#124600 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:23 am Subject: [dsg] Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E > > Sila is kamma during speech, acts and mind. They are taught as foundation because sila restraints ones nama and rupa. When one is restraint, one mind is easily concentrated. But would you agree that sila of speech and acts has to be accompanied by kusala citta, or arise from kusala citta? Is it possible to restrain mind and action correctly without the right volition or intention? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124601 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 1:30 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG moellerdieter Dear Sarah , Nina , all, you wrote: 'may I suggest : ' greed ' only , or to add ' as a condition for attachment'?' .... S: Good to discuss. Now, is there attachment, however subtle, to what is seen, to what is heard? Lobha includes all degrees from the most subtle of attachments to the grossest kinds of greed and grasping. Perhaps 'clinging' also? Others may add their ideas. The important thing is to understand the lobha arising now! D: I thought it was simple error in the glossary .. well, seemingly not .. Nyant.Dict.: lobha: 'greed', is one of the 3 unwholesome roots (mūla, q.v.) and a synonym of rāga (q.v.) and taṇhā (q.v.). upādāna: 'clinging', according to Vis.M. XVII, is an intensified degree of craving (taṇhā, q.v.). The 4 kinds of clinging are: sensuous clinging (kāmupādāna), clinging to views (diṭṭhupādāna), clinging to mere rules and ritual (sīlabbatupādāna), clinging to the personaljty-belief (atta-vādupādāna). (1) "What now is the sensuous clinging? Whatever with regard to sensuous objects there exists of sensuous lust, sensuous desire, sensuous attachment, sensuous passion, sensuous deludedness, sensuous fetters: this is called sensuous clinging. (2) ''What is the clinging to views? 'Alms and offerings are useless; there is no fruit and result for good and bad deeds: all such view and wrong conceptions are called the clinging to views. (3) "What is the clinging to mere rules and ritual? The holding firmly to the view that through mere rules and ritual one may reach purification: this is called the clinging to mere rules and ritual. (4) "What is the clinging to the personality-belief? The 20 kinds of ego-views with regard to the groups of existence (s. sakkāya-diṭṭhi): these are called the clinging to the personality-belief" (Dhs. 1214-17). This traditional fourfold division of clinging is not quite satisfactory. Besides kamupādāna we should expect either rūpupādāna and arūpupādāna, or simply bhavupādāna. Though the Anāgāmī is entirely free from the traditional 4 kinds of upādāna, he is not freed from rebirth, as he still possesses bhavupādāna. The Com. to Vis.M. XVII, in trying to get out of this dilemma, explains kāmupādāna as including here all the remaining kinds of clinging. "Clinging' is the common rendering for u., though 'grasping' would come closer to the literal meaning of it, which is 'uptake'; s. Three Cardinal Discourses (WHEEL 17), p.19. lobha: 'greed', is one of the 3 unwholesome roots (mūla, q.v.) and a synonym of rāga (q.v.) and taṇhā (q.v.). (The most frequent synonyms of taṇhā are rāga (q.v.) and lobha (s. mūla). ) unquote I wonder why the Venerable did not stumble upon"upādāna: 'clinging', according to Vis.M. XVII, is an intensified degree of craving (taṇhā, q.v.)" which may indicate that lobha and upadana are synonyms which they are not . According to the Law of Dependent Orgination tanha conditions upadana , so I wonder how VisM can speak of 'intensified degree of craving ' (canonical base ? ). I think it could be a good idea , to go briefly through the glossary in order to get a common understanding of the terms , which obviously can be a source of quite a lot of misunderstandings with Metta Dieter P.S: B.T.W. I think whether or not the Abhidhamma or part of it are a later adding to the Vinaya and Sutta Pitaka is quite peripheral as far as no contradictions are involved ( of which Maha Padesa deals with). The three baskets are the accepted fundament of Theravada Buddhism with Metta Dieter #124602 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 2:50 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > Bad kammavipaka and lack of good vipaka can hinder one's progress in this way: If one is born in sub-human plane. Or even if one is born in good realm, there is no Dhamma teaching available. If one is born as a human, one is "mentally deranged". Or if not mentally deranged, one is born in extreme circumstances (poor starving kid in Africa) where one can't hear the dhamma. > > None of this applies to us. So in this case we have already good kammavipaka in this regard. I believe that we must "use it" when there is a chance. ... > Because mental states can alter so quickly, and are not static, precisely because of that Awakening can occur quickly. I don't agree with that logic. Each moment of individual consciousness is forcibly forged by prior tendencies. We don't start with a blank slate. One is enlightened when the conditions are right and development has reached a certain point, not when one has a sudden revelation out of nowhere through a momentary trick of the mind. > ...When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html > > > Wrong views and bad behavior is not caused by what was done in the past. It is present fault. That's not what I get out of the passage. One should not "fall back on" the causes created by the past, meaning not to use the past as an excuse for complacency. That doesn't mean that the mind is suddenly going to jump into enlightenment, it means that one should focus on current practice, not past conditions, in order to make progress. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124603 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert E (and Jon), > > ---- > <. . .> > RE: [Both for me and the spell checker it may take a while.] > ---- > > KH: I would like to say my money was on you, Rob. :-) That feels so warm and fuzzy! :-) > Conventionally speaking of course my money is on you. But at a Dhamma forum we must concede that both a sentient being and a spell checker are concepts, and ultimately non-existent. In ultimate truth and reality neither will ever attain anything. [I knew it wouldn't last.] Well that may be all well and good, but a spell checker has no cittas! [I know, I know, neither do I, I'm just a bloody concept. Oh hell...] Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124604 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:24 am Subject: Re: [dsg] ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, There are two sides in every schism. Of course a certain school will in some way justify itself and compose explanations as to why it is the best, the most original, the quickest, most wise, etc. To use Theravada commentaries (composed much later) to justify their beliefs, is like using the Bible to justify the truth of Christianity... *Independent* research of different schools, history, linguistics, etc, have shown certain things. With metta, Alex #124605 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:30 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: yes, no more interest in the usual sense objects we're usually so attached to. Like now, do we want to see? to hear? I would say so... Although a little absorption sounds kind of tempting too... > > Well I appreciate the conversation. It's a lot to understand, but little pieces get clearer it seems, gradually. > .... > S: Same for us all..... :-) Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #124606 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:33 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, You have said in these two paragraphs that: >1)Each moment of individual consciousness is forcibly forged by >prior tendencies. We don't start with a blank slate. > >2)One should not "fall back on" the causes created by the past, >meaning not to use the past as an excuse for complacency. That >doesn't >mean that the mind is suddenly going to jump into >enlightenment, it >means that one should focus on current practice, >not past conditions, >in order to make progress. >========================= If current moment is "forcibly forged by prior moment" then doesn't this say that what is intended now (a conscious moment), is forcibly forged by prior moment? Isn't this similar with what the AN 3.61: ...When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.061.than.html With metta, Alex #124607 From: Ken O Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E Yes right action and speech must be arise by kusala cittas as this is a rule. Right volition must arise with kusala citta. Right intention if we are talking about vittaka, will also arise with kusala citta except for 2nd jhanas onwards where vittaka is not present. Restraint can be by five ways, rules of the community, mindfulness, panna, patience and energy. It is not necessary for restraint to arise with panna. But when panna arise, restraint is also there :-). cheers KC #124608 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:38 am Subject: Re: unexperienced experience epsteinrob Hi Sarah, and Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > ...I think, and probably Rob E will agree with me at this point, that the more understanding there is of the Abhidhamma, especially as it applies to daily life, to ife at this moment, the more interested one becomes in the commentaries and the less doubt one has about their value. I still have questions and problems with some of the basic tenets of Abhidhamma, but I almost always find the texts as well as the commentaries interesting and valuable. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - #124609 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:45 am Subject: Re: unexperienced experience truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Sarah, >S: > ...I think, and probably Rob E will agree with me at this >point, >that the more understanding there is of the Abhidhamma, >especially as >it applies to daily life, to ife at this moment, the >more interested >one becomes in the commentaries and the less doubt >one has about >their value. >====================================== >RE: I still have questions and problems with some of the basic >tenets >of Abhidhamma, but I almost always find the texts as well as >the >commentaries interesting and valuable. >==================================================== I don't reject everything that is said in Abhidhamma and commentaries. But this doesn't mean that I accept everything unquestionably. The further something is from real life experience, the more one can question it. With best wishes, Alex #124610 From: Ken O Date: Thu May 31, 2012 3:58 am Subject: Snippets of Dhamma - Is thinking Wrong? ashkenn2k Dear all Thinking is important because it is the basis for one to investigate the dhamma at the conventional level. Unless one can see nama and rupa direclty which could only happpen at purification of view level, then one can say we can stop conventional thinking. Buddha never discrouage one from investigating dhamma. Without conventional thinking accompanied by panna, one cannot investigate the characteristics of dhamma at conventional level. Concepts are the result of conventionnal thinking, so when one practising breathing or 32 parts, they are all thinking. So do not stop yourself from thinking about dhamma or worry unnecessay about thinking, embrace them to understand dhamma better, but dont think too much as it leads to restlessness. :-). cheers KC #124611 From: Ken O Date: Thu May 31, 2012 4:02 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: unexperienced experience ashkenn2k Dear Rob E You like to share with me on your questions on Abhidhamma I hope I could help to explain cheers KC > #124612 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:00 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > ...At moments of insight or satipatthana, panna discerns a dhamma. When it is a moment of samatha or pariyatti (pre-satipatthana), it is concept as object. For example, now we're reflecting on the Dhamma. With the kusala cittas during such reflection, there is calm and the concepts of dhammas are the objects. Is there panna in that situation, with kusala citta arising with samatha or pariyatti? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124613 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:05 pm Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > You have said in these two paragraphs that: > > >1)Each moment of individual consciousness is forcibly forged by >prior tendencies. We don't start with a blank slate. > > > >2)One should not "fall back on" the causes created by the past, >meaning not to use the past as an excuse for complacency. That >doesn't >mean that the mind is suddenly going to jump into >enlightenment, it >means that one should focus on current practice, >not past conditions, >in order to make progress. > >========================= > > If current moment is "forcibly forged by prior moment" then doesn't this say that what is intended now (a conscious moment), is forcibly forged by prior moment? Isn't this similar with what the AN 3.61: > > ...When one falls back on what was done in the past as being essential, monks, there is no desire, no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. Well the Buddha also said in the sutta recently quoted by Nina that consciousness does not arise except in relation to a physical or mental object. So there is no independent place for a volition or realization to come from that is not based on some combination of present object + past accumulations. The past no longer exists, so it is not correct to look backwards, but when understanding how the moment is shaped, one looks to current accumulations and present conditions, which are the only sources of the present mental or physical response. There's no other place for consciousness to arise from, no independent entity that can have a free-floating volition, at least according to the Buddha. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124614 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:13 pm Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >Well the Buddha also said in the sutta recently quoted by Nina that >consciousness does not arise except in relation to a physical or >mental object. >================\ "Consciousness that arises in dependence on the intellect & ideas is classified simply as intellect-consciousness." This part of mn38? Compare: >RE: So there is no independent place for a volition or realization >to come from that is not based on some combination of present object >+ past accumulations. and >RE:The past no longer exists, so it is not correct to look backwards, >============================= It is good that we agree that present moment counts, while the past no longer is. With metta, Alex #124615 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 12:38 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Restraint can be by five ways, rules of the community, mindfulness, panna, patience and energy. It is not necessary for restraint to arise with panna. But when panna arise, restraint is also there :-). BTW, nice to see you back here. That is interesting - so it seems that vinaya, "rules of the community," can stand in for sati and panna if they are not present, and give the monk the restraint that is needed, so that more akusala will not arise...? That would explain some of the great help that is given by the Sangha and the Vinaya. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124616 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 1:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: unexperienced experience epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E > > You like to share with me on your questions on Abhidhamma > > I hope I could help to explain Thanks, Ken! Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #124617 From: "Robert E" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 1:17 pm Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > >Well the Buddha also said in the sutta recently quoted by Nina that >consciousness does not arise except in relation to a physical or >mental object. > >================\ > "Consciousness that arises in dependence on the intellect & ideas is classified simply as intellect-consciousness." This part of mn38? I don't remember, but that is in line with what I was referring to. > Compare: > > >RE: So there is no independent place for a volition or realization >to come from that is not based on some combination of present object >+ past accumulations. > > and > > >RE:The past no longer exists, so it is not correct to look backwards, > >============================= > > It is good that we agree that present moment counts, while the past no longer is. We agree on that, except that you seem to ignore accumulations and tendencies, which are passed on over and over again, and to ignore their influence as conditions is a serious error. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124618 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu May 31, 2012 6:38 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 30-mei-2012, om 16:17 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > I am wondering, when nibbana is the object of citta, would the > consciousness still be considered a form of "mental consciousness," > or does this have its own category that is different? I realize the > cittas have a different name, but just wanted to clarify this point > for myself. ------ N: The sutta translates: if consciousness arises because of mind and mental objects, it is known as mental consciousness. The Pali: mana~nca pa.ticca dhamme ca upajjati vi~n~naana.m, manovi~n~naa.nant' eva sa"nkha.m gacchati (to be called)... Nibbaana is a dhamma that is known by lokuttara citta. Even lokuttara citta is impermanent, dukkha, anatta. It should not be taken for self. It arises because of conditions. When the conditions are right it cannot be prevented from arising. The development of understanding for a long, long time, for aeons, can condition the arising of lokuttara citta. ------ Nina. #124619 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 6:41 pm Subject: Re: the path sarahprocter... Dear Alex (& Rob E), --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, A T wrote: > >RE: The Buddha also explains such things due to accumulations in past lives, not by a stand-alone sudden awakening. > >============================== > > Where in the suttas, especially early ones, does Buddha state this? There is NO such teaching in main suttas (4.5 Nikayas). .... S: SN 56:21 Ko.tigaama "On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling among the Vajjians at Ko.tigaama. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus: 'Bhikkhus, it is because of not understanding and not penetrating the Four Noble Truths that you and I have roamed and wandered through this long course of sa.msaara." " 'Because of not seeing as they are The Four Noble Truths, We have wandered through the long course In the various kinds of births. " 'Now these truths have been seen; The conduit to existence is severed; Cut off is the root of suffering: Now there is no more renewed existence.' " As a bodhisatta the Buddha had to wander through endless lifetimes, even after hearing the Dhamma, in order to develop all the perfections to become fully enlightened. The same applied to all his disciples. The "sudden awakening" without endless lifetimes in samsara developing understanding is a myth. Metta Sarah ==== #124620 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 6:51 pm Subject: Re: what demarcates citta? sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > >S: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at all. >This >is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the next >one, like >in the case of falling dominoes. > >============================== > > I wonder, based on what criteria do we demarcate one citta from another citta? Why can't there be the same citta (as "knowing", or "cognizing") that sees this, then sees that, and only the objects of citta change? .... As the Buddha tells us, no simile can account for the speed of a citta arising and falling away. We don't demarcate them, but each citta which arises and falls away is "demarcated" by its nature of arising, existing and falling away immediately. In the time it takes for a rupa, such as visible object to fall away, 17 cittas including seeing consciousness have arisen and fallen away. Therefore, it's impossible that one citta of seeing could experience more than one object. The same applies to hearing - it may seem that the hearing citta experiences different sounds, but this is because there's no understanding now of hearing, let alone its impermanence. ..... > > Even if we say that different citta take different objects, any and all citta is still the same in one intrinsic characteristic of "knowing" or "cognizing". > > ================================================================= > "Consciousness, though divided into eighty-nine types, is regarded as one entity because all cittas have the same intrinsic nature-the cognizing of an object." - CMA book pg 264 > ======================================================S: Each citta has the characteristic of knowing/cognizing its object, but even so, each citta is different with its particular nature. In the same way, each rupa has the characteristic of being the dhamma that cannot know anything. This doesn't mean that all rupas are "one entity". (Pls note that your quote is from 'The Guide' section, rather than from the text itself.) Metta Sarah ======= #124621 From: "sarah" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 7:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - rise and fall of cittas, vibhanga comy sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: Each citta is succeeded by another citta with no gaps at all. This is by proximity condition - each citta 'triggers' the next one, like in the case of falling dominoes. > > Is there someplace online or a topic in UP that I can read about the specifics about how one citta triggers the next one? .... S: In UP, see "Proximity condition" (anantara paccaya). Also see Nina's book on "Conditions" http://www.zolag.co.uk/ for more on the various conditions. Or again ch V111 in CMA or the on-line Abhidhammattha Sangaha transl by Narada. For example, it says (CMA transl, p 305): "In six ways mind is a condition for mind: Consciousness and mental factors [cittacetasikaa] that immediately cease are a condition for present consciousness and mental factors by way of proximity, continuity, absence and disappearance. Preceding javanas are a condition for subsequent javanas by way of repetition. Conascent consciousness and mental factors are a condition for one another by way of association." In the Guide section, under "proximity condition, contiguity condition", it says" "Formally defined, proximity condition is a condition where one mental state, the conditioning state, causes another mental state, the conditioned state, to arise immediately after it has ceased, so that no other mental state can intervene between them." [Proximity and contiguity conditions operate in the same way]. "These two conditions apply to the relationship between the citta and cetasikas ceasing at any given moment and the citta and cetasikas that arise in immediate succession. " .... >I assume there are some accumulated tendencies that cause the next citta to arise, and that it is related to attachments that cause citta to keep seeking an object, or something like that...? I would like to know more about this mechanism. ... S: Here the main condition at work is pakatu upanissaya paccaya (natural decisive condition). It is the widest condition and determines are accumulated tendencies from the past, such as all the attachments and perceptions, condition the present attachments and perceptions. In turn, the attachments now will condition more of the same in future. Again, more in UP under "Decisive support condition" and in Nina's book. In CMA, p 315, the text says briefly: "The natural decisive support is of many kinds: states of lust, etc., states of faith, etc., pleasure, pain, individuals, food, season, lodgings - (all such things) internal and external, as the case may be, are conditions for wholesome states, etc." In the Guide note, it says: "Natural decisive support (pakatuupanissaya) is a wide relation that includes as the conditioning states all past mental or material phenomena that become strongly efficacious for the arising, at a subsequent time, of the conditioned states, which are subsequent cittas and cetasikas. For example, prior lust may be a natural decisive support condition for the volitions of killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, etc., ; prior faith for the volitions of giving alms, undertaking precepts, and practicing meditation; the gaining of health for happiness and energy, the onset of sickness for sorrow and torpor, etc." ... > I am interested in how the next citta is caused to arise, and also how the tendencies and accumulations are transmitted to the next citta, even after the previous citta has just fallen away. .... S: see above. By the force of the condition, the previous citta triggers the next one to arise. Likewise, by pakatupanissaya paccaya, all the tendencies and accumulations are 'carried' by each citta and 'transmitted' to the next citta. This is why, even at a wholesome moment, the latent tendencies, the (unwholesome) anusayas are still there, lying 'dormant in the citta', until eradicated. ... > Thanks for the great information, you know an awful lot! :-) ... S: Not at all. Mostly I just repeat what I've heard and questioned myself many times:-) .... >If consciousness temporarily ceases is that not a gap? ... S: No - see above, there is no gap in mental states, so the conditioning forces remain intact. .... >Not sure how to understand that. As nibbana is object in nirodha samapatti, does nibbana cease to be object when all cittas have temporarily ceased? I'm a little confused about that as well. ... S: Nibbana is the object of the fruition cittas immediately afterwards, but not beforehand. At the moments of nirodha samapatti itself, there are no cittas arising, only rupas conditioned by kamma, nutriment and temperature, therefore, no object is experienced. Nibbana doesn't arise or fall away, but it depends on conditions (like other objects) as to whether it is experienced. Immediately prior to the nirodha samapatti, they were the highest arupa jhana cittas which arose. Htoo wrote the following before: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/41019 ***** >17. enter 4th arupa jhana or nevasanna-nasanna-ayatana arupa jhana. BBBBBB..BBBMPUAGNN_____________ApBBBBBBB 18. nirodha-samapatti is reached [_______]. N here means 'nevasanna- nasanna-ayatana jhana javana citta and it arises twice and then nothing arise there after. [_________] <-- this is attainment of nirodha-samapatti and it is called sa-upadisesa nibbana. 19. __________ApBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB Ap here is Anagami phala javana citta or Arahatta phala javana citta. And after arising once there follow many bhavanga cittas. 20. contemplate on what has experienced. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBB..BBBMJJJJJJJTTBBBBBB [paccavakkhana javana vithi vara]< ***** [More in UP under "nirodha samapatti"] Metta Sarah ====== #124622 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 10:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat ptaus1 Hi Sarah, Thanks for the long post, it explains some of the things I've been wondering about. > S: Below you ask about highly developed samatha and absorption. The object, breath, is still a concept or rather a nimitta of the concept. The clear comprehension of kusala and akusala and the suppression of sense objects (through understanding the danger of attachment to them when it arises) has been developed to such a degree that the citta with calm and understanding is very refined indeed. No need for a 'story'. < Here I wonder how can there be clear comprehension of a/kusala if the object of cittas is a concept (of breath)? I mean, if there's no panna of insight kind, how can then the concept of breath be known as a/kusala, since a/kusala are characteristics of a dhamma, not concept, if I'm not mistaken? Best wishes pt #124623 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu May 31, 2012 10:47 pm Subject: Re: degree of kusala and akusala ptaus1 Hi Sarah, Thanks for the correction. Best wishes pt > S: The passages were from the Dhammasangani. Dan started quoting the very similar "right and wrong" descriptions with the following. (Same applies in Dhsg for concentration and other factors that can be kusala or akusala): > ***** > The only difference is the word "right" in the second paragraph > contrasting with the "wrong" of the first. It's fine and dandy to > toss around lists of the five this's and the four that's, but it is > critical to be able to discern clearly when they are "right" > or "wrong" as they arise. This hinges on development of discernment > and understanding. Is this done via ritual? I don't think so.< #124624 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 12:11 am Subject: good site for sutta with pali rjkjp1 Love this site. Mouse over pali words for definition http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/maha/sn56-011.html #124625 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 12:28 am Subject: Re: [dsg] good site for sutta with pali nilovg Dear Rob K, very useful, thank you. Nina. Op 31-mei-2012, om 16:11 heeft rjkjp1 het volgende geschreven: > Love this site. Mouse over pali words for definition > http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/maha/sn56-011.html > > #124626 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 12:32 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 30-mei-2012, om 17:30 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > I wonder why the Venerable did not stumble upon"upādāna: > 'clinging', according to Vis.M. XVII, is an intensified degree of > craving (taṇhā, q.v.)" > which may indicate that lobha and upadana are synonyms which they > are not . > According to the Law of Dependent Orgination tanha conditions > upadana , so I wonder how VisM can speak of 'intensified degree of > craving ' > (canonical base ? ). ------- N: tanhaa and upaadaana are lobha cetasika, but they are different aspects of it. I can add more text from the Vis. Ch XVII, 242: -------- Nina. #124627 From: Prasad Praturi Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 1:12 am Subject: RE: [dsg] good site for sutta with pali ppraturi Thanks..Very useful. sitePrasad To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: rjkjp1@... Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 14:11:12 +0000 Subject: [dsg] good site for sutta with pali Love this site. Mouse over pali words for definition http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/maha/sn56-011.html #124628 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 2:49 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG moellerdieter Dear Nina, All, thanks for your feedback. you wrote: N: tanhaa and upaadaana are lobha cetasika, but they are different aspects of it. I can add more text from the Vis. Ch XVII, 242: D: A beautiful simile we find in Genesis : Eve and the forbidden tree .. " And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise " ('Craving is the aspiring to an object that one has not yet reached like a thief's stretching out his hand in the dark') ... " she took of the fruit thereof " ( 'clinging is the grasping of an object that one has reached, like the thief's grasping his objective ') and did eat ...(in D.O. that should be bhava .. ) ------- We have stated now our proposition , i.e. the entree ' lobha - attachment or greed ' vs ' lobha- greed or greed as a condition for attachment', would be nice to learn about the opinion from other members, wouldn't it? with Metta Dieter #124629 From: Ken O Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 4:48 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: 2007 audio - 9. Sila as foundation? ashkenn2k Dear Rob E Yes Vinaya is ian mportant part of the development for monks. Some do not need it, while others need this for incalculating the habit of restraint. cheers KC #124630 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 4:50 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Dear Sarah, RobertE, all, The SN56:21 simply states that we have wondered long time in samsara because of not realizing 4NT. Considering how rare human birth (or higher) and meeting the Dhamma is. No wonder! If anything, good kamma is required in order to be born as human being, in relatively good conditions (a starving child in africa might not have the ability to hear and study the Dhamma), be born when and where Dhamma is available, not be too dull. None of this applies to us. So this part is done. What needs to be done is to realize the Dhamma. > S: SN 56:21 Ko.tigaama > > "On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling among the Vajjians at Ko.tigaama. There the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus thus: 'Bhikkhus, it is because of not understanding and not penetrating the Four Noble Truths that you and I have roamed and wandered through this long course of sa.msaara." >============ Right. To have the ability to hear the Dhamma is VERY rare. If you don't hear the Dhamma, chances are that you will not be able to consider it. >" 'Because of not seeing as they are >The Four Noble Truths, >We have wandered through the long course >In the various kinds of births. >===================== Right. Encountering the dhamma, being in good enough condition, etc, is rare. >" 'Now these truths have been seen; > The conduit to existence is >severed; > Cut off is the root of suffering: > Now there is no more >renewed existence.' " >=============================== And this can be seen in ONE life as many suttas say. There is NOTHING, NOTHING in this sutta to even remotely suggest that "once you hear the Dhamma, you need to practice for 100,000 MK to become an Arhat". Maybe if one doesn't understand the Dhamma, then it might take that long because on is going West when one is supposed to go EAST. With metta, Alex #124631 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 4:56 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >Alex: It is good that we agree that present moment counts, while the >past no longer is. > >RE:We agree on that, except that you seem to ignore accumulations >and >tendencies, which are passed on over and over again, and to >ignore >their influence as conditions is a serious error. >===================================== While past accumulations can certainly influence, they do not set in stone what happens now. One is dealt certain cards. How one plays them is up to that person... Even though I read all 4.5 Nikayas, I do not remember any sutta that puts as much emphasis on non-existent past as I see here. IMHO, doing akusala and justifying it by saying that *all* the fault is in past accumulations is similar as saying "G-d/Devil made me do it". With metta, Alex #124632 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 5:09 am Subject: Re: what demarcates citta? truth_aerator Dear Sarah, all, >S: As the Buddha tells us, no simile can account for the speed of a >citta arising and falling away. We don't demarcate them, >========================== So one cannot give *exact* number of how many cittas rise and fall. BTW, this (AN1.48) is one of the suttas I believe justifies the *possibility* of Awakening happening very quickly. Citta can reverse itself very quickly! >(Pls note that your quote is from 'The Guide' section, rather than >from the text itself.) >============================================= Thank you very much for this correction. With metta, Alex #124633 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 6:17 am Subject: Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Rob E, > Op 30-mei-2012, om 16:17 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > I am wondering, when nibbana is the object of citta, would the > > consciousness still be considered a form of "mental consciousness," > > or does this have its own category that is different? I realize the > > cittas have a different name, but just wanted to clarify this point > > for myself. > ------ > N: The sutta translates: if consciousness arises because of mind and > mental objects, it is known as mental consciousness. The Pali: > mana~nca pa.ticca dhamme ca upajjati vi~n~naana.m, manovi~n~naa.nant' > eva sa"nkha.m gacchati (to be called)... > Nibbaana is a dhamma that is known by lokuttara citta. Even lokuttara > citta is impermanent, dukkha, anatta. It should not be taken for > self. It arises because of conditions. > When the conditions are right it cannot be prevented from arising. > The development of understanding for a long, long time, for aeons, > can condition the arising of lokuttara citta. So then, it is still "mental consciousness," because the lokuttara citta is still a form of consciousness, and nibbana is a nama, mental object, even though it is unconditioned? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124634 From: Vince Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 9:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what demarcates citta? cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Dear Sarah you wrote: > As the Buddha tells us, no simile can account for the speed of a citta arising and > falling away. We don't demarcate them, but each citta which arises and falls away is > "demarcated" by its nature of arising, existing and falling away immediately. In the > time it takes for a rupa, such as visible object to fall away, 17 cittas including > seeing consciousness have arisen and fallen away. Therefore, it's impossible that one > citta of seeing could experience more than one object. The same applies to hearing - it > may seem that the hearing citta experiences different sounds, but this is because > there's no understanding now of hearing, let alone its impermanence. Do you think this impossibility needs of the surrender to the fact that we (the self) cannot control nothing at all?. I say this to know a possible connection with dry-insight. and some position of not being focused in any object as a type of surrender. When we read about the speed of citta, many times we think "that's impossible, that's not logical, I cannot conceive that". However, the real meaning can be "the self cannot catch that" thanks, Vince. #124635 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 6:48 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: ....Concepts or thoughts are objects of thinking. Cittas (moments of consciousness) are mostly thinking cittas when they are not moments of seeing, hearing and other vipaka cittas. The thinking cittas and accompanying mental factors, especially factors such as vitakka, "think about" or conceive a concept, an idea, an image. ... >R: So just to try to simplify it, you could say that vitakka, for instance, arises, but its concept does not. Vitakka, in a sense, to could be said to invent the concept when *it* [vitakka] arises; thus the concept doesn't come from or go to anywhere, but is just entertained in the moment that the reality that entertains it is there. .... S: Correct. .... >R: So it is time-freed in that sense, that it doesn't arise, nor does it need to arise, because a real mental faculty of some kind is doing the arising for it and it only exists while that mental faculty exists. It cannot support itself, but is supported by a reality that entertains it. ... S: Along the right lines:) I would say "it is only conceived while that 'mental faculty' exists". ... >R: I've been trying to get this straight for a while - if the above is in the right direction, that will help me understand what is meant by the concept being the object of thought, but not of citta directly, and being time-freed, etc. ... S: Concept is the object of citta, the thinking citta and associated mental states such as vitakka. The reason it's important to understand this is that now there can be awareness and direct understanding of thinking, of reality, but not of concept. So concept can never be the object of satipatthana because it's not a reality. ... .... > > S: Concepts don't arise. Like now if you think about an orange, the thinking arises and passes away. If there were no realities, no dhammas such as visible object and tangible object, there'd be no concepts, no idea of an orange or anything else. Sanna (perception) has marked and remembered the names, the ideas and associations. Even now there is a marking of what is seen and thought about which accumulates at each moment. .... >R: Well that is still a bit difficult to grasp, ie, the thinking arises and passes away, but the concept that it is thinking of does not arise or pass away. The way I interpret this is that the concept is conceived in a kind of semblance of stasis - the citta that is thinking has arisen in order to think; and when it entertains the concept it is already arisen, so the concept just sort of beams into existence, rather than coming from anywhere or going anywhere, and then dissolves, as it is unreal, when the citta is no longer there to support it. .... S: Yes, except, to be precise, we can't even say the concept "beams into existence" or "dissolves", although I understand what you mean. It's just an idea. It doesn't mean the orange (in the example) dissolved, it just means that at a different moment there were no conditions to think about it. ... >R: So although the concept is dependent on the arising and falling away of cittas, the concept itself has no capability to arise or fall away and thus exists outside of the "time" that takes place for realities, which actually do have a kind of "real time" to their existence. > > Hope that is in the right direction. .... S: Getting there for sure......:-)) I still wouldn't say it 'exists' either inside or outside of the 'time'. It never exists - it's just imagined and usually wrongly taken to exist. I think this is one of the most significant points to be clear on as far as the undersanding of dhammas, the 'practice', is concerned. This is why I'm picking up on all the details. I appreciate your persistence with it. metta Sarah ====== #124636 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 6:55 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: I picked up on this point before as well, #123719, but you may have missed it. In that context, the discussion was about rupas and I pointed out that a rupa can be (usually is) the object of akusala as well as kusala cittas in the sense door process as well as in the following mind door process. For example, if there's attachment to the visible object in the eye-door javana cittas, then there will be attachment to it in the following mind door process as well. As just discussed with Phil, any dhamma, apart from lokuttara dhammas, can be the object of lobha and other akusala cittas. ... >R: What is confusing about this to me is that it suggests a stage of development at which dhammas are being directly discerned, and yet there is still akusala. If you can clarify for me what kind of stage has this degree of sati and understanding to see the rupas or namas for what they are yet still has the potential for such akusala attachment, that would help me orient to what sorts of akusala drop away at what points, as this seems pretty advanced to me. This would be after the second stage of insight at least...? .... S: Only the arahat has no more akusala of any kind and only the anagami has no more sensuous attachment. This means that even the sakadagami and sotapanna who have no more wrong view or self-belief, no more doubt, no more inclination to break the precepts under any condition, will still have attachment to sense objects at moments when there is no awareness and understanding. In any sense or mind door process if the javana cittas are not kusala and accompanied by sati at one level or other, the cittas must be akusala. All akusala cittas are accompanied by ignorance and very, very often during the day, accompanied by attachment too. Like now, after seeing or hearing, if there's no awareness, there's likely to be subtle attachment to what is seen or heard. Let me know if I've missed your point. Metta Sarah ===== #124637 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 7:08 pm Subject: Re: unexperienced experience sarahprocter... Hi Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > I don't reject everything that is said in Abhidhamma and commentaries. But this doesn't mean that I accept everything unquestionably. The further something is from real life experience, the more one can question it. .... S: That's fine. The real question, however, is whether our questioning of fine details and various schools and schisms and histories of Abhidhammas helps us to understand the reality appearing now or does it keep us away from understanding such realities? If we keep arguing about such ideas, when will there be the conditions for understanding the seeing and visible object appearing now? I think that the more interest there is in understanding life as it is at this moment, the less concern there is in what different texts or schools say about it. It can be tested out now. For example, is there lobha now or is there calm with kusala citta? The Teachings are all for testing and proving at this moment. Nina wrote the following based on our discussions on a trip to Sri Lanka: #91210 **** >If there can be mindfulness of the different cittas which appear we shall see this, not merely in a theoretical way, but through our own experience. We can find out that at the moment of kusala citta there is peace and at the moment of akusala citta there is restlessness. We may have read the Buddha's advice to the Kaalaamas (Gradual Sayings, Book of the Threes, Ch VII, 65, Those of Kesaputta): "... Be not misled by report or tradition or hearsay. Be not misled by proficiency in the collections, nor by mere logic or inference, nor after considering reasons, nor after reflection on and approval of some theory, nor because it fits becoming, nor out of respect for a recluse (who holds it). But, Kaalamas, when you know for yourselves: These things are unprofitable, these things are blameworthy, these things are censured by the wise; these things when performed and undertaken, conduce to loss and sorrow-- then indeed do you reject them, Kaalaamas...." Do we really understand this sutta? We read suttas but we do not apply them. During our discussions we discovered that we cling more often than we ever realized before.< ***** Metta Sarah ====== #124638 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 1, 2012 7:38 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: > > There is no computer screen at all. Seeing consciousness sees visible object and this is followed repeatedly by thinking about what has been seen. This is so for the ignorant worldling or for the arahat. In the case of the ignorant worldling, there is ignorance and clinging to the signs and details, proliferations and ideas about the computer screen as something that really exists. For the arahat, even though there's no confusion between, say, the computer screen and the computer keyboard, there's no illusion that either exist in an ultimate sense or that anything is seen other than visible object. The concepts are merely used for convenience and communication. > > > > Hope I've clarified or correctly repeated what I've said before:-) ... >R: Thanks for compassionately jumping in to help clarify this continuing topic - continuing because I refuse to drop it! Ha ha. Maybe not so funny... :-/ ... S: :-)) "The clever one is not satisfied before the final goal of ending all misery is completely achieved." Theragatha 585 ... > > So, if I understand you correctly, the following is true: > > 1. There is no computer screen. > 2. The worldling thinks there is a computer screen, and thus clings to the concept as real. > 3. What is actually being experienced is visual object, followed by proliferation that makes assumptions about what exists and what is being experienced based on the experience of visual object. > > Would this be correct? ... S: Yes, based on the experience of v.o. and the tendency to proliferate. From the Mulapariyaya Sutta under "The Worldling": "He perceives the seen as the seen. Having perceived the seen as the seen, he conceives (himself) in the seen; he conceives (himself apart) from the seen; he conceives 'the seen is mine'; he delights in the seen. What is the reason? Because it has not been fully understood by him, I declare." Just remembered - I think this is one of the texts (with commentary) that Ken O kindly sent you. If so, do read it. Eng transl is "The Discourse on the Root of Existence". .... > > Futhermore: > > 4. The arahat has no illusion that the concepts he is using are real. Therefore he is able to do all the "computer stuff" and communicate with worldlings without the illusion that there really is a computer, or any clinging to such a concept. ... S: Correct. ... > > Would that also be correct? > > So if I can summarize the above, for the arahat, the use of the computer would be like a dream in which objects are invented for certain purposes, but don't really exist outside of the dream, while the worldling goes around worrying about what happens to these "objects" and clinging to them because of confusion about what actually exists. > > Would you agree that this is a somewhat in the right direction? ... S: Yes, the ariyan disciples have no illusion, no doubt about the distinction between the real worlds appearing and the dream worlds imagined. Now we're living in a dream most of the time. "...an arahat.....does not delight in earth. What is the reason? Because he is devoid of delusion through the destruction of delusion. "He directly knows water as water..... the seen as the seen......nibbaana as nibbaana...What is the reason? Because he is devoid of delusion through the destruction of delusion." .... > Finally: > > 5. Since the conceptualization that creates the illusion of a "computer" is based on visual object, etc., there is a relationship between visual object, etc. and computer in the sense that the computer is a false extrapolation from the experience of visual object. Even though the concept of a computer is useful and allows us to do conventional activities, the false identification of it as an independently existing object rather than a product of thinking is a misinterpretation of visual object. .... S: Yes. ... >If I knew that visual object was real and that computer was a thought-creation, I would let go of visual object and go on to the next dhamma. Instead, thinking that the computer is real, I cling to it and am stuck in a thought-world of objects that I think are real. ... S: There may be awareness of dhamma or wise consideration one moment and then clinging and ignorance the next moment. So no expectations, no "I" to let go of anything. However, it's true that the more understanding, the less wrong view, the less clinging to nimitta anupyanjana - signs and details. Nina quoted from of her books: #78974 ***** >We read in the "Visuddhimagga" (I, 54): " `Apprehends neither the signs': he does not apprehend the sign (nimitta) of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. `Nor the particulars' (anubya~njana): he does not apprehend any aspect classed as hand, foot, smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking aside, etc., which has acquired the name `particular' because of its particularizing defilements, because of its making them manifest themselves. He only apprehends what is really there..." Further on the "Visuddhimagga" (I,56) explains: "He enters upon the way of its restraint: he enters upon the way of closing that eye faculty by the door-panel of mindfulness." Understanding of realities should be naturally developed, we should not force ourselves to ignore concepts and try to know realities such as seeing or hearing. When we are listening to music we may try to know the reality that is just sound, different from the concept of a whole, of a melody, but this is not the way to develop right understanding naturally. Then there would be attachment that obstructs the development of pa~n~naa. Direct understanding of a characteristic of a reality is already developed pa~n~naa and how can we expect to have developed pa~n~naa in the beginning?< ***** Metta Sarah ===== #124639 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 2:58 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >Alex: It is good that we agree that present moment counts, while the >past no longer is. > > > >RE:We agree on that, except that you seem to ignore accumulations >and >tendencies, which are passed on over and over again, and to >ignore >their influence as conditions is a serious error. > >===================================== > > While past accumulations can certainly influence, they do not set in stone what happens now. Really? How do you know that? > One is dealt certain cards. How one plays them is up to that person... Well, if you want to assert that, you should be able to give some idea of what element or what mechanism allows "one to play" conditions like they are a deck of cards. If you are saying, "Well one has kind of free volition or choice over those cards - I can decide to play clinging and aversion today, or else I can just choose to play detachment and insight" then you are asserting the control of a self who is apart from conditions and can play around with them to make these kinds of unconditioned choices. Is that what you are saying? Please be clear about it, because if you are just sort of generally asserting that conditions are not final and that "we" can choose how to deal with them then you are asserting a self that has control and free will. I don't think there's any way out of that, but I'll wait to hear your explanation. The result of conditions may not be "set in stone," but whatever makes the final determination of what takes place, it is still a net effect of conditions and events that occur at the time, not the act of an independent "self" who can freely make choices or control conditions. > Even though I read all 4.5 Nikayas, I do not remember any sutta that puts as much emphasis on non-existent past as I see here. Kamma is a major theme throughout the Nikayas, and the Buddha went on for many many pages worth of talks about the specific effects of past actions and events far into future lifetimes. I don't see how you can say that this is "not putting much emphasis" on the "non-existent past." The Buddha put a lot of emphasis on the results of the past. The fact that the past does not exist anymore is important, of course, but does not change the effects that have been put in motion, which do come to fruition in the present and will continue to do so in the future. These "blank slate" and "free will" ideas do not come from the Buddha. > IMHO, doing akusala and justifying it by saying that *all* the fault is in past accumulations is similar as saying "G-d/Devil made me do it". I wouldn't say that about anything, "all the fault is in past accumulations." The fault is in the fault. If an akusala action takes place, it is akusala, plain and simple, and the results of that akusala will be the results. Though you cannot blame it on the past, we can still recognize that conditions do cause present reality, including both past and present conditions, not just past; but in any case, there is no self that is at fault or that controls what takes place, because there is no self - unless you think there is one, please let me know. Still, we take responsibility and take the consequences of our actions. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124640 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 9:47 am Subject: Re: unexperienced experience truth_aerator Dear Sarah, >S:The real question, however, is whether our questioning of fine >details and various schools and schisms and histories of Abhidhammas >helps us to understand the reality appearing now or does it keep us >away from understanding such realities? >================================= I agree with the above. What happens now is what matters. With metta, Alex #124642 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 10:46 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: Really? How do you know that? >================================== Here is an example. Decide where you want to move your right hand and then move it there. You can choose to raise it up, and then you raise it. You can choose it to move to the left, to the right... It doesn't matter if one committed a lot of akusala yesterday or was a saint. One can make a choice like that and then follow it. In Buddhist context. External object is not the cause of your reaction to it. You can react with lobha, dosa, alobha, adosa, etc. External object does not have it inherent in it. One can see a rose and be sensually delighted by it, or one can say with irritation "look at those thorns!", or one can remain peaceful. It is up to the mind to choose the reaction. Any of these three reactions are possible. You could have reacted differently. With metta, Alex #124643 From: "azita" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 11:31 am Subject: Re: [dsg] bad moods, looking for trubles gazita2002 hallo Nina, Lukas --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: > > Dear Lukas, ...snip.... > If the Buddha had not attained enlightenment and taught us the truth > of all realities we would live in complete darkness, not knowing the > way to develop right understanding, not knowing what is right and > what is wrong. It is a blessing that the Buddha taught us the way to > develop right understanding. It is a blessing that there still is > opportunity to hear the Dhamma "which only becomes manifest at rare > intervals covering immeasurable aeons". Thank you Nina, and we still live in complete darkness, except for the very rare moments of weak knowledge of realities. The above passage is a great reminder to not waste time worrying about this and that, altho worry can be known as a type of nama, which arises and falls away. patience, courage and good cheer azita #124644 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 11:49 am Subject: Re: the path rjkjp1 Nice writing robert! --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Alex. > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > > >Alex: It is good that we agree that present moment counts, while the >past no longer is. > > > > > >RE:We agree on that, except that you seem to ignore accumulations >and >tendencies, which are passed on over and over again, and to >ignore >their influence as conditions is a serious error. > > >===================================== > > > > While past accumulations can certainly influence, they do not set in stone what happens now. > > Really? How do you know that? > > > One is dealt certain cards. How one plays them is up to that person... > > Well, if you want to assert that, you should be able to give some idea of what element or what mechanism allows "one to play" conditions like they are a deck of cards. If you are saying, "Well one has kind of free volition or choice over those cards - I can decide to play clinging and aversion today, or else I can just choose to play detachment and insight" then you are asserting the control of a self who is apart from conditions and can play around with them to make these kinds of unconditioned choices. Is that what you are saying? Please be clear about it, because if you are just sort of generally asserting that conditions are not final and that "we" can choose how to deal with them then you are asserting a self that has control and free will. I don't think there's any way out of that, but I'll wait to hear your explanation. > > The result of conditions may not be "set in stone," but whatever makes the final determination of what takes place, it is still a net effect of conditions and events that occur at the time, not the act of an independent "self" who can freely make choices or control conditions. > > > Even though I read all 4.5 Nikayas, I do not remember any sutta that puts as much emphasis on non-existent past as I see here. > > Kamma is a major theme throughout the Nikayas, and the Buddha went on for many many pages worth of talks about the specific effects of past actions and events far into future lifetimes. I don't see how you can say that this is "not putting much emphasis" on the "non-existent past." The Buddha put a lot of emphasis on the results of the past. The fact that the past does not exist anymore is important, of course, but does not change the effects that have been put in motion, which do come to fruition in the present and will continue to do so in the future. These "blank slate" and "free will" ideas do not come from the Buddha. > > > IMHO, doing akusala and justifying it by saying that *all* the fault is in past accumulations is similar as saying "G-d/Devil made me do it". > > I wouldn't say that about anything, "all the fault is in past accumulations." The fault is in the fault. If an akusala action takes place, it is akusala, plain and simple, and the results of that akusala will be the results. Though you cannot blame it on the past, we can still recognize that conditions do cause present reality, including both past and present conditions, not just past; but in any case, there is no self that is at fault or that controls what takes place, because there is no self - unless you think there is one, please let me know. Still, we take responsibility and take the consequences of our actions. > > Best, > Rob E. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > #124645 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 12:14 pm Subject: Re: no-control truth_aerator Hello RobertE, RobK, all, If you are hungry, you don't say "Too bad. no control!" and starve to death. If you are hungry, you eat. If you are thirsty, you drink. If it is cold, you put on more clothing. If it is hot, then you dress lighter. When sense consciousness occurs: Will you try to react with akusala or try to react with kusala? With best wishes, Alex #124646 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 2:29 pm Subject: Re: no-control rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, RobK, all, > > If you are hungry, you don't say "Too bad. no control!" and starve to death. If you are hungry, you eat. If you are thirsty, you drink. If it is cold, you put on more clothing. If it is hot, then you dress lighter. > > When sense consciousness occurs: Will you try to react with akusala or try to react with kusala? > > With best wishes, > > Alex > Dear Alex no matter one tries to react with kusala actions are 99% or more of the time conditioned by akusala; and this is due to vast accumlations of avijja and lobha through aeons. So one thinks "ahhhh, my daily life is full of akusala, I crave chocalate, I enjoy TV. All akusala!" Next step one decides to go a program of intense ascetism: "no more TV, chocolate or internet porn for me!" And perhaps one takes up some technique or another , sits all day, walks slolwy, focuses on feelings in the body and so on. And thus one resists these base urges and feels like real and profound changes have occured. Much like the winner of "Biggest Loser" was recently saying about a 90kg weight loss. The thing is though, "sense desire is obvious" not so easy to see is the attachment to rule and ritual and self view. One is/maybe increasing the hard to see attachment to self and to technique, and that is what is keeping us locked in samsara. It take s certai amount of courge to let go of the deep attachments to silabata - and just be with what is, in order to understand even akusala. robert #124647 From: "Christine" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 2:38 pm Subject: "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities'' christine_fo... Hello all, From H-Buddhism e-list: ''On behalf of my co-editors, I am pleased to announce the publication of our new book "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities". This volume has been edited by Peter Skilling, Jason A. Carbine, Claudio Cicuzza, and Santi Pakdeekham, published by Silkworm Books (Chiang Mai), and is now available through Silkworm Books Website ( http://www.silkwormbooks.com/). Its bibliographic data are: ISBN 978-616-215-044-9 2012. 640 pp. Paperback, 14 x 21 cm 50 black and white illustrations, 100 color illustrations, footnotes, bibliography, index USD 60 THB 950 Contents: - Introduction - Acknowledgements - Conventions - Map of South and Southeast Asia 1.Was Buddhaghosa a Theravadin? Buddhist Identity in the Pali Commentaries and Chronicles. Rupert Gethin 2. The Teachings of the Abhayagiri School. L.S. Cousins. 3. Sthavira, Thera and '*Sthaviravada' in Chinese Buddhist Sources. Max Deeg. 4. The King and his Bhagava: The Meanings of Pagan's Early Theravadas. Lilian Handlin. 5. Sasanasuddhi/Simasammuti: Comments on a Spatial Basis of the Buddha's Religion. Jason A. Carbine. 6. Lineage, Inheritance, and Belonging: Expressions of Monastic Affiliation from Lanka. Anne M. Blackburn. 7. King Rama I and Wat Phra Chetuphon: the Buddha-sasana in Early Bangkok. Peter Skilling. 8. The Benefits of Ordination according to the Paramatthamangala. Claudio Cicuzza. 9. Circulation of Texts in Mid-Nineteenth Century Cambodia: A new reading of Inscription K. 892 (Vatt Ta Tok, CE 1857). Olivier de Bernon. 10. King Mongkut's Invention of a Universal Pali Script. Venerable Phra Anil Sakya. 11. Thai Ideas about Hinayana-Mahayana: Correspondence between King Chulalongkorn and Prince Narisranuvattiwong. Arthid Sheravanichkul. 12. Whence Theravada? The Modern Genealogy of an Ancient Term. Todd LeRoy Perreira. - Description of plates - Contributors and editors - Indexes From the back cover: "Our understanding of the history of Buddhism in Southeast Asia has often been oversimplified, biased, or vague. The twelve innovative essays presented here shed new light upon terms such as sthavira, theravada, theriya, or theravamsa, each of which may carry a variety of meanings and connotations. Some of the contributors reconsider known data to present new and challenging perspectives on the complicated history of the Mahavihara and Abhayagiri schools in Sri Lanka, or the Indian historiographical tradition on the formation of Buddhist orders/schools (nikaya/acariyavada). Others stress the central role of lineages and their transmission, as well as the dynamic impulse, that this problematic provokes in terms of long-distance exchanges. Topical inquiries based on epigraphical material reveal the force of institutional practices, or invite scholars to analyze the textual traditions of Southeast Asia more deeply, particularly its "transitive" mode of translation. Essays range across Buddhism in early Lanka, in Burma during the Pagan and Dhammachedi periods, in nineteenth-century Cambodia, and in Thailand from the late eighteenth to early twentieth centuries. This richly illustrated volume should figure in all academic programs of Buddhist Studies." With my (our) best regards, Claudio Cicuzza'' with metta Chris #124648 From: "Christine" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 2:43 pm Subject: Re: "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities'' christine_fo... Here is the webpage for this book: "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities" http://www.silkwormbooks.com/catalog/info/how-theravada/index.html with metta Chris #124649 From: "colette_aube" Date: Sat Jun 2, 2012 3:28 pm Subject: Re: no-control colette_aube Hi Robert I'm playing in, playing with, TANTRA and this has created such MIND BLOWING OBSERVATIONS. Yep, I noticed, several days ago, the futility of the fixation that the Western society has on "CONTROL" and how they automatically discredit and blasphemy "CHAOS" without ever researching the TRUTH about CHAOS and CHAOS THEORY (see ChaosMatrix) I like how you applied THE BOLLINGEN SERIES XX THE COLLECTED WORKS OF CARL GUSTAV JUNG. "Instinct" is the answer and "instinct" could/can only exist after it "being" has been immersed in the procedure, the behavior (see PAVLOV). It takes a long time for the genetics of a complete DNA line of BARBIE DOLLS or the complete DNA line of KEN DOLLS to learn to accept the programming that a robot must accept when told what is good and what is not good, what is KUSALA and what is AKUSALA. After the behavior has been repeated countless times over aeons, then it is firmly rooted in the SUPER SUB-CONSCIOUS and grows as though it were a pestilence, and it grows as the pestilence without being recognized as being a pestilence, but as being a drug, THE DRUG, that can only issue LIFE and allow people to experience LIFE <.....> I'm glad to read your perspective and position. THANK YOU. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: <...> > Dear Alex > no matter one tries to react with kusala actions are 99% or more of the time conditioned by akusala; and this is due to vast accumlations of avijja and lobha through aeons. > So one thinks "ahhhh, my daily life is full of akusala, I crave chocalate, I enjoy TV. All akusala!" Next step one decides to go a program of intense ascetism: "no more TV, chocolate or internet porn for me!" And perhaps one takes up some technique or another , sits all day, walks slolwy, focuses on feelings in the body and so on. And thus one resists these base urges and feels like real and profound changes have occured. > Much like the winner of "Biggest Loser" was recently saying about a 90kg weight loss. > > The thing is though, "sense desire is obvious" not so easy to see is the attachment to rule and ritual and self view. One is/maybe increasing the hard to see attachment to self and to technique, and that is what is keeping us locked in samsara. > > It take s certai amount of courge to let go of the deep attachments to silabata - and just be with what is, in order to understand even akusala. > robert > #124650 From: Ken O Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 3:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: no-control ashkenn2k Dear Alex Dhamma is not about control or not control, damma is about self and not self. Not self is not about no control of actions but no control over the nature of dhamma which itself is not self. There is no self that is doing all the things like eating, drinking or craving. Even learning aboud dhamma arise from dhamma itself and not over a self. Until this is clear, we are just not doing the correct thing, explaining the wrong essence of Buddhism. The suttas, abhidhammas and vinaya is all about learning not self and not no control. Just concentrate on the right things, learning about not self and not arguing about not control. It is rather a fruitless execise. If you think developing concentration is your way, just follow your inclinations. But remember whatever we learn in dhamma or practise dhamma, is about not self. There is never a self in what your are doing or your development of concentration cheers Ken O or KC #124651 From: Ken O Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 3:21 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: the path ashkenn2k Dear Rob E and Alex Let me share a passage from the Expositor, Analysis of Term pg 99 <> Cheers KC #124652 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 5:02 am Subject: Re: no-control truth_aerator Dear RobertK, RobertE, all,, >A:If you are hungry, you don't say "Too bad. no control!" and >starve to death. If you are hungry, you eat. If you are thirsty, you >drink. If it is cold, you put on more clothing. If it is hot, then >you dress lighter. > >When sense consciousness occurs: Will you try to react with akusala >or try to react with kusala? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >RK: Dear Alex > no matter one tries to react with kusala actions are 99% or more of >the time conditioned by akusala; and this is due to vast >accumlations of avijja and lobha through aeons. >========================= So, you are basically falling into the past as being essential sort of thing? Neither is this Dhamma nor this fits common sense. Example: If someone takes a knife and cuts oneself. Is the pain due to some past life akusala kamma? No. It is due to action done in the present. You didn't seem to answer my initial question. >RK: So one thinks "ahhhh, my daily life is full of akusala, I crave >chocalate, I enjoy TV. All akusala!" >===================== Is this due to past life? How can one prove that? It is convinient to put the blame somewhere else, rather than on one's mind in the present. >RK: Next step one decides to go a program of intense ascetism: "no >more TV, chocolate or internet porn for me!" And perhaps one takes >up some technique or another , sits all day, walks slolwy, focuses >on feelings in the body and so on. And thus one resists these base >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Technique is not required for that. >RK...urges and feels like real and profound changes have occured. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Kusala or akusala more preferable? If one is going to do something (other than falling into a coma like a log), kusala is better. With best wishes, Alex #124653 From: "Rev Triple" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 1:07 am Subject: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... revtriple Hi everyone! Did the Buddha forbid soldiers from going into the monastery so that they avoid can avoid fighting in the Kingdom of Magadah, when several generals entered the Sangha ? If so is this in the Tipitaka? If so why did he do this? #124654 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 5:36 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: no-control upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and both Roberts ;-) In a message dated 6/2/2012 3:02:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Dear RobertK, RobertE, all,, >A:If you are hungry, you don't say "Too bad. no control!" and >starve to death. If you are hungry, you eat. If you are thirsty, you >drink. If it is cold, you put on more clothing. If it is hot, then >you dress lighter. > >When sense consciousness occurs: Will you try to react with akusala >or try to react with kusala? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >RK: Dear Alex > no matter one tries to react with kusala actions are 99% or more of >the time conditioned by akusala; and this is due to vast >accumlations of avijja and lobha through aeons. >========================= So, you are basically falling into the past as being essential sort of thing? Neither is this Dhamma nor this fits common sense. Example: If someone takes a knife and cuts oneself. Is the pain due to some past life akusala kamma? No. It is due to action done in the present. You didn't seem to answer my initial question. >RK: So one thinks "ahhhh, my daily life is full of akusala, I crave >chocalate, I enjoy TV. All akusala!" >===================== Is this due to past life? How can one prove that? It is convinient to put the blame somewhere else, rather than on one's mind in the present. --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: And, Alex, is there no basis for the present mental state? Does it occur independent of prior conditions, arising without basis? There is no actor or thinker who creates the state, is there? Nor do things happen without basis, out of the blue. There are prior conditions, volitions and actions included of course, and it is these past phenomena, some quite recent and some long past, that serve as the basis. ----------------------------------------------------------- >RK: Next step one decides to go a program of intense ascetism: "no >more TV, chocolate or internet porn for me!" And perhaps one takes >up some technique or another , sits all day, walks slolwy, focuses >on feelings in the body and so on. And thus one resists these base >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Technique is not required for that. >RK...urges and feels like real and profound changes have occured. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Is Kusala or akusala more preferable? If one is going to do something (other than falling into a coma like a log), kusala is better. With best wishes, Alex ================================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124655 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 6:07 am Subject: [dsg] Re: no-control truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, >HCW:There is no actor or thinker who creates the state, is there? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just mind that thinks. >----------------------------- >HCW: And, Alex, is there no basis for the present mental state? >=============================================== Of course there is a necessary basis. But it doesn't mean that mind in the present cannot choose this or that, and then attempt it. Mind could have chosen alternative course of action and done that. As I type this, how much did past life *caused* it? Of course past accumulations were responsible for me being born as a human, not as a starving kid in Africa, having enough money to have computer with internet, etc. But the choice to type these words are done in the present. This specific action is not forcefully caused by past lives. With best wishes, Alex #124656 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 7:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: no-control upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/2/2012 4:07:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, >HCW:There is no actor or thinker who creates the state, is there? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just mind that thinks. ----------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, there is thinking and other mental operations. ---------------------------------------------- >----------------------------- >HCW: And, Alex, is there no basis for the present mental state? >=============================================== Of course there is a necessary basis. But it doesn't mean that mind in the present cannot choose this or that, and then attempt it. ------------------------------------------------------------ HCW: Yes, there is thinking, choosing, and attempting, but that is all dependent on conditions - not arbitrary. ---------------------------------------------------------- Mind could have chosen alternative course of action and done that. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Alternative courses of action could have been adopted and acted upon HAD conditions been otherwise. But of course, conditions were as they were. Nothing occurs for no reason at all. Even if there is some element of randomness to choosing among alternatives, what the possible alternatives are it is drastically constrained by conditions including predisposition. --------------------------------------------------------- As I type this, how much did past life *caused* it? --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: It was entirely determined, possibly within a (greatly constrained) range of probability, by what went before. Your typing this is dependent on your accumulations, especially your desire to write, on the key board etc being available to you, on there being a floor on which your chair rests, and on millions of other things being exactly as they were before your typing this. What else do you think was the basis for your typing it? A freely acting self of yours? An autonomous actor, acting independent of conditions? Where is there such an actor, and what sort of thing is it? ---------------------------------------------------------- Of course past accumulations were responsible for me being born as a human, not as a starving kid in Africa, having enough money to have computer with internet, etc. But the choice to type these words are done in the present. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Everything, when it is done, is done in (what is then called) "the present". So, what? It doesn't happen without condition, and the conditions, lie in the past or are coexistent but themselves dependent on past conditions. Ultimately, what happens now depends on what went before. What else??? There is no autonomy. ---------------------------------------------------------- This specific action is not forcefully caused by past lives. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: What is the difference between "caused" and "forcefully caused"? It really does seem to me, Alex, that what you are wishing for is an autonomous agent, i.e., a self. There ain't no such thing! ;-) ------------------------------------------------------ With best wishes, Alex ================================= With metta, Howard /"When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that."/ (From the Bodhi Sutta, Udana 1.1) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /"Nothing comes from nothing. Nothing ever could."/ (From "The Sound of Music") #124658 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 9:19 am Subject: [dsg] Re: no-control truth_aerator Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, Thank you for your interesting points. >HCW: Alternative courses of action could have been adopted and >acted upon HAD conditions been otherwise. But of course, >conditions >were >as they were. >====================================================== This is unverifiable (and thus a speculation) as we cannot rewind back the time and see if mind under the exact same conditions would have behaved differently. "Freedom of will", as I see it, does not require that a mind would behave differently under the same conditions - only that it *could* have acted differently. In real life it does seem that there are possible choices to be made, and I hope that the kusala choices are made. If nothing today could be altered, then in essence past would determine the future. Present would play no new role as it is totally determined by the past, and future would be totally determined by the present. What is your opinion regarding Venerables intro to MN101: ============================================================ "The general understanding of this teaching is that actions from the past determine present pleasure and pain, while present actions determine future pleasure and pain. Or, to quote a recent book devoted to the topic, "Karma is the moral principle that governs human conduct. It declares that our present experience is conditioned by our past conduct and that our present conduct will condition our future experience." This, however, does not accurately describe the Buddha's teaching on karma, and is instead a fairly accurate account of the Nigantha teaching, which the Buddha explicitly refutes here. As he interrogates the Niganthas, he makes the point that if all pleasure and pain experienced in the present were determined by past action, why is it that they now feel the pain of harsh treatment when they practice asceticism, and no pain of harsh treatment when they don't? If past action were the sole determining factor, then present action should have no effect on their present experience of pleasure or pain. In this way, the Buddha points to one of the most distinctive features of his own teaching on kamma: that the present experience of pleasure and pain is a combined result of both past and present actions. This seemingly small addition to the notion of kamma plays an enormous role in allowing for the exercise of free will and the possibility of putting an end to suffering before the effects of all past actions have ripened. In other words, this addition is what makes Buddhist practice possible, and makes it possible for a person who has completed the practice to survive and teach it with full authority to others. ...If the cause of present suffering were located exclusively in the past, no one could do anything in the present moment to stop that suffering; the most that could be done would be to endure the suffering while not creating any new kamma leading to future suffering. Although this was the Jain approach to practice, many people at present believe that it is the Buddhist approach as well. Meditation, according to this understanding, is the process of purifying the mind of old kamma by training it to look on with non-reactive equanimity as pain arises. The pain is the result of old kamma, the equanimity adds no new kamma, and thus over time all old kamma can be burned away. ...the problem underlying pain is not past action, but passion in the present for the causes of pain. In other words, pain is not inevitable. Present suffering can be prevented by changing one's understanding of, and attitude toward, the cause of suffering in the present. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html ============================================================== With best wishes, Alex #124659 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 9:57 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: Only the arahat has no more akusala of any kind and only the anagami has no more sensuous attachment. This means that even the sakadagami and sotapanna who have no more wrong view or self-belief, no more doubt, no more inclination to break the precepts under any condition, will still have attachment to sense objects at moments when there is no awareness and understanding. In any sense or mind door process if the javana cittas are not kusala and accompanied by sati at one level or other, the cittas must be akusala. > > All akusala cittas are accompanied by ignorance and very, very often during the day, accompanied by attachment too. I'm still a little confused. Maybe a couple of simple questions will help me get more clear: 1. Can a dhamma be directly discerned with attachment? 2. Can panna ever arise with any form of akusala? 3. If the sakadagami or sotapanna has a moment of attachment arise, is there ignorance at that moment, and does that mean there is no direct understanding at that moment? Thanks, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124660 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 10:18 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > ...it's true that the more understanding, the less wrong view, the less clinging to nimitta anupyanjana - signs and details. This idea of not clinging to signs and details seems very important and specific. [From Nina's book:] > >We read in the "Visuddhimagga" (I, 54): > " `Apprehends neither the signs': he does not apprehend the sign > (nimitta) of woman or man, or any sign that is a basis for defilement > such as the sign of beauty, etc.: he stops at what is merely seen. > `Nor the particulars' (anubya~njana): he does not apprehend any aspect > classed as hand, foot, smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking > aside, etc., which has acquired the name `particular' because of its > particularizing defilements, because of its making them manifest > themselves. He only apprehends what is really there..." This is very, very interesting. Thanks to you, and to Nina. for that very intriguing quote. It outlines a lot of important things to look into. I like the lists of things that cause particularization, and thus, it appears, cause objects of attachment to be created through false ideas about what exists. ...When we are listening to music we may try to > know the reality that is just sound, different from the concept of a > whole, of a melody, but this is not the way to develop right > understanding naturally. Then there would be attachment that > obstructs the development of pa~n~naa. Thanks for another good quote, and thanks to Nina too. Appreciate all your good comments as well. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - #124661 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 10:44 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > >RE: Really? How do you know that? > >================================== > > Here is an example. Decide where you want to move your right hand and then move it there. You can choose to raise it up, and then you raise it. You can choose it to move to the left, to the right... It doesn't matter if one committed a lot of akusala yesterday or was a saint. One can make a choice like that and then follow it. Okay, so my question to you, which you haven't answered yet I don't think, is: Who or what makes that decision? Is there a self that can choose to move the hand to the left or right? Or else, what element or capacity makes that decision? Does citta arise and just decide whatever it likes? How exactly does it work? If you just leave it open and say "You can raise your hand," then you are asserting a self that can override conditions and make free choices. That is not Buddhism, it has no sense of conditionality to it, if conditions can simply be swept aside any time you feel like it. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124662 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 10:48 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Thanks, Rob. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > Nice writing robert! > > Well, if you want to assert that, you should be able to give some idea of what element or what mechanism allows "one to play" conditions like they are a deck of cards. If you are saying, "Well one has kind of free volition or choice over those cards - I can decide to play clinging and aversion today, or else I can just choose to play detachment and insight" then you are asserting the control of a self who is apart from conditions and can play around with them to make these kinds of unconditioned choices. Is that what you are saying? Please be clear about it, because if you are just sort of generally asserting that conditions are not final and that "we" can choose how to deal with them then you are asserting a self that has control and free will. I don't think there's any way out of that, but I'll wait to hear your explanation. > > > > The result of conditions may not be "set in stone," but whatever makes the final determination of what takes place, it is still a net effect of conditions and events that occur at the time, not the act of an independent "self" who can freely make choices or control conditions. ================================= #124663 From: "Robert E" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 10:51 am Subject: Re: no-control epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, RobK, all, > > If you are hungry, you don't say "Too bad. no control!" and starve to death. If you are hungry, you eat. If you are thirsty, you drink. If it is cold, you put on more clothing. If it is hot, then you dress lighter. There's nothing to prevent any of that - even an amoeba can stretch out and get some food instinctively, without even any developed consciousness. There's no doubt that the organism gets hungry and grabs some food and shoves it down its throat, but that doesn't really require much consciousness either, just some sensory input and a hunger response, with a few motor skills. So what? Are you saying there is a self making those decisions? I would appreciate a straight answer. If there is no self then what is doing all that deciding in your view? > When sense consciousness occurs: Will you try to react with akusala or try to react with kusala? When is the extra moment to prepare for kusala or akusala? Is it inbetween the official moments of what actually takes place? As far as I know, there are no breaks. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = #124664 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 10:54 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE:Okay, so my question to you, which you haven't answered yet I >don't >think, is: Who or what makes that decision? >============================ The mind makes decision. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/124655 >RE: Is there a self that can choose to move the hand to the left or >right? >===================================== The mind can choose among the possible possibilities and be able to influence this or that. What is helpful for Nibbana, kusala or akusala? With metta, Alex #124665 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 11:02 am Subject: Re: no-control truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >A:If you are hungry, you don't say "Too bad. no control!" and >starve to death. If you are hungry, you eat. If you are thirsty, you >drink. If it is cold, you put on more clothing. If it is hot, then >you dress lighter. >================================================ >RE:There's nothing to prevent any of that -... >======================= So what is the problem when I say that the mind can react differently to what occurs? >RE:Are you saying there is a self making those decisions? The mind decides. >RE: When is the extra moment to prepare for kusala or akusala? Is >it inbetween the official moments of what actually takes place? As >far as I know, there are no breaks. >================== Immediately after sense process occurs, there can be reaction toward it. Reaction (lobha, dosa, moha, or alobha, adosa, amoha) are not built into external object. The mind (especially with knowledge of Dhamma) has possibility to react in either way. With metta, Alex #124666 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 6:01 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 3-jun-2012, om 2:18 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > he does not apprehend any aspect > > classed as hand, foot, smile, laughter, talk, looking ahead, looking > > aside, etc., which has acquired the name `particular' because of its > > particularizing defilements, because of its making them manifest > > themselves. He only apprehends what is really there..." > > This is very, very interesting. Thanks to you, and to Nina. for > that very intriguing quote. It outlines a lot of important things > to look into. I like the lists of things that cause > particularization, and thus, it appears, cause objects of > attachment to be created through false ideas about what exists. ------- N: We should not erroneously believe that we should not think of details like hand or foot. Nobody can prevent thinking. But thinking itself can be realized as only a kind of naama, only a dhamma, no self who thinks. This is very important. At the moment of understanding there is no wrong view or attachment, understanding can take as object the wrong view or attachment that has just fallen away. So, we do not mind whatever reality appears, it has arisen because of conditions, and all that is to be done: know it, discern it as only a dhamma. This can also take away fear. Some people worry about the akusala that may arise just before dying, because this can condition an unhappy rebirth. If there is right understanding there cannot be fear at the same time. Satipa.t.thaana is our island in the sea of samsara. ------ Nina. #124667 From: "jonoabb" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 7:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat jonoabb Hi Rob E Picking up this older thread again ... (123748) --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > Hi Jon. > > > J: OK, so meditation is also: 'Techniques prescribed by the Buddha that are practice for direct awareness (as well as the direct awareness resulting from the undertaking of such techniques)'. > > > > Comparing this to the earlier definition ('Mental exercises prescribed by the Buddha to build kusala mental states (including insight) and which lead to the development of those mental states'), perhaps you would settle on something like this: > > 'Mental exercises or techniques prescribed by the Buddha that, if properly carried out, give rise to kusala mental states (including insight) thereby leading to the development of those mental states.' > > > > Would this be a fair and comprehensive definition of meditation as you use the term? > > RE: On first blush, it seems to stand up very well. Obviously some holes could be found in it if investigated, but pending such adjustments, it sounds like a damned good working definition to work with. > =============== J: OK, so your definition of meditation is: "Any mental exercise or technique prescribed by the Buddha for giving rise to kusala mental states (including insight) thereby leading to the development of those mental states." You might be interested in the following definition of `meditation' which I came across recently: "The methodical effort to tame and master the mind and to develop its capacity for calm and insight". This seems similar to your own definition, with the substitution of `methodical effort' for `mental exercise or technique'. Any further thoughts or comments? Jon #124668 From: upasaka@... Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 11:04 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: no-control upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/2/2012 7:06:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, Thank you for your interesting points. >HCW: Alternative courses of action could have been adopted and >acted >upon HAD conditions been otherwise. But of course, >conditions >were >as they were. >=============================================== This is unverifiable (and thus a speculation) as we cannot rewind back the time and see if mind under the exact same conditions could have behaved differently. In real life it does seem that there are choices to be made, and I hope that the kusala choices are made. If nothing today could be altered, then in essence past would determine the future. Present would play no new role as it is totally determined by the past, and future would be totally determined by the present. ------------------------------------------------------------ HCW: Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. But they are not made from whole cloth, without basis. Whenever a choice is made, consider what went into it. It was based on a pattern of thinking and predisposition and desire and on what seemed to be possible, and all of *this* occurred for cause as well. If choosing is without basis, without foundation, what sort of choosing it anyway? And how is the choice made??? What do you actually think about that, Alex? Does some entity/agent make a decision? Is there an actor involved? And is that "chooser" autonomous? --------------------------------------------------------------- What is your opinion regarding Venerables intro to MN101: ============================================================ "The general understanding of this teaching is that actions from the past determine present pleasure and pain, while present actions determine future pleasure and pain. Or, to quote a recent book devoted to the topic, "Karma is the moral principle that governs human conduct. It declares that our present experience is conditioned by our past conduct and that our present conduct will condition our future experience." This, however, does not accurately describe the Buddha's teaching on karma, and is instead a fairly accurate account of the Nigantha teaching, which the Buddha explicitly refutes here. As he interrogates the Niganthas, he makes the point that if all pleasure and pain experienced in the present were determined by past action, why is it that they now feel the pain of harsh treatment when they practice asceticism, and no pain of harsh treatment when they don't? If past action were the sole determining factor, then present action should have no effect on their present experience of pleasure or pain. In this way, the Buddha points to one of the most distinctive features of his own teaching on kamma: that the present experience of pleasure and pain is a combined result of both past and present actions. This seemingly small addition to the notion of kamma plays an enormous role in allowing for the exercise of free will and the possibility of putting an end to suffering before the effects of all past actions have ripened. In other words, this addition is what makes Buddhist practice possible, and makes it possible for a person who has completed the practice to survive and teach it with full authority to others. ...If the cause of present suffering were located exclusively in the past, no one could do anything in the present moment to stop that suffering; the most that could be done would be to endure the suffering while not creating any new kamma leading to future suffering. Although this was the Jain approach to practice, many people at present believe that it is the Buddhist approach as well. Meditation, according to this understanding, is the process of purifying the mind of old kamma by training it to look on with non-reactive equanimity as pain arises. The pain is the result of old kamma, the equanimity adds no new kamma, and thus over time all old kamma can be burned away. ...the problem underlying pain is not past action, but passion — in the present — for the causes of pain. In other words, pain is not inevitable. Present suffering can be prevented by changing one's understanding of, and attitude toward, the cause of suffering in the present _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html_ (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html) ------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Ven T is just wrong on this. Present action is not unconditioned, arising without prior basis. He may think it is, but that is just wishful thinking on his part. His most central confusion here is that he is misreading the Buddha's teaching in that specific sutta, namely that one's own intention and intentional action is not the sole principle of causality involved in what comes to one. In any case, as regards choosing, even if, and that's a big "if", there is some element of randomness involved in the matter of which of one of several possible alternatives of action is chosen (a la quantum theory), random is random and not something wonderful. Moreover, and this is most important, there still is no chooser, and there is no autonomy. Anytime "you" make a decision, if you stop to inquire *why* you made that decision, you will find conditions that led to it. Example: You have an itch and then scratch it. Why? Answer: The itch occurred due to conditions, some bodily perhaps, some due to external contact perhaps - whatever. And you scratched it, because itches are unpleasant to you, and you are predisposed to put an end to discomfort, and scratching an itch has proven to stop it temporarily, and you had no reason to not scratch it, etc., etc. Now, you say that you could have chosen otherwise. Yes, had conditions been otherwise. If you were a masochist, that would have changed things. If you had lost consciousness for some reason, that would have changed things. If some anti-itch cream providing for longer relief had been available, that could have changed things. If the thought arose that you could refrain from scratching just to show that you could do so, that could have changed things. In any case, nothing comes from nothing! -------------------------------------------------------------- With best wishes, Alex ================================ With metta, Howard /"When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of that."/ (From the Bodhi Sutta, Udana 1.1) #124669 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Sun Jun 3, 2012 11:41 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: no-control rjkjp1 Yep totally agree Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, Alex - > > In a message dated 6/2/2012 7:06:49 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > truth_aerator@... writes: > > Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, > > Thank you for your interesting points. > > >HCW: Alternative courses of action could have been adopted and >acted > >upon HAD conditions been otherwise. But of course, >conditions >were >as they > were. > >=============================================== > > This is unverifiable (and thus a speculation) as we cannot rewind back the > time and see if mind under the exact same conditions could have behaved > differently. > > In real life it does seem that there are choices to be made, and I hope > that the kusala choices are made. If nothing today could be altered, then in > essence past would determine the future. Present would play no new role as > it is totally determined by the past, and future would be totally determined > by the present. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > HCW: > Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. But they are > not made from whole cloth, without basis. Whenever a choice is made, consider > what went into it. It was based on a pattern of thinking and > predisposition and desire and on what seemed to be possible, and all of *this* occurred > for cause as well. > If choosing is without basis, without foundation, what sort of > choosing it anyway? And how is the choice made??? What do you actually think about > that, Alex? Does some entity/agent make a decision? Is there an actor > involved? And is that "chooser" autonomous? > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > What is your opinion regarding Venerables intro to MN101: > ============================================================ > "The general understanding of this teaching is that actions from the past > determine present pleasure and pain, while present actions determine future > pleasure and pain. Or, to quote a recent book devoted to the topic, "Karma > is the moral principle that governs human conduct. It declares that our > present experience is conditioned by our past conduct and that our present > conduct will condition our future experience." This, however, does not > accurately describe the Buddha's teaching on karma, and is instead a fairly > accurate account of the Nigantha teaching, which the Buddha explicitly refutes > here. As he interrogates the Niganthas, he makes the point that if all > pleasure and pain experienced in the present were determined by past action, why > is it that they now feel the pain of harsh treatment when they practice > asceticism, and no pain of harsh treatment when they don't? If past action > were the sole determining factor, then present action should have no effect > on their present experience of pleasure or pain. > > In this way, the Buddha points to one of the most distinctive features of > his own teaching on kamma: that the present experience of pleasure and pain > is a combined result of both past and present actions. This seemingly > small addition to the notion of kamma plays an enormous role in allowing for > the exercise of free will and the possibility of putting an end to suffering > before the effects of all past actions have ripened. In other words, this > addition is what makes Buddhist practice possible, and makes it possible for > a person who has completed the practice to survive and teach it with full > authority to others. > > ...If the cause of present suffering were located exclusively in the past, > no one could do anything in the present moment to stop that suffering; the > most that could be done would be to endure the suffering while not > creating any new kamma leading to future suffering. Although this was the Jain > approach to practice, many people at present believe that it is the Buddhist > approach as well. Meditation, according to this understanding, is the > process of purifying the mind of old kamma by training it to look on with > non-reactive equanimity as pain arises. The pain is the result of old kamma, the > equanimity adds no new kamma, and thus over time all old kamma can be burned > away. > > ...the problem underlying pain is not past action, but passion " in the > present " for the causes of pain. In other words, pain is not inevitable. > Present suffering can be prevented by changing one's understanding of, and > attitude toward, the cause of suffering in the present > _http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html_ > (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.101.than.html) > ------------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Ven T is just wrong on this. Present action is not unconditioned, > arising without prior basis. He may think it is, but that is just wishful > thinking on his part. His most central confusion here is that he is misreading > the Buddha's teaching in that specific sutta, namely that one's own > intention and intentional action is not the sole principle of causality involved in > what comes to one. > In any case, as regards choosing, even if, and that's a big "if", > there is some element of randomness involved in the matter of which of one of > several possible alternatives of action is chosen (a la quantum theory), > random is random and not something wonderful. Moreover, and this is most > important, there still is no chooser, and there is no autonomy. > Anytime "you" make a decision, if you stop to inquire *why* you made > that decision, you will find conditions that led to it. Example: You have an > itch and then scratch it. Why? Answer: The itch occurred due to > conditions, some bodily perhaps, some due to external contact perhaps - whatever. And > you scratched it, because itches are unpleasant to you, and you are > predisposed to put an end to discomfort, and scratching an itch has proven to > stop it temporarily, and you had no reason to not scratch it, etc., etc. Now, > you say that you could have chosen otherwise. Yes, had conditions been > otherwise. If you were a masochist, that would have changed things. If you had > lost consciousness for some reason, that would have changed things. If > some anti-itch cream providing for longer relief had been available, that > could have changed things. If the thought arose that you could refrain from > scratching just to show that you could do so, that could have changed things. > In any case, nothing comes from nothing! > -------------------------------------------------------------- > > With best wishes, > > Alex > ================================ > With metta, > Howard > > > /"When this is, that is. From the arising of this comes the arising of > that."/ > (From the Bodhi Sutta, Udana 1.1) > > > > > #124670 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 12:06 am Subject: [dsg] Re: no-control truth_aerator Hi Howard, all, >------------------------------------------------------------ >HCW: Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If choice is made (by the mind, no Atta!) then it means that there were at least multiple *possible* actions from which mind had to choose one. Of course it is all conditioned. The question is not so much as "would the mind behave in exactly the same way under those same conditions" but ***could*** it behave differently under those same conditions. Of course they are dependent on certain condition. Example: a person cannot move right arm if it is broken and in the cast or worse, amputated. But if person has functioning arm, s/he can move it to the right to the left, up, down. The motion is conditioned but it is the choice in the present which "decides". Prior to choice it might be impossible to predict the choice made and where the arm will be moved. So present action is conditioned, neither I not Ven. T said otherwise. But from the same set of required conditions, the choice can be made that will result in corresponding conditioned action. >HCW:Whenever a choice is made, consider what went into it. It was >based on a pattern of thinking and predisposition and desire and >on >what seemed to be possible, and all of *this* occurred >========================================== And the pattern of thinking is made of choices made in the present moment (as present moment occurs). Pattern of thinking is not forced by someone else. It is what was done by the mind moments. >HCW:Does some entity/agent make a decision? Is there an actor >involved? And is that "chooser" autonomous? >------------------------------------------- Mind chooses. >HCW: Ven T is just wrong on this. Present action is not >unconditioned, arising without prior basis. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is conditioned, and requires prior basis as I've said above with the example of moving an arm. >HCW: Anytime "you" make a decision, if you stop to inquire *why* >you made that decision, you will find conditions that led to it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mind chooses among possibilities due to conditions in the present. And then the choice made is itself one of the conditions for resultant action. >Example: You have an itch and then scratch it. Why? Answer: The >itch occurred due to conditions, some bodily perhaps, some due to >external contact perhaps - whatever. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> One could scratch or one could tolerate it longer. So this is NOT an example of forced action. Sure, both actions are conditioned and could physically occur. The mind's choice in the present can determine whether one will scratch the each or watch it pass away. >HCW:In any case, nothing comes from nothing! > -------------------------------------------------------------- Right. And the mind's choice in the present is one of those conditions for present action based upon present conditions. With metta, Alex #124671 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 12:26 am Subject: choices truth_aerator Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, >------------------------------------------------------------ >HCW: Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions, then why is there such thing as a choice? There would be no point in choosing if only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions. What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions? With best wishes, Alex #124672 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 2:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] choices upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/3/2012 10:26:35 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, >---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions, then why is there such thing as a choice? There would be no point in choosing if only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions. What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions? With best wishes, Alex =============================== I do take your point where you write "What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions?" I have addressed that issue previously, and I don't think it is without merit. I hasten to add, though, that a choosing that is unconditioned and is only a random actualization of one of a few already-determined, possible actions is not a purposeful choosing. Please be aware that no "one" would be making a choice even in that case. I don't deny that such a so-called choosing *might* be what actually occurs. It might be for all I know, but even so it is not "you choosing". Conditions certainly determine what are the possible actions that could be taken, and the occurrence of actualizing one of them is an event (a cetasika) also determined by conditions, and, moreover, how that actualization proceeds is at least a matter of the influence of varying probabilities for the alternatives, probabilities conditioned by a variety of phenomena, chief among which are one's predispositions/accumulations. So, even if there is an element of randomness in choosing among possible alternatives of action, the following is the case: 1) There is no "actualizer" or "chooser," 2) what the alternatives are is predetermined, 3) that an actualization must occur is predetermined, and 4) the alternatives have associated probabilities of actualization that are predetermined. I also have one more thought with regard to your question (and mine) of "What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions?" My thought is as follows: One could ask the same question about EVERY event in any chain of conditionality, a > b > c > ... >z. If the first collection, a, of conditions leads inexorably to result z, would we ask why b through y are needed? The point is that this is simply the way things work. [Example: If fanning our perspired face moves the air, and the moving air causes evaporation of persp iration from the face, and that reduces the facial temperature, would we ask why doesn't the fanning directly produce the cooling? Certainly not - the entire chain of conditions must occur.] Similarly, in the case being discussed of human actions, choice, even if predetermined and entirely unprobabilistic, may well be required as part of a chain of conditionality. So. although it is conceivable that some element of randomness is involved, it is far from obvious that it must be so. In any case, however we hypothesize about causal determinacy and non-determinacy, we should carefully examine our motives for atta view. I strongly suspect it is present in all of our musings. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124673 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 3:25 am Subject: Re: [dsg] choices truth_aerator Hi Howard, all, >HCW:I do take your point where you write "What is the purpose of >the choice in the present if one course of action is already >decided by all the previous conditions?" I have addressed that issue >previously, and I don't think it is without merit. >==================================== Please forgive me, but could you type it again (or cut-and-paste) that particular answer? We have talked about many points and it is easy to overlook this or that. >I hasten to add, though, that a choosing that is unconditioned... Nowhere did I imply that choice was totally unconditioned. It is conditioned, if only by the available choices. >Please be aware that no "one" would be making a choice... Of course. Anatta. Mind chooses. >HCW:I don't deny that such a so-called choosing *might* be what >actually occurs. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there real life experience of mind choosing this possible or that possible option? >HCW: Conditions certainly determine what are the possible actions >that could be taken, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course. Mind cannot choose to make body grow wings and fly to Pluto. By possible actions I emphasize "not reacting with lobha,dosa, moha" toward external object. >1) There is no "actualizer" or "chooser," Right. Mind chooses. >2) what the alternatives are is predetermined, Right. Growing wings and flying to Pluto is not one of the alternatives that we have. >HCW: I also have one more thought with regard to your question (and >mine) of "What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one >course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions?" >My thought is as follows: >One could ask the same question about EVERY event in any chain of >conditionality, a > b > c > ... >z. If the first collection, a, of >conditions leads inexorably to result z, would we ask why b through >y are needed? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So the future (z) is going to happen no matter what is attempted in the present (b through y)? Remember the purpose of Dhamma is to let go of Dukkha. If nothing can be done in the present, then what the purpose of Dhamma, etc? The reason why I stress "choice" is because of belief that external objects are not the cause of suffering, it is only ignorant reaction toward it that is cause of suffering. It is possible not to react with lobha, dosa, moha toward what occurs. With metta, Alex #124674 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 3:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] choices upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/3/2012 1:26:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hi Howard, all, >HCW:I do take your point where you write "What is the purpose of >the choice in the present if one course of action is already >decided by all the previous conditions?" I have addressed that issue >previously, and I don't think it is without merit. >==================================== Please forgive me, but could you type it again (or cut-and-paste) that particular answer? We have talked about many points and it is easy to overlook this or that. ================================= What I proposed as a possible scheme that involves some randomness of choice is as follows (drawn from 2 posts of mine): __________________________ When an act of will occurs, an "impulsion" in Abhidhammic terms, it is preceded by a multitude of conditions leading up to it. That act of will, together with other current and prior conditions, yields an action-result. So, we have conditions --> will --> action-result. I then wonder what the role of the will might be! Why do not the conditions that lead to the will instead directly induce the action? It seems that the willing is superfluous, pointless, and dispensable. But this might be a clue! It occurs to me that the following scenario is conceivable: The conditions that precede an act of will determine not only that there be an act of will but also determine in general, not a single resultant action, but a *set* (maybe large, maybe small) of possible alternative actions, and what the willing does is to randomly pick one of the possible actions. This scenario is a sort of middle way between determinism and non-determinism, in that prior conditions (including often a pattern of planning, thinking, and engaging in emotion) completely determine 1) a set of possible resultant actions and 2) the occurrence of an act of will that randomly chooses one from this delimited set to be the actual action to occur. It is likely that for most of the sets of possible actions to be chosen among, the choices are not equally probable. In particular, due alone to inclinations (or predispositions or "accumulations"), some choices of action would be more likely than others, with an equiprobable measure being the case only on rare occasion. (As we well know, though, a choice with a tiny probability may be the one chosen. For example, in a three-choice set, where choice#1 has a weight of 1/1000, choice#2 a weight of 450/1000, and choice#3 a weight of 549/1000, choice#1 may still be the outcome, because 1 chance out of a thousand is still a positive probabilty.) -------------------------------------- But do note that even if every act of volition is completely predetermined, it might still be a needed step in a causal chain. As I pointed out with the fanning example even though the initial conditions in a causal chain determine all the steps to follow, all those steps might be entirely requisite. With metta, Howard P. S. According to the Dhamma, there is one and only one dhamma that is asankhata, namely nibbana. All else arises in dependence on conditions. Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124675 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 4:58 am Subject: Re: choices truth_aerator Hello Howard, Thank you for your good post that I will have to think over and over. Do you view individual dhammas, the All, as ultimately real? If they are not ultimate real, then what about the process of them? Is it ultimately real? Is ultimate real causes make ultimately real results? With best wishes, Alex #124676 From: upasaka@... Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 6:13 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: choices upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/3/2012 2:58:11 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, Thank you for your good post that I will have to think over and over. Do you view individual dhammas, the All, as ultimately real? ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: As variations in quality, they occur, but as separate things with own being, no, they are conventional and ultimately unreal. This is the main point at which I find myself parting ways with Abhidhamma, at least as expressed here. I consider it a matter of mere convention to view dhammas as separate realities. Actually, any alleged "thing" that changes is not, IMO, an entity, and the Buddha, followed by the commentaries, countenances dhammas as "changing while standing". In the Sankhata Sutta, the Buddha taught "Monks, these three are conditioned characteristics of what is conditioned. Which three? Arising is discernible, passing away is discernible, change while remaining is discernible. These are three conditioned characteristics of what is conditioned." ---------------------------------------------------- If they are not ultimate real, then what about the process of them? Is it ultimately real? Is ultimate real causes make ultimately real results? ------------------------------------------------------ HCW: All "separate phenomena" that we think we observe are actually, as such, matters of convention, in my view, and thus so are relations among them. The entire realm of samsara, IMO, is a sankharic creation - a pipe dream if taken to be more than conventional. In the Uraga Sutta, the Buddha taught "He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: 'This is all unreal' — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin," and in the Potaliya Sutta, he taught "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". Just to clarify, where does sustenance/clinging for the baits of the world cease without trace? Nibbana! That is the singleness referred to, that is the real, and only that. ------------------------------------------------------ With best wishes, Alex ============================ With metta, Howard /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) #124677 From: "Ken H" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 7:54 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' kenhowardau Hi Jon, You wrote to Chris: > The Ven. seems to prefer modern scientific observations over the Abhidhamma, and in doing so he also seems to equate certain dhammas with their conventional counterparts, which in my view is not how they are meant to be understood. > KH: You also wrote: > It seems that the Ven. accepts without question the modern scientific view that all consciousness arises in the brain. He rejects the possibility of citta having a base ("vatthu") other than the brain, yet he does not explain why this could not possibly be the case. > KH: I agree with everything you said about the article: the Ven had not established his case. But wouldn't you agree there was no possibility of anyone ever establishing that type of case? No matter if we settled on the heart or the brain as the ultimately true base of citta we would be missing the point of your first sentence: dhammas cannot be equated with their conventional counterparts. That means, does it not, that no conventional counterpart can be more equated with a dhamma than any other? The ancient commentaries might just as well have said citta was based in the foot. If that was the most intelligent scientific thinking of their day then 'foot' would have been the best conventional (scientific) designation they could have given for 'mind-base.' That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! But sometimes you seem to defend certain concepts found in the Pali texts as if their conventional validity (by modern thinking) somehow mattered. Or am I just imagining that? Ken H #124678 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 2:20 pm Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Rob E and Alex > > Let me share a passage from the Expositor, Analysis of Term pg 99 > > < inclination, training, and idea, there occurs to him a moral thought.>> Thank you, Ken. So there are several types of conditions that will lead to an act or thought being kusala or akusala. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #124679 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 2:36 pm Subject: Re: choices epsteinrob Hi Alex, & Howard. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, > > >------------------------------------------------------------ > >HCW: Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > If only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions, then why is there such thing as a choice? I don't think that the way we understand choice is correct. There is no freedom to choose, one chooses within conditions, which give the possibilities for choice, and factors of various kinds create the choice. "Choices are made" is true in that one option is taken while another is not. But "No one makes a choice" is also true. The choice is made by a collision of various conditions, past and present, and there is no "free agent" to look over all the options and then freely decide. If there were, when would he have the chance to make such a decision? The conditions and their weight is influencing each moment without any breaks. Even the decision process is the result of various forces coming together. > There would be no point in choosing if only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions. There's no way to say what would cause the choice to be made for a or for b - you are assuming you know how it works. But there is no free agent. That which makes the difference between choice a and b with all the same conditions is another condition - what goes into the decision-making process at that moment. It is not a "decider" who comes from the sky and can stand apart from conditions to assess anything. That is an illusion. > What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions? Choice is just another moment in a sequence of events that are caused by conditions and tendencies. There isn't anything else. Unless you believe in a self that magically exists apart from conditions. Do you? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = #124680 From: "Robert E" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 2:45 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Jon. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > J: OK, so your definition of meditation is: "Any mental exercise or technique prescribed by the Buddha for giving rise to kusala mental states (including insight) thereby leading to the development of those mental states." > > You might be interested in the following definition of `meditation' which I came across recently: "The methodical effort to tame and master the mind and to develop its capacity for calm and insight". > > This seems similar to your own definition, with the substitution of `methodical effort' for `mental exercise or technique'. > > Any further thoughts or comments? It's similar but has more of a sense of force or control, which is not what I would advocate. I think that regular practice has its effect because of its design, [Buddha] not because of "effort" or any kind of will or force. But if you were to substitute "regular practice" for "methodical effort" I think it would be close, but not conclusive. I would want to leave room for practice that is not done methodically or continuously as well. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #124681 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 5:48 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 31-mei-2012, om 18:49 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > We have stated now our proposition , i.e. the entree ' lobha - > attachment or greed ' vs ' lobha- greed or greed as a condition for > attachment', ------- N: Here the English might be confusing: lobha has many intensities and sometimes it is translated as attachment, sometimes as greed, or as grasping, etc. The Dhammasangani 1059 has almost hundred synonyms: lust, passion, delighting in, wanting, hoping, etc. One thing is sure: a moment of lobha arises and falls away but it conditions more and more later on. ---------- You had a question (raised to the Bhante) re the issue of avijja- sankhara , the first two elements of the Law of Dependent Orgination , and the question whether these two have to be considered to belong to the previous life. -------- N: So long as there is ignorance there are conditions for the committing of kamma (sankhara), even kusala kamma, that bring results and thus the cycle goes on. This is true for the past but also now. There is ignorance of the four noble Truths now, and we may perform good deeds with the expectation that these will bring good results. At the moment of kusala citta there is no ignorance, but ignorance can be a natural decisive condition for akusala and kusala. ----- Nina. #124682 From: sarah abbott Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 5:54 pm Subject: Re:2007 audio - 11. Idle gossip sarahprocter... Dear Friends, ***** Azita: Can samphappalaapaa [S: idle gossip] be akusala kamma patha [S: i.e. bring results]? KS: If it hurts the other intentionally. Azita: Ok, because there are other aspects of the speech where there is specifically harm to someone else. KS: When it's akusala kamma - the intention to harm the other ***** Metta Sarah ====== #124683 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 5:54 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 31-mei-2012, om 22:17 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > Nibbaana is a dhamma that is known by lokuttara citta. Even lokuttara > > citta is impermanent, dukkha, anatta. It should not be taken for > > self. It arises because of conditions. > > When the conditions are right it cannot be prevented from arising. > > The development of understanding for a long, long time, for aeons, > > can condition the arising of lokuttara citta. > > R: So then, it is still "mental consciousness," because the > lokuttara citta is still a form of consciousness, and nibbana is a > nama, mental object, even though it is unconditioned? ------ N: the translation mental object is used to indicate that the object can be experienced only through the mind-door. It is true that nibbaana is naama, it is not ruupa, not a certain place where one could go to. However, nibbaana is naama that is different from citta and cetasika that are naama, that experience objects. Nibbaana does not experience any object, it is the object of lokuttara citta. There is a word association of naama and namati, to bend. Citta and cetasika bend towards the object. NIbbaana does not, but it bends the lokuttara citta and cetasika towards itself. ------ Nina. #124684 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 6:14 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: the path sarahprocter... Dear Ken O, Good quote below. Thx for sharing. However desirable the object, the object cannot be blamed for the greed that follows.... Again we read about the importance of hearing the Dhamma and accumulated merit and inclination for the practising of "good". Metta Sarah --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > Let me share a passage from the Expositor, Analysis of Term pg 99 > > < inclination, training, and idea, there occurs to him a moral thought.>> ======= #124686 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 6:29 pm Subject: Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... sarahprocter... Dear Rev Triple, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Rev Triple" wrote: > Did the Buddha forbid soldiers from going into the monastery so that they avoid can avoid fighting in the Kingdom of Magadah, when several generals entered the Sangha ? > > If so is this in the Tipitaka? ... S: I vaguely recall reading that King Bimbisara asked the Buddha to ban soldiers from ordaining so that his army didn't all leave when called to action. As I remember, the Buddha agreed to this. However, I don't remember where I read it or whether it's in the Vinaya. (I don't have texts with me). Perhaps others know? Metta Sarah p.s Pls sign off with your name - preferably your real name, so we know how to address you. ========= #124687 From: "sarah" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 6:33 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Dear Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > I'm still a little confused. Maybe a couple of simple questions will help me get more clear: > > 1. Can a dhamma be directly discerned with attachment? ... S: Usually by "discerned", we mean understood. Attachment cannot understand anything, it just clings. So a dhamma can be clung to by attachment. At that instant, citta and all accompanying cetasikas "experience" the dhamma, but not with any wisdom. ... > 2. Can panna ever arise with any form of akusala? ... S: No. No other kusala mental states can either. .... > 3. If the sakadagami or sotapanna has a moment of attachment arise, is there ignorance at that moment, and does that mean there is no direct understanding at that moment? ... S: Yes and correct. There is ignorance arising with all akusala cittas, including those with attachment. Attachment and ignorance are the "roots" at that moment. No direct, indirect, any kind of understanding at those moments. Metta Sarah ===== #124688 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 8:25 pm Subject: VESAKHA DAY yawares1 Dear Members, Do you know that today is the beautiful full moon Vesakha Day? *************** VESAKHA DAY [From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia] History The decision to agree to celebrate the Vesākha as the Buddha’s birthday was formalized at the first Conference of the World Fellowship of Buddhists held in Sri Lanka in 1950, although festivals at this time in the Buddhist world are a centuries-old tradition. The Resolution that was adopted at the World Conference reads as follows: “That this Conference of the World Fellowship of Buddhists, while recording its appreciation of the gracious act of His Majesty, the Maharaja of Nepal in making the full-moon day of Vesak a Public Holiday in Nepal, earnestly requests the Heads of Governments of all countries in which large or small number of Buddhists are to be found, to take steps to make the full-moon day in the month of May a Public Holiday in honour of the Buddha, who is universally acclaimed as one of the greatest benefactors of Humanity.” On Vesākha Day, Buddhists all over the world commemorate events of significance to Buddhists of all traditions: The birth, enlightenment and the passing away of Gautama Buddha. As Buddhism spread from India it was assimilated into many foreign cultures, and consequently Vesākha is celebrated in many different ways all over the world. In 1999, the United Nations resolved to internationally observe the day of Vesak at its headquarters and offices. The celebration of Vesākha May 2007 had two full moon days, the 1st and the 31st. Some countries (including Sri Lanka, Cambodia and Malaysia) celebrated Vesākha on the 1st, while others (Thailand, Singapore) celebrated the holiday on the 31st due to different local lunar observance. This difference also manifests in the observance of other Buddhist holidays, which are traditionally observed at the local full moon. Likewise, in 2012, Vesak or the birth anniversary of the Buddha will be observed on 28 April in Hong Kong and Taiwan, on 5 May in Sri Lanka, on 6 May in India, on 28 May in South Korea and on 4 June in Thailand. On Vesākha day, devout Buddhists and followers alike are expected and requested to assemble in their various temples before dawn for the ceremonial, and honorable, hoisting of the Buddhist flag and the singing of hymns in praise of the holy triple gem: The Buddha, The Dharma (his teachings), and The Sangha (his disciples). Devotees may bring simple offerings of flowers, candles and joss-sticks to lay at the feet of their teacher. These symbolic offerings are to remind followers that just as the beautiful flowers would wither away after a short while and the candles and joss-sticks would soon burn out, so too is life subject to decay and destruction. Devotees are enjoined to make a special effort to refrain from killing of any kind. They are encouraged to partake of vegetarian food for the day. In some countries, notably Sri Lanka, two days are set aside for the celebration of Vesākha and all liquor shops and slaughter houses are closed by government decree during the two days. Also birds, insects and animals are released by the thousands in what is known as a 'symbolic act to liberation'; of giving freedom to those who are in captivity, imprisoned, or tortured against their will. Some devout Buddhists will wear a simple white dress and spend the whole day in temples with renewed determination to observe the eight Precepts. Young novice on Vesākha Day Parade Devout Buddhists undertake to lead a noble life according to the teaching by making daily affirmations to observe the Five Precepts. However, on special days, notably new moon and full moon days, they observe the eight Precepts to train themselves to practice morality, simplicity and humility. Some temples also display a small image of the baby Buddha in front of the altar in a small basin filled with water and decorated with flowers, allowing devotees to pour water over the statue; it is symbolic of the cleansing of a practitioner's bad karma, and to reenact the events following the Buddha's birth, when devas and spirits made heavenly offerings to him. Devotees are expected to listen to talks given by monks. On this day monks will recite verses uttered by the Buddha twenty-five centuries ago, to invoke peace and happiness for the Government and the people. Buddhists are reminded to live in harmony with people of other faiths and to respect the beliefs of other people as the Buddha had taught. Bringing happiness to others Celebrating Vesākha also means making special efforts to bring happiness to the unfortunate like the aged, the handicapped and the sick. To this day, Buddhists will distribute gifts in cash and kind to various charitable homes throughout the country. Vesākha is also a time for great joy and happiness, expressed not by pandering to one’s appetites but by concentrating on useful activities such as decorating and illuminating temples, painting and creating exquisite scenes from the life of the Buddha for public dissemination. Devout Buddhists also vie with one another to provide refreshments and vegetarian food to followers who visit the temple to pay homage to the Enlightened One. Paying homage to the Buddha Tradition ascribes to the Buddha himself instruction on how to pay him homage. Just before he died, he saw his faithful attendant Ananda, weeping. The Buddha advised him not to weep, but to understand the universal law that all compounded things (including even his own body) must disintegrate. He advised everyone not to cry over the disintegration of the physical body but to regard his teachings (The Dhamma) as their teacher from then on, because only the Dhamma truth is eternal and not subject to the law of change. He also stressed that the way to pay homage to him was not merely by offering flowers, incense, and lights, but by truly and sincerely striving to follow his teachings. This is how buddhists are expected to celebrate Vesak: to use the opportunity to reiterate their determination to lead noble lives, to develop their minds, to practise loving-kindness and to bring peace and harmony to humanity. ************** Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya #124689 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Mon Jun 4, 2012 9:22 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] VESAKHA DAY moellerdieter Dear Yawares,All, thanks for the reminder of the most important Buddhist holiday. Nice for those living not close to a monastry : offer a candle ..perhaps together with paying homage to the Buddha , taking refuge in the Triple Gem ...... see http://www.buddhamind.info/shrine/recent/visit_thumbs.php with Metta Dieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Yawares Sastri To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 12:25 PM Subject: [dsg] VESAKHA DAY Dear Members, Do you know that today is the beautiful full moon Vesakha Day? *************** #124690 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 2:04 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG moellerdieter Dear Nina, thanks for the feedback. you wrote (N: Here the English might be confusing: lobha has many intensities and sometimes it is translated as attachment, sometimes as greed, or as grasping, etc. The Dhammasangani 1059 has almost hundred synonyms: lust, passion, delighting in, wanting, hoping, etc. One thing is sure: a moment of lobha arises and falls away but it conditions more and more later on. ---------- D: I wonder sometimes whether the seemingly overload of synonyms for certain key terms presents the trouble of translation as fine differences of a language specialized in consciousness (etc..) are simply missing in our mother tongue. In general - and I think you will agree - lobha means urge for which the Buddha used 'thirst' tanha - as a simile , because we all know what it means and our habit (attachment,grasping, -upadana) ) to follow with action . It is exactly like you quoted: 'Craving is the aspiring to an object that one has not yet reached like a thief's stretching out his hand in the dark') ... 'clinging is the grasping of an object that one has reached, like the thief's grasping his objective ') . It is important to see the difference because between the emotion of desire and the grasping lies a chance to resist.. (possible when conscience makes it's present felt .. how would you translate that in terms of Citta-Cetasika ? ) N: You had a question (raised to the Bhante) re the issue of avijja- sankhara , the first two elements of the Law of Dependent Orgination , and the question whether these two have to be considered to belong to the previous life. -------- So long as there is ignorance there are conditions for the committing of kamma (sankhara), even kusala kamma, that bring results and thus the cycle goes on. This is true for the past but also now. There is ignorance of the four noble Truths now, and we may perform good deeds with the expectation that these will bring good results. At the moment of kusala citta there is no ignorance, but ignorance can be a natural decisive condition for akusala and kusala. ----- D: do I get that right: you are sharing my view that the elements avijja -sankhara do not mean finished but accumulated/up-to-date past ?;-) with Metta Dieter #124691 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 2:42 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... moellerdieter Dear Sarah, you wrote: S: I vaguely recall reading that King Bimbisara asked the Buddha to ban soldiers from ordaining so that his army didn't all leave when called to action. As I remember, the Buddha agreed to this. However, I don't remember where I read it or whether it's in the Vinaya. (I don't have texts with me). Perhaps others know? D: during the ordination ceremony , a standard procedure with dates back to the Buddha' s time the candidate is asked in front of the assembly 'whether he is free from government service?' (anunnatosi matapituhi). I assume that there is a corresponding text in the vinaya... with Metta Dieter #124692 From: "Christine" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 6:31 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... christine_fo... Hello all, This might be of assistance, with metta Chris ======================================== 3. Critics of the Doctrine of Ahimsa 1. There were persons who objected to the doctrine of Ahimsa. They said that it involved surrender or non-resistance to evil. 2. This is a complete misrepresentation of what the Blessed Lord taught by his doctrine of Ahimsa. 3. The Blessed Lord has made his position clear on various occasions so as to leave no room for ambiguity or misunderstanding. 4. The first such occasion to which reference should be made is the occasion when he made a rule regarding the entry of a soldier in the Sangh. 5. At one time the border provinces of the kingdom of Magadha were agitated. Then the Magadha king Seniya Bimbisara gave order to the Commander of the army: ' Well now, go and ask your officers to search through the border provinces for the offenders, punish them and restore peace." The Commander acted accordingly. 6. On hearing the orders of the Commander the officers found themselyes placed in a dilemma. They knew that the Tathagatha taught that those who go to war and find delight in fighting, do evil and produce great demerit. On the other hand, here was the king's order to capture the offenders and to kill them. Now what shall we do, asked the officers to themselves. 7. Then these officers thought: "If we could enter the order of the Buddha we would be able to escape from the dilemma." 8. Thus these officers went to the bhikkhus and asked them for ordination; the bhikkhus conferred on them the pabbajja and upasampada ordinations and the officers disappeared from the army. 9. The Commander of the army .finding that the officers were not to be seen, asked the soldiers: "Why, how is it that the officers are nowhere to be seen ?" " The officers, lord, have embraced religious life of the bhikkhus," replied the soldiers. 10. Then the Commander of the army was annoyed, and became very angry: "How can the bhikkhus ordain persons in the royal army ? " 11. The Commander of the army informed the king of what had happened. And the king asked the officers of justice: "Tell me, my good sirs, what punishment does he deserve who ordains a person in the royal service ?" 12. "The Upagghaya, Your Majesty, should be beheaded; to him who recites (the Kammavaka), the tongue should be torn out; to those who form the chapter, half of their ribs should be broken." 13. Then the king went to the place where the Blessed One was; and after obeisance informed him of what had happened. 14. " The Lord well knows that there are kings who are against the Dhamma. These hostile kings are ever ready to harass the bhikkhus even for trifling reasons. It is impossible to imagine the lengths to which they might go in their ill-treatment of the bhikkhus if they find that the bhikkhus are seducing the soldiers to leave the army and join the Sangh. Pray Lord to do the needful to avert the disaster." 15. The Lord replied: " It was never my intention to allow soldiers undfer the cloak of Ahimsa or in the name of Ahimsa to abandon their duty to the king or to their country." 16. Accordingly the Blessed One made a rule against the admission of persons in royal service to the Sangh and proclaimed it to the bhikkhus, saying: "Let no one, 0 Bhikkhus, who is in the royal service, receive the Pabbajja ordination. He who confers the Pabbajja ordination on such a person will be guilty of a dukkata offence." http://www.ambedkar.org/buddhism/BAHD/45F.Buddha%20and%20His%20Dhamma%20PART%20V\ I.htm #124693 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 8:08 am Subject: Re: choices truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: I don't think that the way we understand choice is correct. You, and Howard can be right. But lets think about this. >RE:There is no freedom to choose, one chooses within conditions, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Freedom to choose from conditions is freedom within the boundary of those conditions. >RE: "Choices are made" is true in that one option is taken... If there was only one thing that could and would happen, then it would not be correct to use the word "choice". Choice can only be made if there is some thing to choose from, the possible actions being limited by conditions. >RE: But "No one makes a choice" is also true. Right. Mind chooses within choices of possible actions. >RE: The conditions and their weight is influencing each moment >without any breaks. Even the decision process is the result of >various forces coming together. >==================================== Right. The tough question is what precisely does "conditionality" or "causality" mean? >RE: Choice is just another moment in a sequence of events that are >caused by conditions and tendencies. There isn't anything else. >Unless you believe in a self that magically exists apart from >conditions. Do you? >====================== Why can't conditions limit the possible courses of action, and choice is the trigger that chooses one? Of course it is all conditioned. The question is not so much as "would the mind behave in exactly the same way under those same conditions" but ***could*** it behave differently under those same conditions. If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X played such and such a role. If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. With metta, Alex #124694 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 8:17 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ...Nibbaana does not experience > any object, it is the object of lokuttara citta. > There is a word association of naama and namati, to bend. Citta and > cetasika bend towards the object. NIbbaana does not, but it bends the > lokuttara citta and cetasika towards itself. So nibbana is an object of citta, but is not citta or cetasika, but a mental object of citta that does not itself experience anything. Would nibbana then be a condition or state for citta to experience? Is there any way to say or describe what nibbana is, as an object of citta? Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #124695 From: "Robert E" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 8:20 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > >RE:Okay, so my question to you, which you haven't answered yet I >don't >think, is: Who or what makes that decision? > >============================ > > The mind makes decision. > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/124655 > > >RE: Is there a self that can choose to move the hand to the left or >right? > >===================================== > > The mind can choose among the possible possibilities and be able to influence this or that. If the mind makes a decision about various possibilities and freely chooses one over others, that is the definition of a self. You are saying that the mind has self-hood and is able to control and choose what reality it will create. A mind that has agency has self-hood. > What is helpful for Nibbana, kusala or akusala? Right now the question is one of agency, that is, how does kusala or akusala get created, who can create it, not whether it's better or not. Obviously, kusala is better. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = #124696 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 9:00 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hi RobertE, all, >If the mind makes a decision about various possibilities and freely >chooses one over others, that is the definition of a self. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is this said? Can you please provide a sutta quote? In 99% of the cases the Buddha rejected Atta because aggregates are anicca and dukkha. >RE:You are saying that the mind has self-hood and is able to control >and choose what reality it will create. A mind that has agency has >self-hood. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am not saying that. I am saying that mind chooses. Doesn't causal dhamma control its result? (ex: kamma creates corresponding vipaka.) >A:What is helpful for Nibbana, kusala or akusala? >=================== >RE:Right now the question is one of agency, that is, how does kusala >or akusala get created, who can create it, not whether it's better >or not. Obviously, kusala is better. >==================== Mind chooses. Why don't you consider a sabhava dhamma to be little Atta? Doesn't it cause its corresponding result to arise? With metta, Alex #124697 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 9:21 am Subject: Choice within Conditionality truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Howard, all, Is it possible to have conditionality AND choice? Lets say that at a certain time there is a set of conditions XYZ. If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X played such and such a role. If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. Also choice within possibilities doesn't mean that the mind would always choose A if there were conditions XYZ. Choice means that the mind could have chosen B rather than A, provided that A&B are possible actions. With metta, Alex #124698 From: upasaka@... Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 10:17 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Alex (and Robert) - In a message dated 6/4/2012 7:21:46 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello RobertE, Howard, all, Is it possible to have conditionality AND choice? Lets say that at a certain time there is a set of conditions XYZ. If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X played such and such a role. If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. Also choice within possibilities doesn't mean that the mind would always choose A if there were conditions XYZ. Choice means that the mind could have chosen B rather than A, provided that A&B are possible actions. With metta, Alex ============================= Alex, with regard to what you are saying here, not all of which do I follow, the most important matter, it seems to me, is what you might mean by "this mind that chooses". It seems to me that such an alleged thing would be a chooser, an actor of sorts. From my perspective, there is no agent that is "the mind". Consciousness and a variety of other mental operations, including volition, simply occur. And any single one of these, call it O, occurs due to prior conditions, including so-called "present conditions", which, actually, are simply material and mental conditions in effect *immediately* prior to O functioning. All that is involved with this is events that occur, all conditioned. There is doing, but no doer. It is wrong, of course, to play down the role of volition, but it is even more serious of an error, I believe, to treat volition as an agent or as the action of an agent. With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124699 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 10:37 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality truth_aerator Hello Howard, >============================= >HCW: "this mind that chooses". It seems to me that such an alleged >thing would > be a chooser, an actor of sorts. From my perspective, >there is no agent that is "the mind". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does Kamma (cause) produce its Vipaka (result)? Can a certain dhamma produce certain result? Why can't mind, or will be able to chose? > Consciousness and a variety of other mental operations, >including volition, simply occur. >>>>>>>>>>>> And impersonal choice does occur. >And any single one of these, call it O, occurs due to prior >conditions, including so-called "present conditions", >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right. Choice is conditioned. But that doesn't mean that only one thing can and would be chosen by impersonal process. >HCW:...but it is even more serious of an error, I believe, to treat >volition as an agent or as the action of an agent. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What about cause->effect dhammas? Isn't there control where dhamma is the cause of some specific result? With metta, Alex #124700 From: Ken O Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 10:06 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: choices ashkenn2k Dear Rob E <> KC: I like this statment choices are made through the collision of various conditions. There is no one that make a choice, it is dhamma that make a choice. Even if one there is a self that choose, that is just miccha ditthi, and miccha ditthi is also a dhamma, in the end still dhamma that make a choice. Dhamma is not self, where is a self then in the first instance, it is just our own misconceiving that is a self that make a choice. cheers KC From: Robert E >To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com >Sent: Monday, 4 June 2012, 12:36 >Subject: [dsg] Re: choices > > > >Hi Alex, & Howard. > >--- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: >> >> Hello Howard, RobertK, RobertE, all, >> >> >---------------------------------------------------------- >> >HCW: Of COURSE choices are made! There is no doubt of that. >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> >> If only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions, then why is there such thing as a choice? > >I don't think that the way we understand choice is correct. There is no freedom to choose, one chooses within conditions, which give the possibilities for choice, and factors of various kinds create the choice. "Choices are made" is true in that one option is taken while another is not. But "No one makes a choice" is also true. The choice is made by a collision of various conditions, past and present, and there is no "free agent" to look over all the options and then freely decide. If there were, when would he have the chance to make such a decision? The conditions and their weight is influencing each moment without any breaks. Even the decision process is the result of various forces coming together. > >> There would be no point in choosing if only one thing could and would occur given the same set of conditions. > >There's no way to say what would cause the choice to be made for a or for b - you are assuming you know how it works. But there is no free agent. That which makes the difference between choice a and b with all the same conditions is another condition - what goes into the decision-making process at that moment. It is not a "decider" who comes from the sky and can stand apart from conditions to assess anything. That is an illusion. > >> What is the purpose of the choice in the present if one course of action is already decided by all the previous conditions? > >Choice is just another moment in a sequence of events that are caused by conditions and tendencies. There isn't anything else. Unless you believe in a self that magically exists apart from conditions. Do you? > >Best, >Rob E. > >= = = = = = = = = = > > > > > #124701 From: Ken O Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 10:12 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality ashkenn2k Dear Alex Whatever choice is made A or B, it is just dhamma that made the choice. Yes it is not necessaary that dhamma chiose A because of the conditons XYZ, that will be deterministic, and means there is no salvation. Latency, accumulations and inclinations affect and influence the way dhamma make a choice but they are not what a make a choice, it is still up to the dhamma at the present moment that make a chioce. A kusala dhamma can condition an akusala and likwise in the reverse, an akusala can condition a kusala. KC #124702 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Tue Jun 5, 2012 10:49 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality moellerdieter Hi Howard (Alex and Robert), just a comment between you wrote: 'All that is involved with this is events that occur, all conditioned. There is doing, but no doer. It is wrong, of course, to play down the role of volition, but it is even more serious of an error, I believe, to treat volition as an agent or as the action of an agent' D: certainly the events that occur are conditioned , but I.M.H.O. volition /intention - D.O. 2nd and subsequently 4th place, presents a decisive role. In the case of sankhara we may assume that avijja /moha conditions the role of an agent , a force , which creates /formates a consciousness directed by mental formation which selects priorities among the senses media. To us this appears as the urge ' I ..want, do not want '. with Metta Dieter #124703 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 12:20 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality truth_aerator Dear Ken, Thank you for your reply. With best wishes, Alex --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > > Dear Alex > > Whatever choice is made A or B, it is just dhamma that made the choice. Yes it is not necessaary that dhamma chiose A because of the conditons XYZ, that will be deterministic, and means there is no salvation. Latency, accumulations and inclinations affect and influence the way dhamma make a choice but they are not what a make a choice, it is still up to the dhamma at the present moment that make a chioce. A kusala dhamma can condition an akusala and likwise in the reverse, an akusala can condition a kusala. > > KC > > > #124704 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 12:47 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Dieter (and Alex & Robert) - In a message dated 6/5/2012 8:50:14 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, moellerdieter@... writes: Hi Howard (Alex and Robert), just a comment between you wrote: 'All that is involved with this is events that occur, all conditioned. There is doing, but no doer. It is wrong, of course, to play down the role of volition, but it is even more serious of an error, I believe, to treat volition as an agent or as the action of an agent' D: certainly the events that occur are conditioned , but I.M.H.O. volition /intention - D.O. 2nd and subsequently 4th place, presents a decisive role. --------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I AGREE that volition that implements choice is (quite *literally*) decisive. But volition is still conditioned in at the least the following three ways: 1) Conditions necessitate that an act of volition occur, 2) Conditions determine exactly what are the possible alternatives to be chosen among by that volition, and 3) Conditions - most especially predispositions - determine the probabilistic weights of the possible alternatives. --------------------------------------------------------- In the case of sankhara we may assume that avijja /moha conditions the role of an agent , a force , which creates /formates a consciousness directed by mental formation which selects priorities among the senses media. To us this appears as the urge ' I ..want, do not want '. with Metta Dieter ============================= With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124705 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 2:11 am Subject: 3 lives interpretation moellerdieter Dear Nina , all, I like to add on my previous message (from Ven. Nanavira's Notes ...) 1. The traditional interpretation of paticcasamuppada (of its usual twelve-factored formulation, that is to say) apparently has its roots in the Patisambhidamagga , or perhaps in the Abhidhammapitaka. This interpretation is fully expounded in the Visuddhimagga . It can be briefly summarized thus: avijja and sankhara are kamma in the previous existence, and their vipaka is viana, namarupa, salayatana, phassa, and vedana, in the present existence; tanha, upadana, and bhava, are kamma in the present existence, and their vipaka is jati and jaramarana in the subsequent existence. 2. This Note will take for granted first, that the reader is acquainted with this traditional interpretation, and secondly, that he is dissatisfied with it. D: yes , I am dissatisfied too as long as previous existence means finished past ,as there is nothing like finished past (besides pari nibbana) . Our present is accumulated past. By disruption we can not speak anymore of rounds (samsara) , can we? please compare : http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.145.than.html "Monks, I will teach you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Listen and pay close attention. I will speak. "Now what, monks, is old kamma? The eye is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. The ear... The nose... The tongue... The body... The intellect is to be seen as old kamma, fabricated & willed, capable of being felt. This is called old kamma. "And what is new kamma? Whatever kamma one does now with the body, with speech, or with the intellect: This is called new kamma. "And what is the cessation of kamma? Whoever touches the release that comes from the cessation of bodily kamma, verbal kamma, & mental kamma: This is called the cessation of kamma. "And what is the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma? Just this noble eightfold path: right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration. This is called the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. "So, monks, I have taught you new & old kamma, the cessation of kamma, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of kamma. Whatever a teacher should do - seeking the welfare of his disciples, out of sympathy for them - that have I done for you. Over there are the roots of trees; over there, empty dwellings. Practice jhana, monks. Don't be heedless. Don't later fall into regret. This is our message to you." and http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn15/sn15.009.than.html At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said: "From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Just as a stick thrown up in the air lands sometimes on its base, sometimes on its side, sometimes on its tip; in the same way, beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving, transmigrating & wandering on, sometimes go from this world to another world, sometimes come from another world to this. "Why is that? From an inconstruable beginning comes transmigration. A beginning point is not evident, though beings hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving are transmigrating & wandering on. Long have you thus experienced stress, experienced pain, experienced loss, swelling the cemeteries - enough to become disenchanted with all fabricated things, enough to become dispassionate, enough to be released." with Metta Dieter ----- Original Message ----- From: Dieter Moeller To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 6:04 PM Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Pali glossary to be found in the file section of DSG Dear Nina, thanks for the feedback. you wrote (N: Here the English might be confusing: lobha has many intensities and sometimes it is translated as attachment, sometimes as greed, or as grasping, etc. The Dhammasangani 1059 has almost hundred synonyms: lust, passion, delighting in, wanting, hoping, etc. One thing is sure: a moment of lobha arises and falls away but it conditions more and more later on. ---------- D: I wonder sometimes whether the seemingly overload of synonyms for certain key terms presents the trouble of translation as fine differences of a language specialized in consciousness (etc..) are simply missing in our mother tongue. In general - and I think you will agree - lobha means urge for which the Buddha used 'thirst' tanha - as a simile , because we all know what it means and our habit (attachment,grasping, -upadana) ) to follow with action . It is exactly like you quoted: 'Craving is the aspiring to an object that one has not yet reached like a thief's stretching out his hand in the dark') ... 'clinging is the grasping of an object that one has reached, like the thief's grasping his objective ') . It is important to see the difference because between the emotion of desire and the grasping lies a chance to resist.. (possible when conscience makes it's present felt .. how would you translate that in terms of Citta-Cetasika ? ) N: You had a question (raised to the Bhante) re the issue of avijja- sankhara , the first two elements of the Law of Dependent Orgination , and the question whether these two have to be considered to belong to the previous life. -------- So long as there is ignorance there are conditions for the committing of kamma (sankhara), even kusala kamma, that bring results and thus the cycle goes on. This is true for the past but also now. There is ignorance of the four noble Truths now, and we may perform good deeds with the expectation that these will bring good results. At the moment of kusala citta there is no ignorance, but ignorance can be a natural decisive condition for akusala and kusala. ----- D: do I get that right: you are sharing my view that the elements avijja -sankhara do not mean finished but accumulated/up-to-date past ?;-) with Metta Dieter [ #124706 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 2:34 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Choice within Conditionality moellerdieter Hi Howard, you wrote: HCW: I AGREE that volition that implements choice is (quite *literally*) decisive. But volition is still conditioned in at the least the following three ways: 1) Conditions necessitate that an act of volition occur, 2) Conditions determine exactly what are the possible alternatives to be chosen among by that volition, and 3) Conditions - most especially predispositions - determine the probabilistic weights of the possible alternatives. --------------------------------------------------------- D: sounds good to me ... assumed conditions include the I delusion/identification , the apparent agent ;-) (see as well SN 12, 61) with Metta Dieter . #124707 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 3:51 am Subject: Vessantara And Maddi yawares1 Dear Members, After beautiful Vesakha Day, I proudly present the great love jataka of Vessantara And Maddi. The Twelfth Of Never: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNuB9h-63xg ******************** Vessantara And Maddi [Translated from the Pali by Dr.C.B.Varma,D. Litt] The lineage of the Sivis is best known for its charity and sacrifices in the Indian traditions since time immemorial. Once, the Bodhisatta was born as Vessantara (Sanskrit: Vishvantara) in the dynasty of the Sivi in the kingdom of Jetuttara. King Sanjaya was his father; and Queen Phusati was his mother. He appeared to be a child prodigy because he spoke on the very day when he was born. Interestingly, on the same day a white elephant was also born. This elephant, who was given the name Pacchaya, was gifted with the supernatural power to make the rain fall. Vessantara's passion for charity was so intense that the earth trembled when he pledged to make a great gift at the young age of eight. At sixteen he married Maddi (Sanskrit: Madri). He had two children: Jali and Kanhajina. At that time there was a great draught in Kalinga. So, eight Brahmins from Kalinga came to Vessantara to beg for his white elephant to make the rain fall in their country. Vessantara acceded to their request and donated the elephant. When the people of Jetuttara heard of this news they were terribly disturbed. Agitatingly, they went to the king and asked him to punish the prince by banishing him to the forest of Vankagiri. The will of the people eventually prevailed and Vessantara had to go on exile much to the unwillingness of the king. Before setting out he obtained the king's consent to hold an alms-giving ceremony called the "Gifts of Seven Hundreds (Sattasataka). On the occasion he gave away seven hundred pieces of seven hundred kinds of things to the needy people. When Vessantara took leave of his parents and was preparing to depart, his wife Maddi insisted to accompany him with her children Jali and Kanhajina. They left the palace in a royal chariot drawn by four horses. On the way four brahmins met him and begged for his four horses. After giving the four horses to the brahmins when he began to fasten the girth tightly round his waist to put himself under the yoke and to drag the carriage there appeared four yakkhas in the form of red deer. They put their shoulders under the yoke like well-trained excellent horses and drew his carriage. When Maddi was staring at them with joy and surprise the Bodhisatta said, "Lo! the influence of the benevolent forest Of the hermitage That the best of the deer Extend hospitability To the forest-guests So ardently." The queen, however, remarked, "You may conceal your merits, and say so I call this to be your influence. Like the laughing lotuses, which surpass the beauty of the stars mirrored in the water, Exposing so fully To the curious gaze of the radiant Moon With its groping rays For the delightful titillation." When they were thus involved in the pleasant conversation they encountered one more brahmin beggar, who begged for the carriage. So, Vessantara had to part with his carriage, too. He then lifted his son Jali in his arms, and Maddi lifted Kanhanjana; and thus they continued their jouney on foot. The sun was scorching. So, The cloud overspread overhead to act as a canopy. The trees extended their branches to offer them delicious fruits as an offering to their virtue of charity. When they longed for water the lotus ponds appeared before them to quench their thirst. Further, the yakkhas shortened their path to protect them from exertion. Thus, treading through Suvannagiritala, Kantimara, Mount Aranjagiri, Dunnivittha, the capital of Cheta (where his uncle ruled), Gandhamadana, the foot of Mount Vipula to the river Ketumati (where a forester offered them food) and then by crossing the river Nalika along the bank of lake Muchalinda and further crossing a dense forest they finally reached Vankagiri. Vissakamma, the Engineer of Sakka had already built two hermitages for them in the forest. One was for Vessantara and the other was for the rest of the family. The power of Vessantara was so strong that no wild animal came near their hermitages. Happily, they spent four months. One day, one old Brahmin named Jujaka came to the hermitage when Maddi had gone to the forest to bring some fruits for the family. Accosting Vessantara he begged for his two children because Amittatapana, his wife had demanded for two slaves for herself. As Vessantara was widely known for his dana-paramita (perfection of charitability) the greedy Brahmin was intent on exploiting the situation. Vessantara tried to convince the Brahmin to change his mind in several ways. Yet, he insisted on accepting nothing but the two children. Knowing Jujaka's mind the children were extremely terrified and ran away to a nearby pond and hid themselves. They, however, re-appeared when their father called them. And by then Vessantara had finally agreed to the shrew demand of Jujaka. The brahmin, then chanting some phrases of benediction to the donour ordered the children to accompany him. The children, who did not want to leave glued to the feet of their father to ask Jujaka to wait at least until the arrival of their mother. But shrewd and mean Jujaka without wasting time fastened the hands of the two delicate children with a creeper and forcibly dragged them to his destination. The bleeding and bewailing children, however, screamed, "Oh! the mother will certainly cry like the chataka (bird) upon return Whose little ones are killed. How would she act When she comes back with many roots and fruits Gathered from the forest But finds the hermitage empty. Oh father! I have many toys Horses, elephants and chariots Give half to mother to assuage her grief." When Maddi returned late in the evening and did not find her children around, she asked Vessantara of their whereabouts. But Vessantara kept silence. She then repeated the same question several times, yet Vessantara did not utter a single word. So, she again went inside the forest and looked for the children for whole night. Next morning, when she returned she fainted. Vessentara then helped her regain consciousness. That was the time he apprised her of the whereabouts of the children and narrated the story. By then Maddi had mustered up the courage to endure the trauma. Surprisingly, she praised Vessantara's great act of dana-sila (Conduct of charity). Their sacrifice trembled the earth. And so did mount Sineru with all its resplendent gems. Surprised, Sakka, the lord of the devas inquired into the cause. When he learnt the cause of the quakes owing to the sacrifice of Vessantara he visited the hermitage next morning to test the firmity of his vow in the guise of a mendicant and begged him for his wife. Even then Vessantara did not lose the firmness of his mind and nodded to donate Maddi as well. Besides, no anger sprang even in the heart of Maddi. She did not wail. She rather looked stupefied and stood like a statue with her eyes fixed on her husband with a fresh load of suffering. Admiringly, Sakka then said, "Though a house-holder Yet giving up the most beloved children and wife in charity With such detachment; Can there be a greater exemplification of magnanimity?" Now, it was the time for Sakka to reveal his identity. He gave Maddi back to Vessantara. Furthermore, he offered eight boons to the great donor, which included the reunion of his family; his recall to the father's kingdom; and his ability to benefaction. In the meanwhile, Jujaka had traveled sixty leagues and having lost his way he reached Jetuttara, though he intended to reach Kalinga. His rugged appearance and harsh behaviour with the two delicate children attracted the royal guards, who brought him before the king. King Sanjaya, when saw his grand-children and learnt their story he bought them back from the cruel brahmin in lieu of handsome gifts and seven-storeyed palace. But Jujaka could hardly enjoy those riches as he died of over-eating in a few days. The king along with Phusati, Jali and his army then marched to Vankagiri to bring back his son and the daughter-in-law. The white elephant Pacchaya also joined the procession as he had just returned from Kalinga as no one could subdue him there. Finally, after a month of merry-making in the forest they all returned to the kingdom, happily. (Devadatta is identified with Jujaka and his wife Amittapana as Chincha; Sanjaya as Suddhodhana and Phusati as Mahamaya; Rahula with Jali, Uppalavanna as Kanhajina, Rahulamata as Maddi; and Vessantara as the Bodhisatta). *************** Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya #124708 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 4:26 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > 3. If the sakadagami or sotapanna has a moment of attachment arise, is there ignorance at that moment, and does that mean there is no direct understanding at that moment? > ... > S: Yes and correct. There is ignorance arising with all akusala cittas, including those with attachment. Attachment and ignorance are the "roots" at that moment. No direct, indirect, any kind of understanding at those moments. Thanks for the very helpful responses. This is interesting. So, I would guess that since the sakadagami or sotapanna is very advanced, he is having many kusala moments with panna. Would the moments of attachment and ignorance often be followed by moments with panna that would understand the ignorance and attachment for what they are? And do arahats also have moments of akusala, or has all such been eradicated completely for them? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #124709 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 4:41 am Subject: Re: choices epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > > >RE: I don't think that the way we understand choice is correct. > > You, and Howard can be right. But lets think about this. > > > >RE:There is no freedom to choose, one chooses within conditions, > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Freedom to choose from conditions is freedom within the boundary of those conditions. What is it that is free? You say 'mind' but that is not very specific. Anything can be mind. You have not identified an element that is able to look at choices outside of the flow of changing conditions which happens at every moment, and say "I want this one, not that one." The whole entire false idea of a self that has will and control is that there is a kind of overseer or independent conscious entity that is not subject to the conditions that he is immersed in. That is the false self in a nutshell, so if that is what you are invoking, you are just back to square 1 on the anatta scale. This is a really difficult issue. We either have to account for the element of choice, or else admit that there isn't one. If it is a partial choice, you would have to explain how it works, and what is it that is able to coordinate with conditions to make that choice. Speaking loosely about the mind choosing things, in an area that is so fraught with conflict and misunderstanding, is not going to resolve it. > >RE: "Choices are made" is true in that one option is taken... > > If there was only one thing that could and would happen, then it would not be correct to use the word "choice". Choice can only be made if there is some thing to choose from, the possible actions being limited by conditions. Well I don't know if that is even the case. Conditions are not predicted in advance, but as they arise they dictate the results. If a stream is flowing over rocks, it either goes left or right, but it doesn't "choose" to go left or right. It is some combination of the force and direction of the stream of water, and the construction of the rock. There is no third element that says "left" or "right." It is like that with the mind as well. The mind is presented with "a" or "b" and because of its own conditions and propensities it chooses one or the other. It may "choose," but doesn't have a "choice" over what it "chooses." So you may be right that it is not a real choice in that sense. Maybe there is no choice. That doesn't mean that anyone can predict what choice will be taken. That is due to conditions at the time it takes place. It is very likely that an alcoholic will take a drink, but it is possible that at a certain time he decides not to take a drink. Is that because he is free to choose whether to drink or not, or is it just because at that time conditions were such that it tilted the other way? Next time it will tilt towards the drink and he will 'decide' to take the drink, due to conditions, not really due to choice. It seems like choice, but it is not. > >RE: But "No one makes a choice" is also true. > > Right. Mind chooses within choices of possible actions. The way you are using mind seems no different to me than self. What's the difference? If mind can choose, self can choose. The self is the free mind making choices, if such exists. > >RE: The conditions and their weight is influencing each moment >without any breaks. Even the decision process is the result of >various forces coming together. > >==================================== > > Right. The tough question is what precisely does "conditionality" or > "causality" mean? It means that it pushes or pulls the result in one or another direction. Taking all those conditions together they dictate the final result. The stream example works pretty well. The water doesn't choose anything. It is dictated by speed, direction, rock and wind, and other such conditions. It will go either left or right, but that just depends on all the factors influencing its flow. There is no other factor that "chooses." The analogy holds up for the mind as well. > >RE: Choice is just another moment in a sequence of events that are >caused by conditions and tendencies. There isn't anything else. >Unless you believe in a self that magically exists apart from >conditions. Do you? > >====================== > > Why can't conditions limit the possible courses of action, and choice is the trigger that chooses one? Choice may arise and choose, but then it is just another mental factor triggered by another mental factor. It's not an actual "choice" in that sense - coming out of freedom, rather than conditions. > Of course it is all conditioned. The question is not so much as "would the mind behave in exactly the same way under those same conditions" but ***could*** it behave differently under those same conditions. Not that mind. The mind and its factors is part of the conditionality as well, all of which is also not chosen, but developed by various causes. That mind will only choose the way that it does, given its own conditions and other conditions that affect it at that moment. > If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X played such and such a role. That's right. > If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. But what caused condition Y to choose B instead of X choosing A? More conditions. It's turtles all the way down, if you know that old myth. [The world rests on a giant turtle, but what does the turtle rest on? Answer: It's turtles all the way down. Nothing but conditions.] > Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. Choice is also dictated by conditions. In that sense it is a moment of mental activity, but is not really a "choice" in the way that you mean it. Conditions switch the track, which takes choice down track A or B. The idea that the mind freely chooses between options is, I believe, an illusion. There's no self. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124710 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 9:31 am Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hi RobertE, all, > > > >If the mind makes a decision about various possibilities and freely >chooses one over others, that is the definition of a self. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Where is this said? Can you please provide a sutta quote? If I can find it, it is definitely there in my view. But I'll have to look around. Basically, the Buddha says that the way you can tell if something is self or part of self is if you can control it and tell it what to do. He says that if thought were self you could just think of something and it would come into existence. What he defines as non-self is that which cannot be controlled, determined or kept from disappearing or changing. Anyway, I will try to find it, but don't hold your breath. I keep losing track of my references for unknown reasons. > In 99% of the cases the Buddha rejected Atta because aggregates > are anicca and dukkha. I don't know what this means, please explain. I don't see how Aggregates are anicca and dukkha ---> the Buddha rejects Atta. > >RE:You are saying that the mind has self-hood and is able to control >and choose what reality it will create. A mind that has agency has >self-hood. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > I am not saying that. I am saying that mind chooses. > Doesn't causal dhamma control its result? (ex: kamma creates corresponding vipaka.) No it does not control its result, any more than the moon "controls" the tide - it is just mechanical, not having any sense of "choice." When you talk about making a choice, you mean to do so purposely. Kamma doesn't do that, it just happens, like the moon and the tide. Kamma doesn't have awareness or purposely "do" anything. > >A:What is helpful for Nibbana, kusala or akusala? > >=================== > >RE:Right now the question is one of agency, that is, how does kusala >or akusala get created, who can create it, not whether it's better >or not. Obviously, kusala is better. > >==================== > > Mind chooses. You've said this before, but I frankly don't know what it means. What is "mind?" How does it "choose?" I can't even assess what you are saying without more details of what actually takes place. > Why don't you consider a sabhava dhamma to be little Atta? Doesn't it cause its corresponding result to arise? Causal relations have nothing to do with "choice." You are saying there is a conscious agent that makes a decision. Dhammas don't do any of that, they just arise lawfully in relation to the conditions that cause them to arise. There's no choice to do x or y, just a conditioned outcome. Does a traffic light choose to turn red or green? No, it is programmed to do so. It's the same thing. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = #124711 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 9:37 am Subject: [dsg] Re: choices epsteinrob Hi Ken O. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Ken O wrote: > KC: I like this statment choices are made through the collision of various conditions. There is no one that make a choice, it is dhamma that make a choice. Even if one there is a self that choose, that is just miccha ditthi, and miccha ditthi is also a dhamma, in the end still dhamma that make a choice. Dhamma is not self, where is a self then in the first instance, it is just our own misconceiving that is a self that make a choice. That is a good point - even the arising of the idea that there is a self that made a choice is just another example of a nama that is misconceiving that. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #124712 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:15 am Subject: Re: choices truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: What is it that is free? You say 'mind' but that is not very >specific. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Choice is called choice because it can choose between at least two possibilities. >RE:You have not identified an element "Choice" is that element. [cut] >A: If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X >played such and such a role. >RE: That's right. >A: If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could >also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >RE: But what caused condition Y to choose B instead of X choosing A? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Choice at that moment chose B instead of A. >A: Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still >conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >RE: Choice is also dictated by conditions. Yes. XYZ were past conditions. With metta, Alex #124713 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:21 am Subject: Re: the path truth_aerator Hello RobertE, >RE:If the mind makes a decision about various possibilities and >freely chooses one over others, that is the definition of a self. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >A:Where is this said? Can you please provide a sutta quote? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >RE: If I can find it, it is definitely there in my view. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is probably Anattalakkhana sutta. But please note, it doesn't deny all control. It denies being able to stop aggregates from getting affliction (which in part may depend on external conditions). ""Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.'" http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html One can't stop aggregates from affliction. It is far cry from being able to resist, at least some, kilesas. With best wishes, Alex #124714 From: sīlānanda Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:22 am Subject: This is the PATH ... by Ajahn Dtun silananda_t Dear Dhammafarers, Here is sharing 4 Dhamma talks by Ajahn Dtun Thiracitto - This is the Path May this provide a guiding light towards treading upon the Path. May you be well, happy and peacefully released. mettakaruna silananda *www.dhammatalks.net* #124715 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 3:37 pm Subject: Re: choices epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >RE: What is it that is free? You say 'mind' but that is not very >specific. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Choice is called choice Who cares what it is called? It is called "choice" by the dictionaries and vocabularies of worldlings - what does that have to do with what choice may or may not be in the Dhamma, or in reality? It is called "choice" because of the great illusion that there is someone to choose, someone in control. > because it can choose between at least two possibilities. Is "choice" a word used in sutta or in Abhidhamma? Volition is not choice, in my view, as in choosing between options, but is the desire to act, in my view. In other words, it arises as a decisive impulse out of conditions, rather than sitting around looking over various options. It arises cleanly towards one action, not two or three. > >RE:You have not identified an element > > "Choice" is that element. In that case that element is an illusion. > [cut] > > >A: If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X >played such and such a role. > > >RE: That's right. > > > >A: If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could >also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >RE: But what caused condition Y to choose B instead of X choosing A? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Choice at that moment chose B instead of A. What you are saying is just the same as saying "choice is choice," it's not defining what it is at all. This is the kind of assumption without explanation that maintains the illusion that a word means something, even if you can't say how it takes place. So far we have "choice does it," "mind chooses," "choice is called choice because it chooses" - all self-referential assumptions that don't explain how it happens, or how it can happen, without violating conditionality, the prime modus operandi of all Buddhism. > >A: Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still >conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >RE: Choice is also dictated by conditions. > > Yes. XYZ were past conditions. I don't know what this means. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = #124716 From: "Robert E" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 3:56 pm Subject: Re: the path epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, > > >RE:If the mind makes a decision about various possibilities and >freely chooses one over others, that is the definition of a self. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >A:Where is this said? Can you please provide a sutta quote? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > >RE: If I can find it, it is definitely there in my view. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > It is probably Anattalakkhana sutta. But please note, it doesn't deny all control. It denies being able to stop aggregates from getting affliction (which in part may depend on external conditions). > > ""Bhikkhus, form is not-self. Were form self, then this form would not lead to affliction, and one could have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.' And since form is not-self, so it leads to affliction, and none can have it of form: 'Let my form be thus, let my form be not thus.'" > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.059.nymo.html > > One can't stop aggregates from affliction. It is far cry from being able to resist, at least some, kilesas. Well, as I recall, it goes on to say the same thing for all the kandhas, including consciousness. "If consciousness were self, then one could say of this consciousness: 'Let my consciousness be thus...," etc., which means that one cannot choose mental content, formations or factors. They arise independent of control, just like everything else. That includes volition. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = #124717 From: "philip" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 3:59 pm Subject: spd 27 (mindfulness of the body) philofillet Dear Group Here is today's passage from "Survey of Paramattha Dhammas" by Sujin Boriharnwanaket: "There is mindfulness of the body when sati is mindful of one characteristic at a time of ruupa paramattha, as it appears through the bodysense. It may be a ruupa such as cold, heat, softness, hardness, pressure or motion. Mindfulness of the body is not watching the postures of sitting, lying, standing or walking." (380) (end of passage) phil #124718 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 5:25 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] 3 lives interpretation nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 5-jun-2012, om 18:11 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > (from Ven. Nanavira's Notes ...) > > 1. The traditional interpretation of paticcasamuppada (of its usual > twelve-factored formulation, that is to say) apparently has its > roots in the Patisambhidamagga , or perhaps in the > Abhidhammapitaka. This interpretation is fully expounded in the > Visuddhimagga . It can be briefly summarized thus: avijja > and sankhara are kamma in the previous existence, and their vipaka > is viana, namarupa, salayatana, phassa, and vedana, in the > present existence; tanha, upadana, and bhava, are kamma in the > present existence, and their vipaka is jati and jaramarana in the > subsequent existence. 2. This Note will take for granted first, > that the reader is acquainted with this traditional interpretation, > and secondly, that he is dissatisfied with it. > > D: yes , I am dissatisfied too as long as previous existence means > finished past ,as there is nothing like finished past (besides pari > nibbana) . > Our present is accumulated past. By disruption we can not speak > anymore of rounds (samsara) , can we? ------- N: I am not thinking of disivions as to time, but rather as a way of exposition illustrating that the cycle goes on even now. Is there not ignorance now? As you say, past accumulations appear in the present. You may find interesting what Ven. Bodhi says: < At the risk of oversimplification the sequence can be briefly explained as follows. Due to ignorance - formally defined as non- knowledge of the Four Noble Truths - a person engages in ethically motivated actions, which may be wholesome or unwholesome, bodily, verbal, or mental. These actions, referred to here as volitional formations, constitute kamma. At the time of rebirth kamma conditions the re-arising of consciousness, which comes into being bringing along its psychophysical adjuncts, "mentality-materiality" (naama- ruupa). In dependence on the psychophysical adjuncts, the six sense bases develop - the five outer senses and the mind-base. Through these, contact takes place between consciousness and its objects, and contact in turn conditions feeling. In response to feeling craving springs up, and if it grows firm, leads into clinging. Driven by clinging actions are performed with the potency to generate new existence. There actions, kamma backed by craving, eventually bring a new existence: birth followed by aging and death. To prevent misunderstanding it has to be stressed that the distribution of the twelve factors into three lives is an expository device employed for the purpose of exhibiting the inner dynamics of the round. It should not be read as implying hard and fast divisions, for in lived experience the factors are always intertwined. The past causes include craving, clinging, and existence, the present ones ignorance and volitional formations; the present resultants begin with birth and end in death, and future birth and death will be incurred by the same resultants. Moreover, the present resultant and causal phases should not be seen as temporally segregated from each other, as if assigned to different periods of life. Rather, through the entire course of life, they succeed one another with incredible rapidity in an alternating sequence of result and action; the action is followed by more results; and these are again followed by still more action. So it has gone on through time without beginning, and so it continues. > ------- Nina. #124719 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 5:33 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... nilovg Dear Christine and Dieter, Op 4-jun-2012, om 22:31 heeft Christine het volgende geschreven: > "Let no one, 0 Bhikkhus, who is in the royal service, receive the > Pabbajja ordination. He who confers the Pabbajja ordination on such > a person will be guilty of a dukkata offence." ------ N: This is very interesting. Dieter, you gave this text: anu~n~natosi matapituhi: with the permission of his mother and father (matapituhi). He cannot be ordained without their permission. ------- Nina. #124720 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 5:46 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - nilovg Dear Rob E, Op 5-jun-2012, om 0:17 heeft Robert E het volgende geschreven: > > > > There is a word association of naama and namati, to bend. Citta and > > cetasika bend towards the object. NIbbaana does not, but it bends > the > > lokuttara citta and cetasika towards itself. > > R: So nibbana is an object of citta, but is not citta or cetasika, > but a mental object of citta that does not itself experience > anything. Would nibbana then be a condition or state for citta to > experience? Is there any way to say or describe what nibbana is, as > an object of citta? > ------- N: An object experienced by citta conditions that citta by way of object-condition. Thus, nibbaana conditions the lokuttara citta that experiences it by way of object-condition. Thus, simply, by being its object. The sense objects, like sound now, are usually experienced with lobha. Object-condition is not the only condition for the citta, there are other conditions, like natural decisive-support-condition. Lobha in the past conditions lobha at this moment. However, lokuttara dhammas cannot be objects of clinging. The unconditioned dhamma that is nibbaana cannot be experienced with clinging. We cannot imagine what nibbaana is like, but we can understand the realities appearing right at this moment. If we do not develop understanding of them right now we shall never know what nibbaana is. We can only speculate about nibbaana. Why not learn more about dhammas arising at this moment, that is already quite a difficult task. Nina. #124721 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 5:53 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >S: ...At moments of insight or satipatthana, panna discerns a dhamma. When it is a moment of samatha or pariyatti (pre-satipatthana), it is concept as object. For example, now we're reflecting on the Dhamma. With the kusala cittas during such reflection, there is calm and the concepts of dhammas are the objects. ... R:> Is there panna in that situation, with kusala citta arising with samatha or pariyatti? .... S: Yes, there must be panna at moments of wise reflection on the Dhamma, at moments of pariyatti, even though concepts are the objects. In the development of samatha, samatha bhavana, right up to jhana, concepts are object - again must be panna at such moments. There are different levels and kinds of panna. Metta Sarah ===== #124722 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 6:01 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > Thanks for the long post, it explains some of the things I've been wondering about. > > > S: Below you ask about highly developed samatha and absorption. The object, breath, is still a concept or rather a nimitta of the concept. The clear comprehension of kusala and akusala and the suppression of sense objects (through understanding the danger of attachment to them when it arises) has been developed to such a degree that the citta with calm and understanding is very refined indeed. No need for a 'story'. < > >PT: Here I wonder how can there be clear comprehension of a/kusala if the object of cittas is a concept (of breath)? I mean, if there's no panna of insight kind, how can then the concept of breath be known as a/kusala, since a/kusala are characteristics of a dhamma, not concept, if I'm not mistaken? .... S: Different moments. It's like when there is metta. At the moment of metta, being is the object, but immediately following this there can be understanding of the kusala citta at that time. Same with breath. As you say, the object is the concept of breath. Following this there can be understanding of whether the citta is kusala/akusala. (Note, breath is never kusala/akusala - only the citta and cetasikas). It is the understanding of the kusala and akusala cittas at such time, as now, and the distinction that leads to the development of calm, samatha. Otherwise, during the day, there are moments of kusala, moments of calm, but no knowledge, no development. Of course, when it is understanding at this level of samatha bhavana, there is no understanding of the kusala/akusala as not self. Metta Sarah ====== #124723 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 6:08 pm Subject: Re: good site for sutta with pali sarahprocter... Hi Rob K, Thx for the useful link --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > Love this site. Mouse over pali words for definition > http://www.buddha-vacana.org/sutta/samyutta/maha/sn56-011.html > ... S: Reminds me of traveling in India when Jon, myself and others would recite the Dhammacakkapavattana Sutta in Pali on some long bus journeys as we' d done in the temple in Sarnath. I think Jon also told me how he remembered when he travelled to the Holy Places with Phra Dhammadharo, staying in temples and they'd recite it first thing in the morning. Metta Sarah ===== #124724 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 6:20 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: what demarcates citta? sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > Dear Sarah > > you wrote: > > > As the Buddha tells us, no simile can account for the speed of a citta arising and > > falling away. We don't demarcate them, but each citta which arises and falls away is > > "demarcated" by its nature of arising, existing and falling away immediately. In the > > time it takes for a rupa, such as visible object to fall away, 17 cittas including > > seeing consciousness have arisen and fallen away. Therefore, it's impossible that one > > citta of seeing could experience more than one object. The same applies to hearing - it > > may seem that the hearing citta experiences different sounds, but this is because > > there's no understanding now of hearing, let alone its impermanence. .... >V: Do you think this impossibility needs of the surrender to the fact that we (the self) > cannot control nothing at all?. > I say this to know a possible connection with dry-insight. and some position of not being > focused in any object as a type of surrender. .... S: Yes, when we appreciate that cittas arise and fall away instantly, it becomes apparent that they can never be controlled by a Self or anything else. How could self stop seeing or hearing from occurring now? Or from falling away instantly? As you say, the development of awareness is "a type of surrender" in the sense that it is just aware of what appears and cannot 'hang onto' anything at all. No amount of 'focus' can make any dhamma last an instant. By the time self tries to focus, the dhammas that it's interested in have long since gone. .. > > When we read about the speed of citta, many times we think "that's impossible, that's not > logical, I cannot conceive that". However, the real meaning can be "the self cannot catch that" .... S: Yes - all the Teachings, all the words of the Buddha, are for the purpose of understanding dhammas as anatta, beyond the control of any Self in anyway. Good points. Are you in Spain these days? Hope you're doing OK. Metta Sarah ====== #124725 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 6:29 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: ......For example, there can (usually is) attachment to pleasant feeling, but there can also be awareness of it. If not, it would be impossible to be aware of dhammas. > > > > Hope it's a bit clearer. ... >R: I think this talk has begun to make it clearer - let's see if I am on the right track. It seems that I am getting a distinction between experiencing a dhamma and understanding it clearly, and also a distinction between experiencing and that which follows the initial experience. > > So we are always experiencing dhammas, but we may not be doing so with sati and panna, in which case that experience is lost immediately afterwards in a sea of confusion and proliferation. That does not take away dhamma as object, but it does take it away as an object of direct discernment that understands what it has experienced. Am I thinking about this correctly? .... S: Yes. As you say, we're always experiencing dhammas. Like now, if there were no seeing of visible objects in between the thinking, there'd be no idea about the various texts. Usually no sati or panna and lots of proliferation as you say. I heard K.Sujin saying on a recording this morning that many people tell her they'd like to not think so much, not worry so much and so on. She was saying that the way not to think is to understand reality now! We're always lost in stories about situations with very little awareness of the present reality. Metta Sarah ==== #124726 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 6:35 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > S: There can be clinging to the computer, to the idea of what is seen or touched with lobha, the cetasika or there can be clinging with ditthi, wrong view, when there's an idea of some thing, a computer, in reality. When ditthi, another cetasika, arises, it is rooted in lobha too. All kinds of lobha and ditthi, in fact all kinds of akusala are rooted in moha (ignorance) too. ... >R: Am I right in understanding that dithi cannot arise unless I am explicitly thinking or claiming that the computer is real? If I am just taking it for granted as real, just ignorance, but if I am asserting its reality philosophically, that is wrong view? .... S: When a dhamma, a khandha, such as visible object is taken for some thing, such as a computer, it is ditthi. Yes, most of the time, there's just ignorance, no view at all - like when someone is playing a game on the computer - just ignorance and attachment. Metta Sarah ==== #124727 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 6:42 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 1. experiencing impermanence sarahprocter... Dear Alex, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > Thank you for your other replies. Here is my comment about this sutta: > > >"And they, Ananda, pierce what is even harder to pierce, those who >pierce, as it actually is present, that 'This is stress'; etc... > >http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn56/sn56.045.than.html > >============================================== > > I believe that the hardest part is to encounter the True Dhamma and be able to understand it. .... S: Yes - especially to understand seeing, visible object and other realities now as anatta. .... > > There are plenty of suttas that tell the Awakening can occur very quickly. In fact there are no early suttas that talk about necessity of having to undergo many many lives to become sotapanna. > > > "And what, friend Sariputta, is the cause, what is the reason, why some beings do become totally unbound in the present life?" - AN4.179 > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.179.than.html > > > Arhatship can occur in this life. Also in MN85 the Buddha has said that He could make a good disciple achieve awakening within one day. Satipatthana sutta promises Arhatship in 7 days if it is properly developed. In SN39.x it says that it would take no long time to achieve Awakening. In SN25.x proper understanding or confidence in anicca would make one Sotapanna before dying in this life. Etc etc. > > So I am interested in deep investigation of what anicca really means and how not to mis-perceive it. .... S: it's impossible to understand or investigate "what anicca really means" unless there is the beginning to understand realities appearing now. Instead of thinking about how long it may or may not take, the practice has to come back to this moment, then it becomes apparent that it's not you or I who can decide anything. Just understand what appears now. Metta Sarah ===== #124728 From: sarah abbott Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 7:06 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 12. "I am not the only one subject to aging....." sarahprocter... Dear Friends ***** Han: What I am studying is that "I am not the only one" subject to that - there are five aspects - there are others also subject to that. By reflecting that, you reach the path. How is that? KS: Can we know more about "I" and "the other"? Han: I don't know. What has this to do with it? There is only "you", "me"..... KS: Yes, but can we have more understanding of what is meant by "I" and "the other"? Han: That is only the concept KS: But what about the 5 khandhas? The rupa khandha and the four nama khandhas? Is that "I" or not "I"? Han: Collectively it's "I". Here, collectively it's "I". KS: So instead of saying the 5 khandhas, can we simply say "I" and the others also have 5 khandhas and we can simply say "the other". Han: Yes. KS: But actually they are only 5 khandhas. No one. Rupa khanda is rupa khandha. Vedana khandha is vedana khandha. So in that sense it means that what we take for oneself and the other are only khandhas. **** Metta Sarah *http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an05/an05.057.than.html "Now, a disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not the only one subject to aging, who has not gone beyond aging. To the extent that there are beings — past and future, passing away and re-arising — all beings are subject to aging, have not gone beyond aging.' When he/she often reflects on this, the [factors of the] path take birth. He/she sticks with that path, develops it, cultivates it. As he/she sticks with that path, develops it and cultivates it, the fetters are abandoned, the obsessions destroyed. "Further, a disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not the only one subject to illness, who has not gone beyond illness.'... 'I am not the only one subject to death, who has not gone beyond death.'... 'I am not the only one who will grow different, separate from all that is dear and appealing to me.'... "A disciple of the noble ones considers this: 'I am not the only one who is owner of my actions, heir to my actions, born of my actions, related through my actions, and have my actions as my arbitrator; who — whatever I do, for good or for evil, to that will I fall heir. To the extent that there are beings — past and future, passing away and re-arising — all beings are the owner of their actions, heir to their actions, born of their actions, related through their actions, and have their actions as their arbitrator. Whatever they do, for good or for evil, to that will they fall heir.' When he/she often reflects on this, the [factors of the] path take birth. He/she sticks with that path, develops it, cultivates it. As he/she sticks with that path, develops it and cultivates it, the fetters are abandoned, the obsessions destroyed." ========== #124729 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 7:26 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities'' dhammasaro Warm thanks for the new book... peace... Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: cjforsyth1@... Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 04:43:04 +0000 Subject: [dsg] Re: "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities'' Here is the webpage for this book: "How Theravada is Theravada. Exploring Buddhist Identities" http://www.silkwormbooks.com/catalog/info/how-theravada/index.html with metta Chris #124730 From: "sarah" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 7:26 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 3. If no trying or forcing, then what? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > >S: Such a good idea to share your heartfelt reflections and Buddhist understanding in language that his family and friends may learn from and appreciate. > > There was some Dhamma in there, not enough to post it here, really, but whatever. Interesting to note that in the weeks leading up to this bad news, I had been getting quite intensely into some new age stuff that I use for empowering myself in conventional ways, for career, writing, social projects etc, but when the bad news hit it was Dhamma that really provided comfort. .... S: I know what you mean. It was just the same when my friend had her drowning accident. ... >Well, not entirely true. I'm a bit like Howard who mentionned finding strength in his birth religion, I'm going back to the new age stuff I was interested before I found Dhamma. But I think Dhamma will "win", if you will. We'll see. It is not entirely true to say that they can co-exist or are not mutually negating. .... S: Anytime at all - whether following "new age stuff", "birth religion" - anytime at all, just dhammas that can be known. When Jon had some health issues a while back, we got into the habit before going to bed of doing some gentle, relaxing yoga, lighting a couple of candles and listening to dhamma. Understanding dhamma "co-exists" with "new agey" or any situations.... It always comes back to the reality now. ... > Ph: Yes, understanding of realities, panna arises and sees that despite one's self-reassuring the "I" involved in practices, and the lobha that motivates them are not just factors that can be observed through the practices, they doom the practices from the start.But that has to "click" with people, until it does, the debates go on and on, which is fine of course for those who enjoy them and learn from them, certainly there are textual references to debates between the followers of different teachers, it is part of the tradition, I should try it someday! ... S: Not for everyone. different accumulations, different interests.... NNTR (No need to reply). Glad to see the SPD extract. Hope Ned's funeral went well for his family. Metta Sarah ====== #124731 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 7:32 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... dhammasaro Dear Rev. Triple, 1. I do not recall the Historic Buddha forbidding soldiers going into.... 2. Thank you for your question. I will pursue my references. Hopefully, I will find a Tipitaka reference for you. Respectfully, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: revtriple@... Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 15:07:20 +0000 Subject: [dsg] Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... Hi everyone! Did the Buddha forbid soldiers from going into the monastery so that they avoid can avoid fighting in the Kingdom of Magadah, when several generals entered the Sangha ? If so is this in the Tipitaka? If so why did he do this? #124732 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 7:35 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, intro. nilovg Dear friends, Pilgrimage in India. Introduction. This pilgrimage in India, in 1975, was my third one in a long series that would follow. Acharn Sujin Boriharnwanaket, our friend in the Dhamma and our teacher, was our spiritual leader and Khun Suwat Chansuvityanant was in charge of the organisation of the tour. The late Venerable Bhikkhu Dhamma-dharo who had recently been ordained, Jonothan Abbot, and a few friends from Thailand also joined this tour. Khun Suwat who would also organise all the following pilgrimages in India, always found a suitable picknick spot in the fields when the bus drivers had to take a break. There were often flat tyres or other defects of the bus and then we could walk along in the village and have some tea. Since our group was small we could stay in Thai temples on the way. Acharn Sujin helped us all the way with reminders of the Dhamma, for example, when the bus had to stop and we were walking up and down, waiting. In each of the holy places texts were read that related to that particular place. Venerable Bhikkhu Dhammadharo explained the Dhamma with great enthusiasm, emphasizing that, in whatever situation we would be, there were just nma and rpa, appearing through the six doorways. We discussed the Buddhas perfections as we did during each pilgrimage. These were the indispensable conditions for his attainment of Buddhahood. We were reminded that also for us the development of the perfections along with satipahna is a necessary condition for the attainment of enlightenment. ******* Nina. #124733 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 8:08 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... moellerdieter Dear Nina, you wrote: Dieter, you gave this text: anu~n~natosi matapituhi: with the permission of his mother and father (matapituhi). He cannot be ordained without their permission. ------- D:oops ...the wrong line should be 'nasi rajabhato..' corrrect? with Metta Dieter #124734 From: "philip" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 9:21 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 3. If no trying or forcing, then what? philofillet Hi Sarah Yes, relaxing yoga at hard times, candles, "breath energy in the body" (or chi, or ki, as others say) , wonderful. A lit of libha involved, but understanding that adpect beings it back to dhammas, thus Dhamma. I think everyone should "meditate" as it us commonly called. I'm surprised there is a thread pointing at health dangers, it has been proven in so many studies to be beneficial, physically and psychology. Great if it were a fast track to bhavana as so many believe but it isn't. I guess it's people who misunderstand what is going on and think there is some sort of conection betweem ling arduous meditation and bhavana who make themselves sick, poor chaps and chapettes. Yes, thanks, Ned was celebrated by his many friends. An interesting way Dhamma helped me through this was realizing that the fact that I failed to really be fully attentive to his situation in his last months when exchanging e-mails with him is not something to beat myself up over. That virya didn't arise, it's a dhamma, beyond control. Blaming myself would just mean further accumulation of akusala. On the other hand, noting truthfully how virya that mught have contributed to saving him didn't arise might be condition for virya to arise to help others in need. Yes, I will begin to post spd passages again, but not every day. I need to keep in touch somehow with expressing undwrstanding of Dhamma, somehow. I don't want to fail to appreciate the treasure of sensitivity to Dhamma, and excercising that sensitivity at times by copying valuable teachings is a good idea I think. Phil p.s thanks for the audio transcripts, I will read with interest. #124735 From: upasaka@... Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 10:23 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: choices upasaka_howard Hi, Robert (and Alex) - In a message dated 6/6/2012 1:37:50 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, epsteinrob@... writes: Hi Alex. --- In _dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com) , "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >RE: What is it that is free? You say 'mind' but that is not very >specific. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Choice is called choice Who cares what it is called? It is called "choice" by the dictionaries and vocabularies of worldlings - what does that have to do with what choice may or may not be in the Dhamma, or in reality? It is called "choice" because of the great illusion that there is someone to choose, someone in control. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: There is also the reality of impersonal choice: A "decision process" involving thinking, recalling, comparing, predispositions & desires & aversions, all conditioned, culminating in one or more "impulsions" that actualize "a choice" from various possible (conditioned) alternatives, is exactly "choice" and is erroneously thought to be "carried out by a "decider". [Note: By "decider" I'm not referring to George W. Bush LOL!] ------------------------------------------------------------- > because it can choose between at least two possibilities. Is "choice" a word used in sutta or in Abhidhamma? Volition is not choice, in my view, as in choosing between options, but is the desire to act, ---------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: I don't think volition is desire, but, instead, is a sort of "push" that follows upon desire or aversion along with other conditions. --------------------------------------------------------------- in my view. In other words, it arises as a decisive impulse out of conditions -------------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, I agree with that. ------------------------------------------------------------ , rather than sitting around looking over various options. ----------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Bur such consideration, usually subliminal and very rapid, often does precede the impulsion. ----------------------------------------------------------- It arises cleanly towards one action, not two or three. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Yes, but it is "choosing" only if there were more than one action possible. --------------------------------------------------------- > >RE:You have not identified an element > > "Choice" is that element. In that case that element is an illusion. ------------------------------------------------------- HCW: Choosing is a process consisting of many, many phenomena, and not a single cetasika, though active cetana is a prominent and culminating aspect. -------------------------------------------------------- > [cut] > > >A: If the mind chose option A, then we could say that conditions X >played such and such a role. > > >RE: That's right. > > > >A: If the mind chose Option B on that same occasion, then we could >also say that conditions X (or Y) played such and such a role. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >RE: But what caused condition Y to choose B instead of X choosing A? > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Choice at that moment chose B instead of A. What you are saying is just the same as saying "choice is choice," it's not defining what it is at all. This is the kind of assumption without explanation that maintains the illusion that a word means something, even if you can't say how it takes place. So far we have "choice does it," "mind chooses," "choice is called choice because it chooses" - all self-referential assumptions that don't explain how it happens, or how it can happen, without violating conditionality, the prime modus operandi of all Buddhism. > >A: Choice was made which could have gone either way, and it is still >conditioned. So we have conditionality and choice. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > >RE: Choice is also dictated by conditions. > > Yes. XYZ were past conditions. I don't know what this means. Best, Rob E. ================================= With metta, Howard Some Important Choices to Make "Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what is unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is unskillful, I would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' But because it is possible to abandon what is unskillful, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' If this abandoning of what is unskillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, Abandon what is unskillful.' But because this abandoning of what is unskillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' "Develop what is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what is skillful. If it were not possible to develop what is skillful, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because it is possible to develop what is skillful, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' If this development of what is skillful were conducive to harm and pain, I would not say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.' But because this development of what is skillful is conducive to benefit and pleasure, I say to you, 'Develop what is skillful.'" (AN 2.19) #124736 From: Vince Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:26 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: what demarcates citta? cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Dear Sarah you wrote: > S: the development of awareness is "a type of surrender" in the sense that it is just aware > of what appears and cannot 'hang onto' anything at all. No amount of 'focus' can make > any dhamma last an instant. By the time self tries to focus, the dhammas that it's > interested in have long since gone. good to read that confirmation in your thoughts. I believe this is quite implicit although sometimes I missed some explanations of that position. > S: Yes - all the Teachings, all the words of the Buddha, are for the purpose of > understanding dhammas as anatta, beyond the control of any Self in anyway. Good points. > Are you in Spain these days? Hope you're doing OK. yes, thanks. Still I survive here. I'm not sure if you are Australian or British, excuse me. Are you in Bangkok now? Sujin is ok?. I plain to go to Thailand in the close future. best wishes, Vince. #124737 From: Vince Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:37 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: choices cerovzt@... Send Email Send Email Robert wrote: > What is it that is free? You say 'mind' but that is not very specific. Anything can be > mind. You have not identified an element that is able to look at choices outside of the > flow of changing conditions which happens at every moment, and say "I want this one, not that one." I think you right. Maybe the problem is the authority we give to that inner sense of "I choose". That's the self, although what operates is kamma. Attachment causes a later appropriation by "me" of those movements towards the objects. best, Vince. #124738 From: "jonoabb" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:48 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' jonoabb Hi KenH --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Jon, > > You wrote to Chris: > > > The Ven. seems to prefer modern scientific observations over the Abhidhamma, and > in doing so he also seems to equate certain dhammas with their conventional > counterparts, which in my view is not how they are meant to be understood. > > > > KH: You also wrote: > > > It seems that the Ven. accepts without question the modern scientific view that > all consciousness arises in the brain. He rejects the possibility of citta > having a base ("vatthu") other than the brain, yet he does not explain why this > could not possibly be the case. > > > KH: I agree with everything you said about the article: the Ven had not established his case. But wouldn't you agree there was no possibility of anyone ever establishing that type of case? > =============== J: Yes, I would agree with that. My point was perhpa slightly different one, that the Ven. did not attempt to explain why the Abhidhamma teaching on `vatthu' could not possibly be a correct description of the way things are. > =============== > KH: No matter if we settled on the heart or the brain as the ultimately true base of citta we would be missing the point of your first sentence: dhammas cannot be equated with their conventional counterparts. > =============== J: Yes, quite so. When considering the Abhidhamma, we need to keep in mind that a dhamma is not to be equated with the conventional counterpart of the same name. > =============== > KH: That means, does it not, that no conventional counterpart can be more equated with a dhamma than any other? The ancient commentaries might just as well have said citta was based in the foot. If that was the most intelligent scientific thinking of their day then 'foot' would have been the best conventional (scientific) designation they could have given for 'mind-base.' > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > =============== J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > =============== > KH: But sometimes you seem to defend certain concepts found in the Pali texts as if their conventional validity (by modern thinking) somehow mattered. Or am I just imagining that? > =============== J: Feel free to point out if that happens in future (for the record, I don't think that conventional validity by modern standards should matter in the slightest). Jon #124739 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Wed Jun 6, 2012 11:57 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > >> > =============== > > KH: No matter if we settled on the heart or the brain as the ultimately true base of citta we would be missing the point of your first sentence: dhammas cannot be equated with their conventional counterparts. > > =============== > > J: Yes, quite so. When considering the Abhidhamma, we need to keep in mind that a dhamma is not to be equated with the conventional counterpart of the same name. > > > =============== > > KH: That means, does it not, that no conventional counterpart can be more equated with a dhamma than any other? The ancient commentaries might just as well have said citta was based in the foot. If that was the most intelligent scientific thinking of their day then 'foot' would have been the best conventional (scientific) designation they could have given for 'mind-base.' > > > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > > =============== > > J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > > > =============== > > > Dear Jon and Kenh so can we say then that where it says in the visuddhimagga that the heartbase (hadaya=vatthu,) is found in the blood inside the physical heart, that this has no relation at all with the way things really are. They might as well have said hadayavatthu was in the brain matter or foot?If the foot or brain was what science of that day said. Either way nothing to do with reality or in any way to be construed as being true(the VM). robert #124741 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 12:51 am Subject: [dsg] Re: choices truth_aerator Hello RobertE, Howard, all, Past does not exist now, only present moment exists now during which choice is made. Why do we give the past (which doesn't exist now) equal or higher influence over the present which exists? Are there mind-independent causes for choosing (mental event)? Wouldn't it be speculative to posit such? Nothing to say about interaction between mind and mind-independent things. Are physical similes for conditionality of choice valid for mental events? Of course possible choices (option A vs B) are conditioned and require certain kinds of condition. Choice (a mental action) is the final condition that will make either A or B occur provided A & B both have required causes other than choice in the present. With best wishes, Alex #124742 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 1:32 am Subject: why choice can't be made? truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >Well, as I recall, it goes on to say the same thing for all the >kandhas, including consciousness. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes the sutta mentions all 5 aggregates. But, please note, it says we cannot stop it from "affliction". We cannot control "let there be only pleasant feeling, never unpleasant, that is constant and eternal" etc. We cannot stop anicca. But this is different from saying that choice cannot be made at all. Why can't, lets say, John decide to lift left or right arm and then lift it? If John has both arms that function, etc, and all the required conditions for either action (minus the choice) why can't choice be the final required condition for action to occur? With metta, Alex #124743 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 1:41 am Subject: [dsg] Re: choices truth_aerator Hello Howard, Robert E, RobertK, all, >HCW: Some Important Choices to Make >====================================================== >"Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what >is >unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is >unskillful, I >would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' ..."Develop what >is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what >is skillful. If it >were not possible to develop what is skillful, I >would not say to >you, 'Develop what is skillful.' - AN.219 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there is suggestion to develop wholesome qualities and abandon unwholesome, some say that "there is no control", or that it is "Self trying to control realities" and similar excuses why one should live life "normally". I am not sure if it is good to put the blame of past accumulations rather than on present choice. Past does not exist now, so why is it given more power then the only existing moment, the present? With best wishes, Alex #124744 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 1:53 am Subject: Re: [dsg] 3 lives interpretation moellerdieter Dear Nina , you wrote: (D: yes , I am dissatisfied too as long as previous existence means > finished past ,as there is nothing like finished past (besides pari > nibbana) . > Our present is accumulated past. By disruption we can not speak > anymore of rounds (samsara) , can we? N: I am not thinking of disivions as to time, but rather as a way of exposition illustrating that the cycle goes on even now. Is there not ignorance now? As you say, past accumulations appear in the present. You may find interesting what Ven. Bodhi says: < At the risk of oversimplification the sequence can be briefly explained as follows. Due to ignorance - formally defined as non-knowledge of the Four Noble Truths - a person engages in ethically motivated actions, which may be wholesome or unwholesome, bodily, verbal, or mental. These actions, referred to here as volitional formations, constitute kamma. At the time of rebirth kamma conditions the re-arising of consciousness, which comes into being bringing along its psychophysical adjuncts, "mentality-materiality" (naama-ruupa). In dependence on the psychophysical adjuncts, the six sense bases develop - the five outer senses and the mind-base. Through these, contact takes place between consciousness and its objects, and contact in turn conditions feeling. In response to feeling craving springs up, and if it grows firm, leads into clinging. Driven by clinging actions are performed with the potency to generate new existence. There actions, kamma backed by craving, eventually bring a new existence: birth followed by aging and death. To prevent misunderstanding it has to be stressed that the distribution of the twelve factors into three lives is an expository device employed for the purpose of exhibiting the inner dynamics of the round. It should not be read as implying hard and fast divisions, for in lived experience the factors are always intertwined. The past causes include craving, clinging, and existence, the present ones ignorance and volitional formations; the present resultants begin with birth and end in death, and future birth and death will be incurred by the same resultants. Moreover, the present resultant and causal phases should not be seen as temporally segregated from each other, as if assigned to different periods of life. Rather, through the entire course of life, they succeed one another with incredible rapidity in an alternating sequence of result and action; the action is followed by more results; and these are again followed by still more action. So it has gone on through time without beginning, and so it continues. > D: we agree ..and thanks for the quotation , Nina . Ven. Bodhi confirms ' It should not be read as implying hard and fast divisions, for in lived experience the factors are always intertwined' , i.e. the assumption of a finalized past in respect to avijja -sankhara is wrong . I think this ' expository device ' can by easily misunderstood due to reference of three lives , it has been so and still is .. with Metta Dieter #124745 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 2:05 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: choices upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/6/2012 11:41:11 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, Robert E, RobertK, all, >HCW: Some Important Choices to Make >====================================================== >"Abandon what is unskillful, monks. It is possible to abandon what >is >unskillful. If it were not possible to abandon what is >unskillful, I >would not say to you, 'Abandon what is unskillful.' ..."Develop what >is skillful, monks. It is possible to develop what >is skillful. If it >were not possible to develop what is skillful, I >would not say to >you, 'Develop what is skillful.' - AN.219 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there is suggestion to develop wholesome qualities and abandon unwholesome, some say that "there is no control", or that it is "Self trying to control realities" and similar excuses why one should live life "normally". I am not sure if it is good to put the blame of past accumulations rather than on present choice. Past does not exist now, so why is it given more power then the only existing moment, the present? ---------------------------------------------------- HCW: What do *you* believe is the basis for what arises right now? Nothing? (Nihilism) An autonomous agent? (Substantialist self-view). Note: You have *every right* to hold either of these views or any other. What I deem most important is to be clearly aware of exactly what it is that one DOES believe (at the moment). [There is no reason to be cowed by what others insist is true. Ultimately, each one of us has to come to the truth on one's own. "Be an island unto yourself."] ----------------------------------------------------- With best wishes, Alex ============================ With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124746 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 2:33 am Subject: [dsg] Re: choices truth_aerator Hi Howard, >HCW: What do *you* believe is the basis for what arises right now? >Nothing? (Nihilism) An autonomous agent?(Substantialist self-view). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All we have to work with is current experience. Anything or nothing that lies outside of what is directly or indirectly experienced is speculative at best. As for choice, it is mental state. "Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox." Dhp 1 While mental development in the past affects the present mind (mano), The present, IMHO, has more weight than the past - and the choice now may be the final condition for certain possible mental reactions to occur. With metta, Alex #124748 From: "jonoabb" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 8:47 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' jonoabb Hi RobK --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > ... > > > KH: That means, does it not, that no conventional counterpart can be more equated with a dhamma than any other? The ancient commentaries might just as well have said citta was based in the foot. If that was the most intelligent scientific thinking of their day then 'foot' would have been the best conventional (scientific) designation they could have given for 'mind-base.' > > > > > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > > > =============== > > > > J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > > > > > =============== > > > > > Dear Jon and Kenh > so can we say then that where it says in the visuddhimagga that the heartbase (hadaya=vatthu,) is found in the blood inside the physical heart, that this has no relation at all with the way things really are. > =============== J: I would take a reference to the "physical heart" to be a reference to the conventional heart. > =============== > RK: They might as well have said hadayavatthu was in the brain matter or foot?If the foot or brain was what science of that day said. Either way nothing to do with reality or in any way to be construed as being true(the VM). > =============== J: I did not quite follow KenH's comments relating to the science of the day (and I did not comment on that part of his post). Jon #124749 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 4:38 pm Subject: Re: why choice can't be made? ptaus1 Hi Alex, > Why can't, lets say, John decide to lift left or right arm and then lift it? If John has both arms that function, etc, and all the required conditions for either action (minus the choice) why can't choice be the final required condition for action to occur? I'm confused a bit by this whole topic. E.g. I was under the impression that conditions have to do with dhammas, whereas choice, choosing A or B, lifting arms and legs, etc, have to do with conventional actions. I think RobE suggested sometime ago to look into the texts and see whether the issue of choice, choosing and free will is actually addressed explicitly. I think that was a great suggestion. Afaik, there's a description of cetana as a cetasika, but it seems cetana again has to do just with dhammas and how they work together, not with choice and choosing between A and B as it is understood in western philosophy. Further, there are instances in the texts where it is advised for example to develop kusala rather than akusala (as I think Howard quoted recently), but this imo is not an explicit description nor elaboration on what is "choice". So, does someone know of instances in the texts where choice, choosing and free will are explicitly explained? Best wishes pt #124750 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 4:50 pm Subject: Re: why choice can't be made? ptaus1 Hi Alex, > So, does someone know of instances in the texts where choice, choosing and free will are explicitly explained? On further consideration, it seems choice is more of an issue in Western Philosophy and Judeo-Christian traditions. In Theravada I'd think that the issues of anatta, conditions, a/kusala, etc, render the issue of choice irrelevant. But let's see if there's something in the texts, I might be wrong. Best wishes pt #124751 From: "ptaus1" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 5:06 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat ptaus1 Hi Sarah, Thanks for your reply. > S: Different moments. It's like when there is metta. At the moment of metta, being is the object, but immediately following this there can be understanding of the kusala citta at that time. < pt: So, (a) there's a moment with metta and a concept of a being as object - so kusala citta (since there's metta as the root) without panna as the third root. Then (b) there's a kusala citta with panna (as the third root) - so "understanding of the kusala citta at that time". What is the object of this citta, since it cannot be a dhamma (nor a concept of a dhamma) since we are talking about development of samatha, nor the being? I assume it's some sort of a conceptual recognition of kusala, rather than conceptual thinking about it verbally, which would require concepts of words to be objects of citta processes. > S: Same with breath. As you say, the object is the concept of breath. Following this there can be understanding of whether the citta is kusala/akusala. (Note, breath is never kusala/akusala - only the citta and cetasikas). pt: So, (c) there's a citta with concept of a breath as object first. What makes this citta kusala at all, since it's not the breath, and there's no panna which understands that it is a kusala citta at the time? Then comes (d) a citta with "understanding of whether the citta is kusala/akusala". What is the object of this citta, since it cannot be a dhamma, nor a concept of a dhamma, nor thoughts in the sense of "reflecting wisely" since we are talking about further stages of samatha development where there's no thinking? Thanks. Best wishes pt #124752 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 6:33 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > Hi RobK > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > ... > > > > KH: That means, does it not, that no conventional counterpart can be more equated with a dhamma than any other? The ancient commentaries might just as well have said citta was based in the foot. If that was the most intelligent scientific thinking of their day then 'foot' would have been the best conventional (scientific) designation they could have given for 'mind-base.' > > > > > > > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > > > > =============== > > > > > > J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > > > > > > > =============== > > > > > > > Dear Jon and Kenh > > so can we say then that where it says in the visuddhimagga that the heartbase (hadaya=vatthu,) is found in the blood inside the physical heart, that this has no relation at all with the way things really are. > > =============== > > J: I would take a reference to the "physical heart" to be a reference to the conventional heart. > > > =============== > > RK: They might as well have said hadayavatthu was in the brain matter or foot?If the foot or brain was what science of that day said. Either way nothing to do with reality or in any way to be construed as being true(the VM). > > =============== > > J: I did not quite follow KenH's comments relating to the science of the day (and I did not comment on that part of his post). > > Jon > Dear Jon You "did not follow" means you disagre with KenH or you couldn't understand his point, you previous post looked like agreement? Perhaps we can look at the text: Visuddhimagga Ch. XIV 60. 13. The heart-basis has the characteristic of being the (material) support for the mind-element and for the mind-consciousness-element. Its function is to observe them. It is manifested as the carrying of them. It is to be found in dependence on the blood, of the kind described in the treatise on the mindfulness of the body (Ch. VIII, 111), inside the heart. It is assisted by the primaries with their functions of upholding, etc.; it is consolidated by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment; it is maintained by life; and it serves as physical basis for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element, and for the states associated with them.2 Vism. VIII, 111. This is the heart flesh. As to colour, it is the colour of the back of a red-lotus petal. As to shape, it is the shape of a lotus bud with the outer petals removed and turned upside down; it is smooth outside, and inside it is like the interior of a kosataki (loofah gourd). In those who possess understanding it is a little expanded; in those without understanding it is still only a bud. Inside it there is a hollow the size of a punnaga seed's bed where half a pasata measure of blood is kept, with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur. ++++++ If I understand KENH he is saying this is just some idea that people had 2000 years ago and has no relation at all to actual reality. if they had thought the mind element arises in the brain (like today's scientsist) they would have written that. Apparently those monks at that time had some cultural ideas and saw a connection between reality and concepts like ear, eye body ect. Whereas KENH(and you?) believes there is no relation at all. robert #124753 From: sarah abbott Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 7:02 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 13. Solitary Retreat sarahprocter... Dear Friends, **** Sarah: We often have discussions, like yesterday, about reflections on Death and this sort of thing that can be at any time. Why in the texts does it say that one who wants to develop this should go into solitary retreat and exercise attention wisely. "Death will take place...."* - is this just referring to those who have highly developed samatha or does it refer to those already in solitary retreat? KS: Can it be this moment? S: I think so. So "solitary retreat" referring to this moment. OK. **** S: In other words, at a moment of awareness now, at a moment of wise reflection now, one is in "solitary retreat" already, alone with the kusala citta, the awareness and understanding at that moment. *Vism: (VIII,4): "One who wants to develop this should go into solitary retreat and exercise attention wisely in this way: 'Death will take place; the life faculty will be interrupted', or 'Death, death'." "Ta.m bhaavetukaamena rahogatena pa.tisalliinena ‘‘mara.na.m bhavissati, jiivitindriya.m upacchijjissatī’’ti vaa, ‘‘mara.na.m mara.na’’nti vaa yoniso manasikaaro pavattetabbo." Metta Sarah ===== #124754 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 7:13 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: mindfulness and its object in time sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > >S: For example, suppose there is thinking with metta about someone. At that moment of thinking with metta, there must be awareness (sati), because sati arises with all wholesome cittas. However, the object at this time is the other person. Immediately afterwards, however, that characteristic or quality of metta may be the object of right understanding and awareness. The metta itself has fallen away, but it is considered as "present object" as its nature is known at this moment. ... >R: This discussion suddenly made me realize that I have not understood how a dhamma that has just passed away is, or can be, considered by subsequent cittas and mental processes. In what way, or in what form, does the recently fallen-away dhamma appear in order to be "known" by the subsequent citta with sati or panna? Is it left behind in the form of a nimitta for that citta, does it pass on characteristics that can be understood by the subsequent citta, or how exactly does that take place? ... S: it is the nimitta of the dhamma just passed away. Cittas fall away incredibly fast. It's impossible to know "a citta" - it is always the nimitta of the citta or characteristic of citta that is known. This is why the fire-stick analogy is given. .... > > Also, are there any other examples of a dhamma being known exactly at the time it is present, other than sensory object in the sense-door process? Your example of that above seemed to suggest that the sati or panna that accompanies a kusala citta experiencing a sense-door process would all experience the dhamma at the time that it actually exists, but that other experiences of dhammas that are not sensory in nature take place after the object has fallen away. Does this mean that only rupas are known at the time that they are present? Or is a current mind-door process also known by the present kusala citta that experiences it? .... S: Only in a sense-door process has the rupa not yet fallen away when the javana cittas arise. In the following mind-door processes, that rupa has fallen away, but its characteristic can be known. For all namas, the nama itself that experiences an object, must have fallen away and so its always the nimitta which appears. For example, take seeing consciousness. In the sense door process, the object is visible object. In the following mind door process, awareness can be aware of seeing, but in fact the seeing consciousness has fallen away. Nibbana would of course be the exception. It is the a-nimitta object which is directly experienced. It doesn't arise or fall away. Really, what is important is the present understanding and awareness of the characteristics of realities which appear now. It's easy to be side-tracked by discussions about what is really present - a bit of a red herring, I think. Metta Sarah ==== #124755 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 7:24 pm Subject: Re: eating animal corpses sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > >R: Then the discussion of the far enemies is very good too, leaving equanimity squarely in the middle [way] between lust and aversion, which outlines very clearly where equanimity lies. > > .... > > S: Except that equanimity is not really between lust and aversion at all. It's the opposite of lust and aversion. .. >R: Well, I see what you mean, but I see it in the middle in terms of lust and aversion being two opposite extremes; so equanimity is being unmoved by attraction in one direction, and unmoved by aversion in the other direction. Usually there is push and pull between attraction and aversion, a constant back-and-forth, summed up well in romantic comedies where the same person who is desperately chasing one love-object is trying just as desperately to get away from the person who is after them. Equanimity is the opposite in that it doesn't move either way, just maintains steadiness in the midst of various forces, so I get your point. Still, I think the "middle way" is always between two extremes, so I think that works too. ..... S: I think we need to be careful about considering kusala of any kind as the "middle" between any kinds of akusala. Understanding and equanimity are the "turning away" from attachment of all kinds and the aversion and so on which it brings. The same applies to the Middle Way, the 8fold Path, which is the turning away from all kinds of wrong view under the banners of eternalism and annihilationism, all wrapped up in self-view. ... > >S: ...Equanimity can only arise with wholesome states and these never last more than an instant:-) > >R: I think it is true though, isn't it, that when one is more developed there are many moments in succession of such a state? ... S: We were discussing equanimity, the brahma vihara. This only arises with certain cittas when beings are the object of thinking. It may arise with 7 javana cittas in a mind door process and then there are other kinds of cittas. Of course, for those like the Buddha, such states would arise very often. .... > >S: There's a part of the audio I've been transcribing parts of where a friend talks about all the tumult in her life, all the difficulties. K.Sujin's response is not one of feeling sorry, but "just passing dhammas". I may add it tomorrow. > >R: I could see how the view that difficulties are "just passing dhammas" would tend to promote equanimity too - since there is no need or possibility to do anything about what is happening. ... S: Exactly. This is why reflection on kamma and its results may also condition equanimity. Whatever comes, comes by conditions. The best thing is always the present understanding. Metta Sarah ===== #124756 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 7:44 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 1, 1. nilovg Dear friends, Chapter 1. Visiting the Holy Places The Buddha was born 623 B.C. in Lumbini as Prince Siddhatta, the son of Suddhodana, King of the Skyas and Queen Mya. He attained enlightenment at the age of thirtyfive in Bodhgaya, delivered his first sermon in Sarnath, at the Deerpark of Isipatana, and, after having taught for fortyfive years, he passed finally away in Kusinra. Today, after more than twothousand and sixhundred years, people still visit the holy places where he was born, where he attained enlightenment, where he delivered his first sermon and where he passed away. People pay respect to the Buddha at these places. We read in the Dialogues of the Buddha( Mah- Parinibbna sutta, Ch V, 140) that the Buddha, in the night of his passing away, said to nanda: The place, nanda, at which the believing man can say: --Here the Tathgata was born! is a spot to be visited with feelings of reverence. The place, nanda, at which the believing man can say: --Here the Tathgata attained to the supreme and perfect insight! is a spot to be visited with feelings of reverence. The place, nanda, at which the believing man can say: --Here was the kingdom of righteousness set on foot by the Tathgata! is a spot to be visited with feelings of reverence. The place, nanda, at which the believing man can say: --Here the Tathgata passed finally away in that utter passing away which leaves nothing whatever to remain behind! is a spot to be visited with feelings of reverence. These are the four places, nanda, which the believing clansman should visit with feelings of reverence. And there will come, nanda, to such spots, believers, monks and sisters of the Order, or devout men and women, and will say:--Here the Tathgata was born! or, Here the Tathgata attained to the supreme and perfect insight! or, Here was the kingdom of righteousness set on foot by the Tathgata! or, Here the Tathgata passed finally away in that utter passing away which leaves nothing whatever to remain behind! And they, nanda, who shall die while they, with believing heart, are journeying on such pilgrimage, shall be reborn after death, when the body shall dissolve, in the happy realms of heaven. ------- Nina. #124757 From: "sarah" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 8:27 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Pt, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "ptaus1" wrote: > > S: Different moments. It's like when there is metta. At the moment of metta, being is the object, but immediately following this there can be understanding of the kusala citta at that time. < > > pt: So, (a) there's a moment with metta and a concept of a being as object - so kusala citta (since there's metta as the root) without panna as the third root. ... S: There may or may not be panna at that moment too. ... >Then (b) there's a kusala citta with panna (as the third root) - so "understanding of the kusala citta at that time". ... S: Again, there may or may not be subsequent understanding of the kusala. No rules at all. The point was just that it has to be known when the cittas are kusala in order for that kusala to develop. .... >What is the object of this citta, since it cannot be a dhamma (nor a concept of a dhamma) since we are talking about development of samatha, nor the being? I assume it's some sort of a conceptual recognition of kusala, rather than conceptual thinking about it verbally, which would require concepts of words to be objects of citta processes. ... S: I think it may be the dhamma, but not understood as a reality, as anatta, unless pariyatti has been developed of such. Remember, as discussed, dhammas can also be objects of ignorance or attachment, so not necessary to be the object of satipatthana. ... > > S: Same with breath. As you say, the object is the concept of breath. Following this there can be understanding of whether the citta is kusala/akusala. (Note, breath is never kusala/akusala - only the citta and cetasikas). > > pt: So, (c) there's a citta with concept of a breath as object first. What makes this citta kusala at all, since it's not the breath, and there's no panna which understands that it is a kusala citta at the time? ... S: There can be panna with breath as object. In the development of anapanasati, there must be panna which is developed to very high levels. From the beginning there had to be panna which understood the kusala and akusala. Cittas arise and fall away so fast - one moment breath as object, another moment the kusala citta. ... >Then comes (d) a citta with "understanding of whether the citta is kusala/akusala". What is the object of this citta, since it cannot be a dhamma, nor a concept of a dhamma, nor thoughts in the sense of "reflecting wisely" since we are talking about further stages of samatha development where there's no thinking? Thanks. ... S: It can be a dhamma (nimitta) or a concept of a dhamma. Better not to try and "pin-point" the fine-line! Like now, there can be awareness of thinking. If we try to "work out" whether this is awareness of the reality of thinking or a concept of thinking, it's just more thinking with no awareness. There is always thinking with vitakka arising except at higher levels of jhana. Yes, when samatha is highly developed, the panna is highly developed - it already knows when the cittas are kusala and the attachment is already suppressed. Now, do we know when there is attachment to visible object, when there is attachment or metta to people around us, when there is attachment to breath, wishing to develop it, wishing to know the answers? Always back to this moment - kusala, akusala now, seeing now, visible object now.... Thx for the good questions. metta Sarah ( a bit rushed at the end because Jon just came in - we live in one room in Hong Kong! Let me know if there's more. In Manly in a couple of weeks.) ===== #124758 From: "philip" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 9:03 pm Subject: Re: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 1, 1. philofillet Dear Nina I'm so happy that you are posting one of these series. It feels like it has been quite awhile. Please know that I am eagerly awaiting each installment! Phil #124759 From: upasaka@... Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 9:36 pm Subject: Predestination Versus Elements of Randomness in Conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, all - There is one question with regard to conditionality in general and to "choice" in particular that does seem to me to be rather important: Let us assume, for the moment at least, that there is NO element of (intrinsic) randomness ever involved in the arising of phenomena, so that for *every* phenomenon, P, there is a set, S, of requisite conditions such that if all the phenomena in S have occurred, P MUST occur, but should any phenomenon in S be missing, P CANNOT occur. It seems to me that if this is true, then so is it true that at any moment, whatever will occur from that point in time onwards is fully predetermined, with no possible alteration. In particular, for some worldlings, the "die has been cast" determining that they MUST eventually awaken, but for others it is entirely determined that awakening can NEVER occur. If I am making an error here, I would appreciate a clear explanation of it. With metta, Howard P. S. This matter is independent of the issue of anatta, though there may well be confusion on that point on the part of some. In fact, an element of randomness does not in the slightest support an atta-view. Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124760 From: "Yawares Sastri" Date: Thu Jun 7, 2012 11:06 pm Subject: The Thirty-One Planes Of Existence yawares1 Dear Members, Bhikkhu Gavesako gave me this Youtube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylaZvvO3gag And it reminds me of the article I posted @ SD/JTN Group months ago. Today I would like to share this wonderful article with you all. ********************* The Thirty-One Planes Of Existence [Edited by John T.Bullit 2005-2012] The inescapable law of kamma guarantees that each and every one of our actions whether it be of body, speech, or mind, has consequences in line with the skillfulness or unskillfulness of that action. We can often witness this process first-hand in our own lives, even if the effects may not be immediately apparent. But the Buddha also taught that our actions have effects that extend far beyond our present life, determining the quality of rebirth we can expect after death: act in wholesome, skillful ways and you are destined for a favorable rebirth; act in unwholesome, unskillful ways and an unpleasant rebirth awaits. Thus we coast for aeons through samsara, propelled from one birth to the next by the quality of our choices and our actions. The suttas describe thirty-one distinct "planes" or "realms" of existence into which beings can be reborn during this long wandering through samsara. These range from the extraordinarily dark, grim, and painful hell realms all the way up to the most sublime, refined, and exquisitely blissful heaven realms. Existence in every realm is impermanent; in Buddhist cosmology there is no eternal heaven or hell. Beings are born into a particular realm according to both their past kamma and their kamma at the moment of death. When the kammic force that propelled them to that realm is finally exhausted, they pass away, taking rebirth once again elsewhere according to their kamma. And so the wearisome cycle continues. The realms of existence are customarily divided into three distinct "worlds" (loka), listed here in descending order of refinement: The Immaterial World (arupa-loka). Consists of four realms that are accessible to those who pass away while meditating in the formless jhanas. The Fine-Material World (rupa-loka). Consists of sixteen realms whose inhabitants (the devas) experience extremely refined degrees of mental pleasure. These realms are accessible to those who have attained at least some level of jhana and who have thereby managed to (temporarily) suppress hatred and ill-will. They are said to possess extremely refined bodies of pure light. The highest of these realms, the Pure Abodes, are accessible only to those who have attained to "non-returning," the third stage of Awakening. The Fine-Material World and the Immaterial World together constitute the "heavens" (sagga). The Sensuous World (kama-loka). Consists of eleven realms in which experience both pleasurable and not, is dominated by the five senses. Seven of these realms are favorable destinations, and include our own human realm as well as several realms occupied by devas. The lowest realms are the four "bad" destinations, which include the animal and hell realms. It is pointless to debate whether these realms are real or simply fanciful metaphors that describe the various mind-states we might experience in this lifetime. The real message of this cosmology is this: unless we take steps to break free of the iron grip of kamma, we are doomed to wander aimlessly from one state to another, with true peace and satisfaction forever out of reach. The Buddha's revolutionary discovery came in finding that there is a way to break free: the Noble Eightfold Path, which equips us with precisely the tools we need to escape from this wearisome wandering, once and for all, to a true and unshakeable freedom. The information on this page was assembled from a variety of sources. In the interests of economizing space I have not attributed each fact to its respective source. --------------- TO BE CONTINUED TOMORROW ---------------- Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya #124761 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 12:35 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... nilovg Dear Dieter, Op 6-jun-2012, om 12:08 heeft Dieter Moeller het volgende geschreven: > > Dieter, you gave this text: anu~n~natosi matapituhi: with the > permission of his mother and father (matapituhi). He cannot be > ordained without their permission. > ------- > > D:oops ...the wrong line should be 'nasi rajabhato..' corrrect? ------ N: raaja bha.ta is a soldier. That may be the line. I know that you are studying Pali and if you have questions, on the Pali list there are several people who will answer questions. ---- Nina. #124762 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 1:25 am Subject: Re: why choice can't be made? truth_aerator Hello Pt, all, >Pt: I'm confused a bit by this whole topic. Well, what I had in mind is that *wise* person doesn't have to react in akusala way to whatever happens. External conditions don't force one to react with lobha, dosa, etc. Isn't it possible for a *wise* person to avoid typical reactions of lobha/dosa/moha . With best wishes, Alex #124763 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 1:37 am Subject: Re: Predestination Versus Elements of Randomness in Conditionality truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, You have made good points and expressed it much better than I could. I would also like to add this point: Even if there was total randomness, it like complete determination refutes the ability of the present to influence the future. I have been reading some philosophical things, and this issue is very complex. There are even hints of "retro-causality" (at least on QM levels), ability to influence the past?! There are hints that there may be multiple universes with all possible outcomes already existing. It seems beyond much dispute that time is a dimension that can, in theory, be traveled like space. It is not impossible that time is relative. This means that past, present and future exists - just like two cities exist in different locations. But of course, I ask myself "how is this relevant to experience". For whatever reason we experience only the present, so how much is this all relevant? I guess it is important to investigate experience and not hold "extreme" views, and do what one considers to be the wisest and most appropriate. IMHO, With metta, Alex #124764 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 1:55 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Abhidhamma Studies part 2 - epsteinrob Hi Nina. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Nina van Gorkom wrote: ...If we do not develop understanding of [dhammas] > right now we shall never know what nibbaana is. We can only speculate > about nibbaana. > Why not learn more about dhammas arising at this moment, that is > already quite a difficult task. Good point - difficult to have awareness even for a moment. Still, the unconditioned seems attractive [with lots of attachment I'm sure...] Best, Rob E. #124765 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:01 am Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > > Hi Rob E, > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > >S: ...At moments of insight or satipatthana, panna discerns a dhamma. When it is a moment of samatha or pariyatti (pre-satipatthana), it is concept as object. For example, now we're reflecting on the Dhamma. With the kusala cittas during such reflection, there is calm and the concepts of dhammas are the objects. > ... > R:> Is there panna in that situation, with kusala citta arising with samatha or pariyatti? > .... > S: Yes, there must be panna at moments of wise reflection on the Dhamma, at moments of pariyatti, even though concepts are the objects. > > In the development of samatha, samatha bhavana, right up to jhana, concepts are object - again must be panna at such moments. > > There are different levels and kinds of panna. Great, that is good to know. Do wise reflection and pariyatti with concept as object get onto the scale of insight? Or are those levels of panna prior to what is considered the stages of vipassana? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124766 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:20 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Dhs epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: Yes. As you say, we're always experiencing dhammas. Like now, if there were no seeing of visible objects in between the thinking, there'd be no idea about the various texts. Usually no sati or panna and lots of proliferation as you say. I heard K.Sujin saying on a recording this morning that many people tell her they'd like to not think so much, not worry so much and so on. She was saying that the way not to think is to understand reality now! We're always lost in stories about situations with very little awareness of the present reality. It's interesting to see how thick our experience is with what seem like back-to-back stories. It seems that every experience I have, there's some sort of explanation, rationalization, justification, expectation, or some other complicated add-on, so I see your point. How can one be aware of anything with so much commentary going on? The best I can do is see that all of that is just sort of putting the finger on the scale, constantly trying to change or adjust what has already happened without any control, to turn it into something more pleasant or easier to fit into one's conceptual framework. It's kind of funny in a way, if it weren't so annoying. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - #124767 From: upasaka@... Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:43 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Predestination Versus Elements of Randomness in Conditionality upasaka_howard Hi, Alex - In a message dated 6/7/2012 11:37:07 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, truth_aerator@... writes: Hello Howard, all, You have made good points and expressed it much better than I could. I would also like to add this point: Even if there was total randomness, it like complete determination refutes the ability of the present to influence the future. I have been reading some philosophical things, and this issue is very complex. There are even hints of "retro-causality" (at least on QM levels), ability to influence the past?! There are hints that there may be multiple universes with all possible outcomes already existing. It seems beyond much dispute that time is a dimension that can, in theory, be traveled like space. It is not impossible that time is relative. This means that past, present and future exists - just like two cities exist in different locations. But of course, I ask myself "how is this relevant to experience". For whatever reason we experience only the present, so how much is this all relevant? I guess it is important to investigate experience and not hold "extreme" views, and do what one considers to be the wisest and most appropriate. ---------------------------------------------------------- HCW: To be honest about it, neither of us knows much about what is what (LOL!), but I think that what you say in this last sentence of yours is right-on-target, and we should just do the best we can, conditions allowing. ------------------------------------------------------------- IMHO, With metta, Alex =============================== With metta, Howard Seamless Interdependence /A change in anything is a change in everything/ (Anonymous) #124768 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:55 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... moellerdieter Dear Nina, you wrote: N: raaja bha.ta is a soldier. That may be the line. D: yes .. consequence of the request of the king (Raja) . Nowadays it may concern all government officials, i.e. one must resign from the service. ( not sure in the case of temporary withdrawal/admission to the Sangha) N:I know that you are studying Pali and if you have questions, on the Pali list there are several people who will answer questions. D: I needed nearly one month to learn the text I was supposed to recite during the ordination procedure .. and recognized later that novices managed to learn the whole Patimokkha by heart in a shorter time . Hence knowing my limitation , better to seek- as you suggest -advise from Pali list members , Sankhara in context of the 12 links D.O. comes into my mind.. with Metta Dieter #124769 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 3:22 am Subject: [dsg] Re: Predestination Versus Elements of Randomness in Conditionality truth_aerator Hello Howard, all, >---------------------------------------------------------- >HCW: To be honest about it, neither of us knows much about what is >what (LOL!), >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right. Who knows what underlies experience. Mind, matter, fish in LSD ocean hallucinating our world, brain-in-the-vat created by evil scientist, G-D, or evil demon? If the world is made of matter, is it possible that there is only one atom that exists? Is 5 minute hypothesis true? Retro-causality? Multiple universe? Etc etc. I've read so much that I can't be surprised. We can't be certain of many things. But, IMHO, this is why I prefer to emphasize experience and pragmatic, experiential and logical teachings. With best wishes, Alex #124770 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 7:26 am Subject: RE: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... dhammasaro Good friends all, My US military officer son took two weeks of military leave to become a temporary monk at Wat Mongkoltepmunee which is near Philadelphia. Some years ago, I met a senior military officer, on military leave, as a temporary monk at Wat Thai Washington DC. peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: moellerdieter@... Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 18:55:46 +0200 Subject: Re: [dsg] Re: Did the Buddha forbid soldiers.... Dear Nina, you wrote: N: raaja bha.ta is a soldier. That may be the line. D: yes .. consequence of the request of the king (Raja) . Nowadays it may concern all government officials, i.e. one must resign from the service. ( not sure in the case of temporary withdrawal/admission to the Sangha) N:I know that you are studying Pali and if you have questions, on the Pali list there are several people who will answer questions. D: I needed nearly one month to learn the text I was supposed to recite during the ordination procedure .. and recognized later that novices managed to learn the whole Patimokkha by heart in a shorter time . Hence knowing my limitation , better to seek- as you suggest -advise from Pali list members , Sankhara in context of the 12 links D.O. comes into my mind.. with Metta Dieter #124771 From: "jonoabb" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 8:14 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' jonoabb Hi RobK --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > > > > Hi RobK > > > > --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > > > ... > > > > > KH: That means, does it not, that no conventional counterpart can be more equated with a dhamma than any other? The ancient commentaries might just as well have said citta was based in the foot. If that was the most intelligent scientific thinking of their day then 'foot' would have been the best conventional (scientific) designation they could have given for 'mind-base.' > > > > > > > > > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > > > > > =============== > > > > > > > > J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > > > > > > > > > =============== > > > > > > > > > Dear Jon and Kenh > > > so can we say then that where it says in the visuddhimagga that the heartbase (hadaya=vatthu,) is found in the blood inside the physical heart, that this has no relation at all with the way things really are. > > > =============== > > > > J: I would take a reference to the "physical heart" to be a reference to the conventional heart. > > > > > =============== > > > RK: They might as well have said hadayavatthu was in the brain matter or foot?If the foot or brain was what science of that day said. Either way nothing to do with reality or in any way to be construed as being true(the VM). > > > =============== > > > > J: I did not quite follow KenH's comments relating to the science of the day (and I did not comment on that part of his post). > > > > Jon > > > Dear Jon > You "did not follow" means you disagre with KenH or you couldn't understand his point, ... > =============== J: I meant I could not understand his point. > =============== you previous post looked like agreement? > =============== J: I was agreeing with the paragraph that followed the one with those comments. > =============== > > Perhaps we can look at the text: > Visuddhimagga Ch. XIV > > 60. 13. The heart-basis has the characteristic of being the (material) support for the mind-element and for the mind-consciousness-element. Its function is to observe them. It is manifested as the carrying of them. It is to be found in dependence on the blood, of the kind described in the treatise on the mindfulness of the body (Ch. VIII, 111), inside the heart. It is assisted by the primaries with their functions of upholding, etc.; it is consolidated by temperature, consciousness, and nutriment; it is maintained by life; and it serves as physical basis for the mind-element and the mind-consciousness-element, and for the states associated with them.2 > > Vism. VIII, 111. > This is the heart flesh. As to colour, it is the colour of the back of a red-lotus petal. As to shape, it is the shape of a lotus bud with the outer petals removed and turned upside down; it is smooth outside, and inside it is like the interior of a kosataki (loofah gourd). In those who possess understanding it is a little expanded; in those without understanding it is still only a bud. Inside it there is a hollow the size of a punnaga seed's bed where half a pasata measure of blood is kept, with which as their support the mind element and mind-consciousness element occur. > ++++++ > If I understand KENH he is saying this is just some idea that people had 2000 years ago and has no relation at all to actual reality. > if they had thought the mind element arises in the brain (like today's scientsist) they would have written that. Apparently those monks at that time had some cultural ideas and saw a connection between reality and concepts like ear, eye body ect. Whereas KENH(and you?) believes there is no relation at all. > =============== J: I'm afraid I don't quite follow what you mean by "a connection/no relation between reality and concepts" in this context. I don't have a problem with anything contained in the Vism extract. Happy to discuss if you could elaborate further. Jon #124772 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 12:45 pm Subject: Re: choices epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > Past does not exist now, only present moment exists now during which choice is made. Why do we give the past (which doesn't exist now) equal or higher influence over the present which exists? Because the present includes accumulations and tendencies, as well as other conditions that affect what is happening at the moment - this is true of every moment, they are never blank, until complete cessation of experience, parinibbana. So there is no reason to posit some sort of state that is empty of tendencies, since there is none for worldlings, ever. > Are there mind-independent causes for choosing (mental event)? Wouldn't it be speculative to posit such? Nothing to say about interaction between mind and mind-independent things. You are idealizing "the mind." There is no such thing. Mind is not a place or a thing. It is merely mental events, in succession. And yes, they concretely influence each next event, from moment to moment. There are no moments that just arise independently. That is a fantasy. > Are physical similes for conditionality of choice valid for mental events? Not physical similes, but mental facts. Consciousness is one of the five kandhas, there are no exceptions. Citta is indeed fully conditioned, it is not independent. If you think consciousness is unconditioned, then you are giving it the status of nibbana, which means that it is the equivalent of a higher self or soul -- that is Atman. The Buddha was very clear that "consciousness is not-self." You are saying consciousness is not conditioned, that it has choice, therefore that it has control over its experience. That is the exact opposite of what the Buddha said about it, as one of the five kandhas. Consciousness is mechanical, conditioned, not self, and does not possess choice. When volition arises, that is conditioned too. Conditionality only has one exception, and that is nibbana, nothing else. > Of course possible choices (option A vs B) are conditioned and require certain kinds of condition. Choice (a mental action) is the final condition that will make either A or B occur provided A & B both have required causes other than choice in the present. The citta that chooses is also fully conditioned. It has no choice over what it chooses. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = #124773 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:05 pm Subject: Re: choices epsteinrob Hi Howard, and Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: Alex: > > Choice is called choice > > Who cares what it is called? It is called "choice" by the dictionaries and > vocabularies of worldlings - what does that have to do with what choice > may or may not be in the Dhamma, or in reality? > > It is called "choice" because of the great illusion that there is someone > to choose, someone in control. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > There is also the reality of impersonal choice: > A "decision process" involving thinking, recalling, comparing, > predispositions & desires & aversions, all conditioned, culminating in one or more > "impulsions" that actualize "a choice" from various possible (conditioned) > alternatives, is exactly "choice" and is erroneously thought to be > "carried out by a "decider". [Note: By "decider" I'm not referring to George W. > Bush LOL!] > ------------------------------------------------------------- Yes, the "reality of impersonal choice" is a good way to put it. Of course that takes place. GW didn't decide anything on his own - he consulted the Voice in his Head first. > > because it can choose between at least two possibilities. > > Is "choice" a word used in sutta or in Abhidhamma? Volition is not choice, > in my view, as in choosing between options, but is the desire to act, > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > I don't think volition is desire, but, instead, is a sort of "push" > that follows upon desire or aversion along with other conditions. > --------------------------------------------------------------- Yeah, desire may not be a good word in this context. > in my view. In other words, it arises as a decisive impulse out of > conditions > -------------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Yes, I agree with that. > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > , rather than sitting around looking over various options. > ----------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Bur such consideration, usually subliminal and very rapid, often does > precede the impulsion. Sure, lots of thinking, gears turning, dominoes falling... > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > It arises cleanly towards one action, not two or three. > ---------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Yes, but it is "choosing" only if there were more than one action > possible. The idea of possible actions is future thinking, it is conceptual. The idea that there are "possibilities" is only true in theory, and even if one decides to take possibility A, it may turn out not to be possible or turn into something else a moment later. Multiple choice is often fine for practical purposes, but not really a reality. > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > >RE:You have not identified an element > > > > "Choice" is that element. > > In that case that element is an illusion. > ------------------------------------------------------- > HCW: > Choosing is a process consisting of many, many phenomena, and not a > single cetasika, though active cetana is a prominent and culminating aspect. > -------------------------------------------------------- I think that is good to point out. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - #124774 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:10 pm Subject: Re: why choice can't be made? epsteinrob Hi Alex. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "truth_aerator" wrote: > > Hello RobertE, all, > > >Well, as I recall, it goes on to say the same thing for all the >kandhas, including consciousness. > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > > Yes the sutta mentions all 5 aggregates. But, please note, it says we cannot stop it from "affliction". We cannot control "let there be only pleasant feeling, never unpleasant, that is constant and eternal" etc. We cannot stop anicca. But this is different from saying that choice cannot be made at all. > > Why can't, lets say, John decide to lift left or right arm and then lift it? If John has both arms that function, etc, and all the required conditions for either action (minus the choice) why can't choice be the final required condition for action to occur? There is no John, which is just a designation, not a being, so he cannot lift his arm. He can have the thought to lift the arm, which comes from other conditions, and that thought can condition other impulses to lift the arm. But there's no self, and ultimately no choice in that process. Mental processes have conditionality controlling their arising as well. Nothing happens due to the willing of it by a self. Best, Rob E. = = = = = = = = = = = = = #124775 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: mindfulness and its object in time epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > Really, what is important is the present understanding and awareness of the characteristics of realities which appear now. It's easy to be side-tracked by discussions about what is really present - a bit of a red herring, I think. Well, some of these questions are important to me, and I'm glad to know that the subsequent citta experiences the nimitta of the citta that has just fallen away. Otherwise I would continue to misunderstand what takes place, and it would remain a distraction for me. Anyway, thanks for clearing it up! I really do appreciate the information. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124776 From: "Robert E" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 2:24 pm Subject: Re: eating animal corpses epsteinrob Hi Sarah. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: I think we need to be careful about considering kusala of any kind as the "middle" between any kinds of akusala. Understanding and equanimity are the "turning away" from attachment of all kinds and the aversion and so on which it brings. I see what you mean, that it's better to understand kusala as strictly opposite from any kind of akusala. > The same applies to the Middle Way, the 8fold Path, which is the turning away from all kinds of wrong view under the banners of eternalism and annihilationism, all wrapped up in self-view. That makes sense - it is more clear than seeing "The Middle Way" as somehow floating around in the middle of akusala. ... > > >S: There's a part of the audio I've been transcribing parts of where a friend talks about all the tumult in her life, all the difficulties. K.Sujin's response is not one of feeling sorry, but "just passing dhammas". I may add it tomorrow. > > > >R: I could see how the view that difficulties are "just passing dhammas" would tend to promote equanimity too - since there is no need or possibility to do anything about what is happening. > ... > S: Exactly. This is why reflection on kamma and its results may also condition equanimity. Whatever comes, comes by conditions. The best thing is always the present understanding. Very nice. Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124777 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 4:10 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "jonoabb" wrote: > KENH> > > > > > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > > > > > > =============== > > > > > > > > > > J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > > > > > > > > > > > =============== > > > > > > > > > > If I understand KENH he is saying this is just some idea that people had 2000 years ago and has no relation at all to actual reality. > > if they had thought the mind element arises in the brain (like today's scientsist) they would have written that. Apparently those monks at that time had some cultural ideas and saw a connection between reality and concepts like ear, eye body ect. Whereas KENH(and you?) believes there is no relation at all. > > =============== > > J: I'm afraid I don't quite follow what you mean by "a connection/no relation between reality and concepts" in this context. I don't have a problem with anything contained in the Vism extract. Happy to discuss if you could elaborate further. > > Jon > ___________ Dear Jon The relationship between concept and reality is quite straighforward: the concepts that the VM use are TRUE and come from a direct understanding of actual relaities: this is what I believe. I would claim that the reason the Visuddhimagga said the heart base was situated in the blood contained inside the conventional, physical heart, is that IT IS IN ACTUAL FACT situated just there. And it not situated inside the brain - where scientists of these deluded times seem to think 'mind' arises. It seems KENH has a different opinion on this, but perhaps he will comment. robert #124778 From: "colette_aube" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 12:03 am Subject: Re: Predestination Versus Elements of Randomness in Conditionality colette_aube GOOD MORNING HOWARD! (laughing) I GOT YA! Your points are very well made and I get the picture that you're painting. There ya go, THE LAW OF DEMINISHING RETURNS rears it's ugliness. There can be NO SUCH THING as "randomness". We can suggest that "EVERYTHING" is predetermined so that the creationists can have a little pre-cum dribbling down their cheek thus keeping them thirsty so that they can prove that there is a "CREATOR DEITY" and the Corporate Executive is a good representation of that Deity, yet the second that we suggest this existence of a type of CONTROL being extended to something we raise the issue of CHAOS i.e. either there is ORDER (thus CONTROL) or there is CHAOS. Those Jack Off-Icers cannot stand for the existence of or the chance of the existence of CHAOS since their only mantra is to program robots, educate children, CONDITION, via the glory of CONTROL and ORDER. Even the Brahman Caste that gave us THE BUDDHA from the Hindus of India have known that an addiction to CONTROL exists. How else can we think of the existence of MEDITATION without first recognizing the fluid state of consciousness which is THE MIND. We could save the ORTHODOX a lot of head aches and trouble but we've already planted the bija known as THE ALAYA-VIJNANA. "Racing thoughts" are a characteristic of a Turbulent Mind and CONTROL of the MIND is one of the first objectives in the application of MEDITATION. They, the ORTHODOX, cannot escape the TRUTH of the Alaya-Vijnana (storehouse consciousness) existing. Thank You, Howard, for posing such a humorous TRUTH to us, so that I could wake up as the children were going out the door on their way to school, and find your humor waiting to brighten my day and start my day on a GOOD NOTE. toodles, colette --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, upasaka@... wrote: > > Hi, all - > > There is one question with regard to conditionality in general and to > "choice" in particular that does seem to me to be rather important: > Let us assume, for the moment at least, that there is NO element of > (intrinsic) randomness ever involved in the arising of phenomena, so that for > *every* phenomenon, P, there is a set, S, of requisite conditions such > that if all the phenomena in S have occurred, P MUST occur, but should any > phenomenon in S be missing, P CANNOT occur. > It seems to me that if this is true, then so is it true that at any > moment, whatever will occur from that point in time onwards is fully > predetermined, with no possible alteration. In particular, for some worldlings, the > "die has been cast" determining that they MUST eventually awaken, but for > others it is entirely determined that awakening can NEVER occur. > If I am making an error here, I would appreciate a clear explanation > of it. <...> #124779 From: sarah abbott Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 5:25 pm Subject: 2007 audio - 14. Attanuditthi sarahprocter... Dear Friends, I had mentioned that Han, myself and others had had some discussion (on DSG) about attavadupadana [S: clinging to atta/self] and sakkaya ditthi [S: Personality belief] and whether they were the same or not. ***** KS: So do you mean that only the body can be attanuditthi [S: wrong view of self]? Han: Well, if there's atta, the 5 aggregates are involved. KS: OK, the softness here [S: pointing to her arm] is atta or anatta? Han: Softness.... KS: That which is soft is atta or anatta? Here, atta or anatta? Han: I think it's atta. KS: And what about the pillow? Atta or anatta, the softness? Han: Pillow - there is no atta. Softness is the same. KS: Yes the softness is the same no matter where it arises. So softness there and softness here is rupa. Softness itself is atta or anatta? Han: laughs.... KS: Softness is not different at all no matter where it is, here or there. Softness itself. As softness here is not self, how can softness there be self or something. It has to be the same. Softness is softness Softness is anatta here and softness there is also anatta too. Han: Yes, but we're talking about attavadupadana and sakkaya ditthi and whether they are different. KS: Yes, there are two words atta and anatta. They are opposite and when we talk about attanuditthi we talk about the belief or the idea that some thing stays, permanent. The atta is permanent, it doesn't arise, it does not fall away. That is the meaning of atta, right? Han: My understanding of atta is yourself. KS: But what is it? Is the rupa from head to toe self? Han: 5 aggregates. KS: 5 aggregaes, so it includes hardness and softness in the body too. Han: Yes. KS: But when we are talking about the absolute reality, softness is softness. ***** Metta Sarah ====== #124780 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 6:10 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 3. If no trying or forcing, then what? sarahprocter... Hi Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: >I guess it's people who misunderstand what is going on and think there is some sort of conection betweem ling arduous meditation and bhavana who make themselves sick, poor chaps and chapettes. ... S: "Ling arduous meditation" sounds a bit kinky:-) Yesterday in our main English paper there was an almost full page article about a tragedy at a retreat in Arizona led by the very well-known Geshe Michael Roche. I remember he was Erik's teacher. Some very serious wrong view (and harmful effects of) - a silent retreat for over 3 yrs. i'm sure others will have seen it too. ... > > Yes, thanks, Ned was celebrated by his many friends. An interesting way Dhamma helped me through this was realizing that the fact that I failed to really be fully attentive to his situation in his last months when exchanging e-mails with him is not something to beat myself up over. That virya didn't arise, it's a dhamma, beyond control. Blaming myself would just mean further accumulation of akusala. On the other hand, noting truthfully how virya that mught have contributed to saving him didn't arise might be condition for virya to arise to help others in need. ... S: Yes, excellent. I'm glad there was a "celebration" and that your understanding of Dhamma has been such a support and given you the encouragement to help others in need. I felt just the same after Sharon's accident - inspired to go to a little extra trouble when there are opportunities which are always around us. ... > Yes, I will begin to post spd passages again, but not every day. I need to keep in touch somehow with expressing undwrstanding of Dhamma, somehow. I don't want to fail to appreciate the treasure of sensitivity to Dhamma, and excercising that sensitivity at times by copying valuable teachings is a good idea I think. ... S: Just when it happens is helpful for us all. ... > p.s thanks for the audio transcripts, I will read with interest. ... S: I'm following your good example of just copying a few lines at a time (mostly). I think this is helpful for us all to reflect on, whether or not there's agreement. You inspired me!! Metta Sarah ===== #124781 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 6:08 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' kenhowardau Hi Robert K. > RK: It seems KENH has a different opinion on this, but perhaps he will comment.> --- KH: I think you know my opinions on concepts and realities, Robert, and you regard them as not much more than senseless repetition of `There are only dhammas!' I don't believe the Pali texts add anything to our conventional knowledge. Every word of them is to be understood in terms of satipatthana (right understanding of the present dhamma-arammana) *only*. The Theras conventionally regarded the heart as the base of [conventional] consciousness. Therefore they used `heart' as a conventional counterpart, or shadow, for teaching purposes. On that basis I too am happy to use `heart' as the conventional counterpart of the ultimately real base of [conditioned] consciousness. But that doesn't mean I will regard the heart that way for conventional purposes. Ken H #124782 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 6:30 pm Subject: Re: Research on bad effects of formal meditation retreat sarahprocter... Hi Rob E, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Robert E" wrote: > > > 3. If the sakadagami or sotapanna has a moment of attachment arise, is there ignorance at that moment, and does that mean there is no direct understanding at that moment? > > ... > > S: Yes and correct. There is ignorance arising with all akusala cittas, including those with attachment. Attachment and ignorance are the "roots" at that moment. No direct, indirect, any kind of understanding at those moments. > > Thanks for the very helpful responses. This is interesting. So, I would guess that since the sakadagami or sotapanna is very advanced, he is having many kusala moments with panna. Would the moments of attachment and ignorance often be followed by moments with panna that would understand the ignorance and attachment for what they are? ... S: Of course, the panna would be accumulating. Regardless of 'how often' panna might follow ignorance and attachment, depending on accumulations, what is certain is that for all ariyans there is no more doubt, no more wrong view at all about realities as realities and no taking of them for atta. ... > > And do arahats also have moments of akusala, or has all such been eradicated completely for them? ... S: Completely eradicated at the path moment of becoming an arahat - even the most subtle ignorance or attachment to becoming. Metta Sarah ====== #124783 From: "rjkjp1" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 6:39 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' rjkjp1 --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > > Hi Robert K. > > > RK: It seems KENH has a different opinion on this, but perhaps he will comment.> > --- > > KH: I think you know my opinions on concepts and realities, Robert, and you regard them as not much more than senseless repetition of `There are only dhammas!' > > I don't believe the Pali texts add anything to our conventional knowledge. Every word of them is to be understood in terms of satipatthana (right understanding of the present dhamma-arammana) *only*. > > The Theras conventionally regarded the heart as the base of [conventional] consciousness. Therefore they used `heart' as a conventional counterpart, or shadow, for teaching purposes. > > On that basis I too am happy to use `heart' as the conventional counterpart of the ultimately real base of [conditioned] consciousness. But that doesn't mean I will regard the heart that way for conventional purposes. > > Ken H > Dear Kenh . Do you really think the Commentaries made things up based on some cultural belief. If they said the ear base was located in the toenail obviously they would be wrong, right? Because it is located in the conventional ear. It is exactly the same with the heart base: these bhikkhus were not wrong, they understood reality and concept. You sometimes upbraid members of dsg who cherry pick examples from the ancient Commenatries, and reject others.why nt admit you only accept aspects of the Commenaries yourself robert #124784 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 6:45 pm Subject: Pilgrimage in India, Ch 1, 2. nilovg Dear friends, People were wondering what we were looking for at the holy places and what we were doing while we traveled. What was the reason we went to these places? The Buddha passed finally away, but we can still pay respect to the Buddha. We can show our gratefulness for his teaching by outward signs such as the offering of incense, candles and flowers, or by chanting texts taken from the teachings. It is fitting that we show our gratefulness, because if the Buddha had not taught the development of wisdom which can eradicate defilements how could we develop this wisdom today? We are learning to be mindful of the nmas (mental phenomena) and rpas (material phenomena) which appear now and we have confidence that in this way the clinging to self can be diminished. Confidence in his teachings and above all the development of understanding of nma and rpa is the way to pay respect to the Buddha. During our pilgrimage we talked about the Buddhas life and about the perfections he accumulated as a Bodhisatta in the course of innumerable lives. This is also a way of paying respect to the Buddha. Contemplating the Buddhas perfections can remind us to consider the reality appearing at the present moment. If we have only theoretical knowledge of the Buddhas teachings, acquired from reading, we cannot understand what Buddhahood means. We may begin to know what this means if we develop mindfulness and right understanding of nma and rpa. The Buddha could only become foremost in wisdom and virtue because he had cultivated the right conditions for it. He had accumulated mindfulness and wisdom for an endlessly long time, with great patience and perseverance. He had fulfilled all the perfections (prams) necessary for the attainment of Buddhahood. When we consider his perfections we understand more how only the right cause could bring such result and it fills us with great respect. He fulfilled all the perfections out of compassion, also for us today who can still listen to his teachings and develop the eightfold Path. We too should cultivate the right cause in order to have the appropriate result: right understanding of the phenomena of our life. We too should cultivate understanding with great patience and perseverance, in learning to be mindful of nma and rpa over and over again. ------- Nina. #124785 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 6:54 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: > D: we need further consideration of the question : are khandhas merely an abstract classification by the Buddha or realities , dhammas like dhatus , ayatanas as you state. > I still favor the former . E.g. :Whatever there exists of corporeal things, whether past, present or future, one's own or external, gross or subtle, lofty or low, far or near, all that belongs to the corporeality group. Whatever there exists of feeling ... of perception ... of mental formations ... of consciousness ... all that belongs to the consciousness-group" (S. XXII, 48). > > I like to emphasise 'whatever exists of .....belong to the ...group ' , i.e. what exists are the corporeal or mental phenomena/ dhammas, distinguished by the khandhas. The grouping itself is concept , has 'no real existence' , only its single constituents parts `can be called reality . ... S: Here is a quote from 'Survey of Paramattha Dhammas' explaining this point (which Nina quoted before): "The term khandha refers to the dhamma which can be described as past, future or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near. Hence khandha is sankhata dhamma, the dhamma which is conditioned, which arises and falls away, and thus, it can be described as past, present, future, etc. Whereas asankhata dhamma, nibbaana, is the dhamma which does not arise, which is unconditioned . ... We read in the "Kindred Sayings" (III, Khandhaa-vagga, First Fifty, Ch 5, 48, The Factors) that the Buddha, while he was at Saavatthii, explained to the monks about the five khandhas : I will teach you, monks, the five khandhas and the five khandhas that have to do with grasping. Do you listen to it. S: Any rupa is rupa khandha and so on. Each one is a reality. See the sutta quotes on this I quoted to you before. If they were not realities, the Buddha would not talk about understanding their impermanence and so on. ... > Please compare with following I copied from Wiki 'Skandha' (hopefully the copy appears close to the orginal > (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skandha ) The scheme is nice , but -I.M.H.O. - fails with the classification of the citta > > . > "The Abhidhamma and post-canonical Pali texts create a meta-scheme for the Sutta Pitaka's conceptions of aggregates, sense bases and dhattus (elements).[24] This meta-scheme is known as the four paramatthas or four ultimate realities ... S: In other words, whether we're talking about khandhas, ayatanas or dhatus, they are all realities, all dhammas. > D: you don't agree to " each conditioned reality belongs to the (5/3/2) 'classificatory grouping ' , do you ? ;-) ... S: Each dhamma is a khandha, ayatana and dhatu. Visible object is rupa khandha. Sound is rupa khandha. Rupa khandha clarifies what these realities have in common. They are rupa khandha, not nama khandha. The same applies to the other terms - they help us understand the nature of different realities as anatta. ... > > S:If this were not so, the Buddha would not refer to the impermanence of khandhas over and over again as shown in the suttas I quoted from. > > D: no doubt the khandas in perspective of a living being are impermanent due the breakdown and coming together at death and (re)birth . > Another aspect is if the moment or the life is concerned ... we need to have a closer look to respective suttas. > Perhaps it is a matter of speech ..in a way : yes, basically right ..but nitpicking (?) :-) ... S: At this moment there are khandhas arising and falling away. This shows us there is no living being in reality at all. ... > > S:The English translation 'aggregate' is totally misleading imho. > > D: my dictionary says 'a total number or amount made up of smaller amounts that are collected together' > would you consider that misleading? ... S: Let's stick to the Pali term khandha. It refers to each dhamma ("whether past, present or future, one's own or external, gross or subtle, lofty or low, far or near") as impermanent as rupa khandha, vedana khandha, sanna khandha, sankhara khandha or vinnanna khandha. No self, no being, no other conditioned dhammas but khandhas. Thx for the discussion. It's not an easy topic. Metta Sarah ==== #124786 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 7:11 pm Subject: Re: spd 23 (bhavanga citta maintans continuity) sarahprocter... Dear Phil, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "philip" wrote: > p.s I suppose one could ask what is the difference between the function of bhavanga citta that "maintains the continuity in one's life" and the life faculty cetasika, jiivitindriya. I see on p.422 that jivitindriya arises together with the other cetasikas and "maintains their life at that moment" so I guess the role it plays in "maintaining" is more momentary in some sense than what the bhavangas do. ... S: Good qu. 1. Bhavanga cittas "maintain the continuity of life" in between sense and mind door processes, so there is no "gap", such as in deep sleep. 2. jivitindriya cetasika is a universal cetasika which arises with every single citta - kusala, akusala, vipaka and kiriya, maintaining the life of that citta and associated cetasikas by way of support. 3. There is also jivitindriya rupa which arises in each kalapa conditioned by kamma. Only living beings have such kalapas. These rupas continue to arise and fall away in beings even when there is no consciousness, as in nirodha samapatti. Without these kamma conditioned rupas, the body would not stay alive. Metta Sarah ===== #124787 From: Nina van Gorkom Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 7:16 pm Subject: Re: [dsg] How do new dhammas form? nilovg Dear Alex, Op 6-jun-2012, om 22:15 heeft truth_aerator het volgende geschreven: > > If world, as we know it, is a combination of momentary dhammas, > then does this mean that the world arises every moment? > ------- N: When we think of the world, we think of a whole, of a collection of things. This is not a reality that can be directly experienced, we can only think of it. It is a concept. Conditioned realities arise and fall away every moment, but concepts we can only think of do not. We can think of the suttas about the world in Kindred Sayings IV: what is the world? It crumbles away. A similar dilemma would occur if we say: the body is a combination of momentary dhammas, does the body fall away each moment? In both cases we think of abstractions, we do not pay attention to a reality arising and falling away at this moment. In this way there will not be right understanding and there will not be detachment. --------- > > A: I wonder, how does dhamma create another dhamma (its result)? > ------ N: Kamma and vipaaka would be an example here. A bad deed brings an unpleasant result later on, by way of an unhappy rebirth or an unpleasant experience through one of the senses. How does kamma create a result? This is one of the unthinkables, the field of Buddhas. We only know: kamma produces result later on. Is this not enough? As to ruupas of the body, these can originate from kamma, from citta, from temperature or from nutrition. ------- > > A: Same question (if answer is different) about how can set of > dhammas create a new set of dhammas. > ------- N: The idea of a set of dhammas seems not so clear to me. It may be a concept we can only think of. Nina. #124788 From: "sarah" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 7:16 pm Subject: [dsg] Re: what demarcates citta? sarahprocter... Dear Vince, --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, Vince wrote: > > Are you in Spain these days? Hope you're doing OK. > > yes, thanks. Still I survive here. I'm not sure if you are Australian or British, excuse me. > Are you in Bangkok now? Sujin is ok?. I plain to go to Thailand in the close future. ... S: I'm a bit of both - Australian and British and a Hong Konger too:) All just ideas we have about ourselves, of course. Jon and I are now in Hong Kong, soon to go to Aus. We're planning to go to Bkk at the end of August for 10 days or so. Another old friend is coming from Japan and I think there will be some good discussions at that time, so would be great if you could come at the same time. Maybe let me know off-list if you want dates and so on. Same applies to anyone else. Would be great if anyone else can join us too. Maybe we'd go into the countryside if so. K.Sujin is well, afaik. Metta Sarah ===== #124789 From: "Ken H" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 7:36 pm Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' kenhowardau Hi Robert K, I have to be careful in this conversation because I don't remember much of the actual Abhidhamma involved. I am confused, for example, about exactly which rupa we are referring to as the `base of citta.' While I will admit to being out of my depth as far as that is concerned, I do feel confident about `concepts and realities' and I am prepared to argue with anyone on that topic. ---------- > RK: Do you really think the Commentaries made things up based on some cultural belief. ---------- KH: I am not saying they made things up. I am just saying conventional terms contained in the texts are to be understood as referring to dhammas. The Theras would not have seen the conventionally known heart or brain as having any ultimate validity in its own right. ------------------ > RK: If they said the ear base was located in the toenail obviously they would be wrong, right? Because it is located in the conventional ear. ------------------ KH: I think it's located in a kalapa, isn't it? ---------------------------- > RK: It is exactly the same with the heart base: these bhikkhus were not wrong, they understood reality and concept. You sometimes upbraid members of dsg who cherry pick examples from the ancient Commenatries, and reject others.why nt admit you only accept aspects of the Commenaries yourself ----------------------------- KH: I reject any conventional interpretation of the Dhamma. But that is not what the commentaries are doing. The commentaries are using conventional terms for talking about dhammas. Ken H #124790 From: Maipenrai Dhammasaro Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 8:35 pm Subject: RE: [dsg] The Thirty-One Planes Of Existence dhammasaro Good friend Yawares, When I first saw the monk's name I thought he was the senior monk I met in Thailand of Japanese origin. A search reveals this monk is of Czech origin. True? See: http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Gavesako%2C_Bhikkhu peace... yours in the Dhamma-vinaya, Chuck To: dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com From: yawares1@... Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2012 13:06:04 +0000 Subject: [dsg] The Thirty-One Planes Of Existence Dear Members, Bhikkhu Gavesako gave me this Youtube clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylaZvvO3gag And it reminds me of the article I posted @ SD/JTN Group months ago. Today I would like to share this wonderful article with you all. ********************* The Thirty-One Planes Of Existence [Edited by John T.Bullit 2005-2012] The inescapable law of kamma guarantees that each and every one of our actions whether it be of body, speech, or mind, has consequences in line with the skillfulness or unskillfulness of that action. We can often witness this process first-hand in our own lives, even if the effects may not be immediately apparent. But the Buddha also taught that our actions have effects that extend far beyond our present life, determining the quality of rebirth we can expect after death: act in wholesome, skillful ways and you are destined for a favorable rebirth; act in unwholesome, unskillful ways and an unpleasant rebirth awaits. Thus we coast for aeons through samsara, propelled from one birth to the next by the quality of our choices and our actions. The suttas describe thirty-one distinct "planes" or "realms" of existence into which beings can be reborn during this long wandering through samsara. These range from the extraordinarily dark, grim, and painful hell realms all the way up to the most sublime, refined, and exquisitely blissful heaven realms. Existence in every realm is impermanent; in Buddhist cosmology there is no eternal heaven or hell. Beings are born into a particular realm according to both their past kamma and their kamma at the moment of death. When the kammic force that propelled them to that realm is finally exhausted, they pass away, taking rebirth once again elsewhere according to their kamma. And so the wearisome cycle continues. The realms of existence are customarily divided into three distinct "worlds" (loka), listed here in descending order of refinement: The Immaterial World (arupa-loka). Consists of four realms that are accessible to those who pass away while meditating in the formless jhanas. The Fine-Material World (rupa-loka). Consists of sixteen realms whose inhabitants (the devas) experience extremely refined degrees of mental pleasure. These realms are accessible to those who have attained at least some level of jhana and who have thereby managed to (temporarily) suppress hatred and ill-will. They are said to possess extremely refined bodies of pure light. The highest of these realms, the Pure Abodes, are accessible only to those who have attained to "non-returning," the third stage of Awakening. The Fine-Material World and the Immaterial World together constitute the "heavens" (sagga). The Sensuous World (kama-loka). Consists of eleven realms in which experience both pleasurable and not, is dominated by the five senses. Seven of these realms are favorable destinations, and include our own human realm as well as several realms occupied by devas. The lