sa > that marks and remembers, but countless moments, arising and falling > away. > Thus, we can speak of the nimitta of each of the five khandhas: of > rpa, of feeling, of sa, of sankhrakkhandha, of consciousness. > There are nimittas of all conditioned dhammas that appear at this > moment, arising and falling away extremely rapidly. > Seeing arising at this moment sees visible object. We notice visible > object and while we notice it, we have a vivid impression of it, but > it has just fallen away. Seeing falls away but extremely shortly > after it has fallen away another moment of seeing arises that > experiences visible object. It arises again and again and in between > one notices that there is seeing, or, if there are the right > conditions a citta with sati can arise that is mindful of its > characteristic. However, mindfulness of seeing arises after seeing > has fallen away, not at the same time as seeing. > > (end quote) > Nina. > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- Met liefdevolle vriendelijkheid en respect. With lovingkindness and respect. Norbert Jakaoemo #123991 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:15 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Dhs nilovg Dear pt, Op 29-apr-2012, om 13:38 heeft ptaus1 het volgende geschreven: > I was wondering what's the best way to translate "dhamma" into > English when referring to cittas and cetasikas? Or at least, what's > your preferred translation? ----- N: It depends on the context, the word dhamma has many meanings. When speaking about citta, cetasika and ruupa I think: realities. Nina. #123992 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:23 am Subject: Re: [dsg] spd 7 (know your defilements, and that you often want them) nilovg Dear Phil, thank you. Op 29-apr-2012, om 3:41 heeft philip het volgende geschreven: > If we really want to eradicate > defilements we should know that all kinds of kusala should be > developed. It is not right to just perform daana, generosity, and > pay no attention to the defilements which still arise. It is > essential to know one's defilements." -------- N: After seeing or hearing there are usually defilements arising, such as subtle clinging we do not notice. For example, hardness may appear, and there may be conditions for mindfulness of this as a reality, but there may also be attachment to hardness as belonging to me. Pa~n~naa may gradually come to know this, and then one will see that it is urgent to develop the way leading to the eradication of the wrong view of self. THis was a reminder I recently heard on a recording. Nina. #123993 From: Alex Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:26 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to develop understanding?? norbert_jaka... Hi Dieter, Ken, Jon and Nina, >D: one way is that you read the suttas , where nimita (sign) is mentioned NJ: Thank you Dieter, I'll already start reading some of them.. >KH: As you have already realised, studying the Dhamma is just like studying any other difficult topic. You have to do a lot of it, and the way you do it will depend on your own inclinations. NJ: Yes, i realised it already and i'm just digest what i can.. Nina sended me also somethings to read and together with the useful posts i'll be bussy enough because i'm also not such a reader.. >J: What is the context in which you have come across the term 'nimitta' (that would help make it easier to explain)? NJ: I heard it on the audio 2007, i believe you posted, and i didn't know nimitta had more than one meaning. Now i will listen to the audio again and find out in what context it is used.. As far as i understand now, is that nimitta can be used in 3 contexts and please correct me if i'm wrong: 1. As an mental object/image for developing jhana's, a kasina. 2. a mental image of objects outwards, like visible or tangible objects 3. and a mental image of objects inwards, the sankhara nimitta.. And in this case i see mental image as a sign that is made by sanna.. Does it makes sens?? Looking forward to all ur feedbacks.. Met liefdevolle vriendelijkheid en respect. With lovingkindness and respect. Norbert Jakaoemo 2012/4/29 jonoabb > ** > > > Hi Norbert > > Appreciating your questions. > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Alex wrote: > > > > NJ: Is there really no simple way to explain nimita for a person with > > totaly no conditions of understanding (probably like me)? > > =============== > > J: What is the context in which you have come across the term 'nimitta' > (that would help make it easier to explain)? > > Jon > > > -- #123994 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] The Most Beautiful Bride nilovg Dear Yawares, I enjoyed this story very much. Thank you and anumodana, Nina. Op 29-apr-2012, om 15:34 heeft Yawares Sastri het volgende geschreven: > I proudly present the most impressive, almost > eternal love story > of princess Yasodhara and prince Siddhattha #123995 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 12:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to develop understanding?? nilovg Dear Norbert, Op 29-apr-2012, om 16:26 heeft Alex het volgende geschreven: > > 1. As an mental object/image for developing jhana's, a kasina. > 2. a mental image of objects outwards, like visible or tangible > objects > 3. and a mental image of objects inwards, the sankhara nimitta.. ------ Nina: sankhaara nimitta, nimitta of all conditioned realities, I would not define it as referring to objects inwards. Nimitta of seeing, of visible object, etc. ----- > Norbert: And in this case i see mental image as a sign that is made > by sanna.. ----- Nina: Sa~n~naa accompanies each citta. It remembers and marks the object. I would not say that sa~n~naa makes the nimitta. All conditioned realities have a nimitta, only nibbaana is without nimitta. ------- Nina. #123996 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 1:36 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... moellerdieter Hi Howard and Rob E, I wonder whether we manage at least some kind of consensus understanding about 'fact - anatta -samsara ' ;-) , please don't mind possible repetition .. you wrote: Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. D; yes, the sway of I delusion H: Such mentality is conditioned, changeable, and anatta. ****************************** D: such mentality is conditioned ,not anatta but when the conditions no longer apply (i.e. they are changeable ) , the sway is gone HCW: It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta.----------------------------------------------- D: nay ...Samsara means our wandering (kamma) in these lasting rounds of births and deaths, conditioned by ignorance/delusion, doesn't it? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Well, yes, but that means it is a compound of many conditioned phenomena, largely involving ignorance and the resultant craving and aversion, and all anatta. ******************************** D: this compound of phenomena conditioned by avijja/moha & co. is what produces identification/ attachment. When the last straw/fetter of the Self delusion (mana) is abolished , at entrance of Arahantship , anatta is realized , the round of birth and death ends , samsara is not applying anymore. So samsara can not be anatta.. D: 'anatta itself' ? you call that a pleonasm, don't you? the anatta realization happens when the mind is purified from the I delusion . Only then it can become a fact (the reasons I tried to explain above) ... Robert: I don't agree with you on this. Anatta is still a fact before enlightenment. Yes, we don't realize it directly yet, but there is still no self, even in delusion, even if we think there is. It's confusing to say that anatta is created by realization. That is not so. =============================== I agree with Robert on this matter. There is a difference between a fact and a known fact, and I think this is a distinction you are not making, Dieter. A fact is a truth, a true statement, or an actual state of affairs. Whatever is a fact is so whether we know it to be or not. D: see about 'anatta created' in the previous post I had to think about the term 'fact' (Wiki has a nice presentation about 'fact'and its relation to hypotheses, theory and law. ) The concept of fact can be different , can it not? "Misunderstanding of the difference between fact and theory sometimes leads to fallacy in rhetoric,[citation needed] in which one person will say his or her claim is factual whereas the opponent's claim is just theory. Such statements indicate confusion as to the meanings of both words, suggesting the speaker believes that fact means "truth," and theory means "speculation." ( I would replace speculation by strong belief in our case) I think in Buddhism we have the Buddha's word about truth to the Kalama in mind "When you know for yourselves" , which refers to 'facts' , doesn't it? The actual state of affair isn't anatta , you believe that the truth is anatta, don't you? H:I believe that nothing has self/own being/separate identity - that is, I believe it to be a fact that all phenomena are anatta. D: the system of D.O. shows the clinging, e.g. this greedily grap of pleasant phenomena conditioned by thirst which leads to becoming (...of this perpetual wandering within the cycle , samsara), doesn't it? D.O.is between soul and no soul , the system neither atta not anatta , it describes the origination of the whole mass of the suffering of the deluded/ignorant being, whose state of affairs isn't anatta . We cannot speak of samsara (the wandering in moment / life cycles,kamma) is anatta. with Metta Dieter #123997 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 1:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: How to develop understanding?? moellerdieter Hi Norbert, I think mnay of the members use Nyanatiloka's Buddhist Dictionary from time to time , it is like a manual for contemplation and further research and a well respected source for reference in discussion . Below about nimitta , with Metta Dieter see http://www.buddhanet.net/budsas/ebud/bud-dict/dic_idx.htm nimitta: mark, sign; image; target, object; cause, condition. These meanings are used in, and adapted to, many contexts of which only the doctrinal ones are mentioned here. 1. 'Mental (reflex-) image', obtained in meditation. In full clarity, it will appear in the mind by successful practice of certain concentration-exercises and will then appear as vividly as if seen by the eye. The object perceived at the very beginning of concentration is called the preparatory image (parikamma-nimitta). The still unsteady and unclear image, which arises when the mind has reached a weak degree of concentration, is called the acquired image (uggaha-nimitta). An entirely clear and immovable image arising at a higher degree of concentration is the counter-image (paṭibhāga-nimitta). As soon as this image arises, the stage of neighbourhood (or access) concentration (upacāra-samādhi) is reached. For further details, s. kasiṇa, samādhi. 2. 'Sign of (previous) kamma' (kamma-nimitta) and 'sign of (the future) destiny' (gati-nimitta); these arise as mental objects of the last karmic consciousness before death (maraṇāsanna kamma; s. kamma, III, 3). Usages (1) and (2) are commentarial (s. App.). In Sutta usage, the term occurs, e.g. as: 3. 'Outward appearance': of one who has sense-control it is said- that "he does not seize upon the general appearance' of an object (na nimittaggāhī; M. 38, D. 2; expl. Vis I, 54f; see sīla). 4. 'Object': the six objects, i.e. visual, etc. (rūpa-nimitta; S. XXII, 3). Also, when in explanation of animitta -cetovimutti, signless deliverance of mind (s. cetovimutti, vimokkha), it is said, 'sabbanimittānaṃ amanasikārā', it refers to the 6 sense-objects (Com. to M. 43 [Saḷāyatanavagga-aṭṭhakathā]), and has therefore to be rendered "by paying no attention to any object (or object-ideas)." - A pleasant or beautiful object (subha-nimitta, q.v.) is a condition to the arising of the hindrance of sense-desire; a 'repellent object' (paṭigha-nimitta) for the hindrance of ill-will; contemplation on the impurity of an object (asubha-nimitta; s. asubha) is an antidote to sense-desire. 5. In Pts.M. II, in a repetitive series of terms, nimitta appears together with uppādo (origin of existence), pavattaṃ (continuity of existence), and may then be rendered by 'condition of existence' (s. Path, 194f.). #123998 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy moellerdieter Dear Sarah, you wrote: '242: "For the making known of the characteristic of no-self is not the province of anyone else; it is the province of the Fully Enlightened Ones > only. ... > D: the authority is with the Buddha Dhamma , the canon, to explain anatta.. one may ask why then a commentary? .... S: The commentary elaborates on what is found in the suttas and Abhidhamma. It is BuddhaDhamma, just as the ancient commentaries on what the Buddha taught, such as the elaborations by Maha Kaccayana were said to be "the word of the Buddha". (see more in 'useful posts' under "Commentaries", "Abhidhamma-origins" etc for more detail - I'd rather leave it there). D: yes.. tried to be a bit witty ;-) .... >S: Thus the characteristic of no-self is unobvious...........but here it should be understood that he taught it by means of both impermanence > and pain.> .... > D: yes, that is important .. anicca and dukkha provide reasons for disenchantment as a prerequisite for detachment. ... S: What is inherently impermanent and unsatisfactory is clearly not in anyone's control as indicated in the Anattalakkhana Sutta. ... D: not in anyone's control , but the search in what is not submitted to anicca and dukkha is (i.e. old age,sickness and death, the quest of the Prince) >S: "But it is owing to not keeping in mind, owing to non-penetration of what and owing to concealment by what that these characteristics do not appear? > Firstly the characteristic of impermanence does not appear owing to not keeping in mind, not penetrating the rise and fall owing to its being > concealed by continuity (santati). ... > D:concealed by the stream of rising and falling dhammas ... S: Yes - always another citta arising, so we don't appreciate that each one falls away as soon as it has arisen, like the flim clips you mentioned. ... >S: "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)." > > [S: rather than being aware of postures, it is the idea of postures that conceals the truths about the elements as dukkha.. When there is > awareness, there's no idea of posture at all] > > D: why concealed by postures (only), the position in which you hold your body when standing or sitting ... ? > I don't think the idea is meant .. perhaps relation to meditation? (recalling that in meditation retreats one is told if pain is arising , preferably not to change the posture in order to see the nature of pain..) .... S: There is no 'posture' in reality. Whether one is told not change ones posture or not has nothing to do with the understanding of dhammas as dukkha. We think in terms of 'self', 'body' and 'posture' and it is such ignorance the hides the truth of the arising and falling away of dhammas now. What arises and falls away is inherently dukkha. D: no posture in the supermundane reality .. there 'posture' would not make any sense but I suppose we are talking about a different aspect of suffering. ("There are three kinds of suffering: (1) suffering as pain (dukkha-dukkhatā), (2) the suffering inherent in the formations (saṅkhāra-dukkhatā), (3) the suffering in change (vipariṇāma-dukkhatā)" (S. XLV, 165; D. 33)." ... >S: "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." > > [S: When there is an idea of `wholes' such as posture, chariot or self, there is no understanding of dhatus (elements) and no way to understand > anatta.] >D:>.. One may possibly say in the case of a person/ individuum it is the emergence of interacting mental and corporal phenomena/dhammas in a stream of dependent orgination . > ( posture isn't a whole as the only element is the body ). ... S: person, interatctions, postures and so on are just ideas, not realities, not dhammas. D: you mean like wheels , axes, etc are not the chariot.. (?) ... <....> >>S: "Herein, the five aggregates (pa~ncakkhandha) are impermanent. Why?Because they rise and fall and change, or be cause of their absence after > having been. Rise and fall and change are the characteristic of impermanence, or mode of alteration (aakaaravikaara) called absence after > having been. .... > D: there is no doubt that the khandas are impermanent , obvious at the moment of death , not to talk about the moments of nibbana experience . > I have difficulties to see the impermanence related to the moment as mentioned above .... S: Even now, the khandhas are impermanent. Citta now is different from citta a moment ago. The same applies to all the other dhammas. Feeling now is different from feeling a moment ago. One moment pleasant, the next moment unpleasant or neutral, on and on. D: its 'content , the dhammas are different , but the function being 'conscious' isn't, is it? ... >S: "But those same five aggregates are painful because of the words `what is impermanent is painful' (S iv 1). Why? Because of continual oppression. > The mode of being continually oppressed is the characteristic of pain. > "But the same five aggregates are no-self because of the words `what is painful is no-self' (S iv 1). Why? Because there is no exercising power > over them. The mode of insusceptibility to having power exercised over them is the characteristic of no-self."> > [S: `no exercising power over them', neither the khandhas or any ideas about them, such as postures, are at one's command]. ... > D: well , posturers are at one's command , aren't they? ... S: It's just an illusion that in reality there are postures and that those postures are subject to the command of a Self. In truth, there are just elements, just dhammas, which arise by conditions and fall away by conditions without any Self being able to exercise any power over them. D: think about 'The Self Doer' sutta , Sarah .. postures belong to the mundane reality S:Without an understanding of present dhammas as anatta, there will always be the idea of people, things and postures subject to one's command and wishes. The ti-lakkhana of dhammas can only be known by understanding dhammas deeper and deeper as they really are - mere namas and rupas with distinct characteristics D: we have no disagreement about the necessity to penetrate,to understand the true nature of present dhammas , but we may not neglect that this understanding is supposed to be a mean leading towards disentchantment, dispassion and detachment . with Metta Dieter #123999 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Apr 30, 2012 2:43 am Subject: Re: the raft simile (was Re: [dsg] Re: The story of Bodhirajakumara and His... upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter - In a message dated 4/29/2012 11:37:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard and Rob E, I wonder whether we manage at least some kind of consensus understanding about 'fact - anatta -samsara ' ;-) , please don't mind possible repetition .. you wrote: Yes, I think it is a language problem. Samsara really comes down to mindstates-under-the-sway-of- delusion. D; yes, the sway of I delusion H: Such mentality is conditioned, changeable, and anatta. ****************************** D: such mentality is conditioned ,not anatta but when the conditions no longer apply (i.e. they are changeable ) , the sway is gone --------------------------------------------- HCW: You are not using standard language, Dieter. EVERYTHING is anatta! To be anatta is independent of wisdom and of delusion. All phenomena are anatta, period. When there is delusion, sabbe dhamma anatta, and when there is no delusion, sabba dhamma anatta. The primary delusion, in fact, is imagining dhammas to be atta when, in fact, they are anatta. -------------------------------------------- HCW: It is also true, of course, that samsara is anatta.----------------------------------------------- D: nay ...Samsara means our wandering (kamma) in these lasting rounds of births and deaths, conditioned by ignorance/delusion, doesn't it? ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Well, yes, but that means it is a compound of many conditioned phenomena, largely involving ignorance and the resultant craving and aversion, and all anatta. ******************************** D: this compound of phenomena conditioned by avijja/moha & co. is what produces identification/ attachment. When the last straw/fetter of the Self delusion (mana) is abolished , at entrance of Arahantship , anatta is realized , the round of birth and death ends , samsara is not applying anymore. So samsara can not be anatta.. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: If samsara were not anatta, it would be atta, and there would be no escape from samsara! ---------------------------------------------- D: 'anatta itself' ? you call that a pleonasm, don't you? the anatta realization happens when the mind is purified from the I delusion . Only then it can become a fact (the reasons I tried to explain above) ... Robert: I don't agree with you on this. Anatta is still a fact before enlightenment. Yes, we don't realize it directly yet, but there is still no self, even in delusion, even if we think there is. It's confusing to say that anatta is created by realization. That is not so. =============================== I agree with Robert on this matter. There is a difference between a fact and a known fact, and I think this is a distinction you are not making, Dieter. A fact is a truth, a true statement, or an actual state of affairs. Whatever is a fact is so whether we know it to be or not. D: see about 'anatta created' in the previous post -------------------------------------------------- HCW: Anatta, the fundamental property of all dhammas, is never created. Now, as a matter of fact, there is no 'thing' called "anatta". When it is said that sabba dhamma anatta, what is meant is that nothing has or is self. The sentence 'Sabbe dhamma anatta' is an assertion of an absence. ------------------------------------------------- I had to think about the term 'fact' (Wiki has a nice presentation about 'fact'and its relation to hypotheses, theory and law. ) The concept of fact can be different , can it not? "Misunderstanding of the difference between fact and theory sometimes leads to fallacy in rhetoric,[citation needed] in which one person will say his or her claim is factual whereas the opponent's claim is just theory. Such statements indicate confusion as to the meanings of both words, suggesting the speaker believes that fact means "truth," and theory means "speculation." ( I would replace speculation by strong belief in our case) I think in Buddhism we have the Buddha's word about truth to the Kalama in mind "When you know for yourselves" , which refers to 'facts' , doesn't it? --------------------------------------------- HCW: When you know for yourself that something is so, you know that it is a fact. If it is so, but you don't know that, it still is so, and it still is a fact. ---------------------------------------------- The actual state of affair isn't anatta , you believe that the truth is anatta, don't you? -------------------------------------------- HCW: What in the world is "the truth"? Is there a thing called "the truth"? Are there not simply true assertions? --------------------------------------------- H:I believe that nothing has self/own being/separate identity - that is, I believe it to be a fact that all phenomena are anatta. D: the system of D.O. shows the clinging, e.g. this greedily grap of pleasant phenomena conditioned by thirst which leads to becoming (...of this perpetual wandering within the cycle , samsara), doesn't it? --------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, and I believe it to be a fact, though I don't KNOW it to be. -------------------------------------------- D.O.is between soul and no soul , the system neither atta not anatta , it describes the origination of the whole mass of the suffering of the deluded/ignorant being, whose state of affairs isn't anatta . ----------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't understand that at all. Any time someone says that anything isn't anatta, I believe they are quite mistaken. -------------------------------------------------- We cannot speak of samsara (the wandering in moment / life cycles,kamma) is anatta. ------------------------------------------------- HCW: If by 'samsara', one means a (i.e., any) deluded mind state, yes, it is anatta. If, OTOH, one means by it a whole collection of such states, i.e., multiple lifetimes of states of delusion, craving, and attachment, then it is no more atta than any of the phenomena of which it is comprised. If, to go one step further, if by 'samsara' one means such a collection but thought of as an individual thing, in fact there is no such thing, it being merely deluded concept. According to the Dhamma as I understand it, the choice for anything whether a) an individual phenomenon or b) a collection of such is twofold: 1) It is merely imagined (i.e., concept-only), or it exists but is anatta. There is NOTHING that is or has atta! ---------------------------------------------------- with Metta Dieter =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous)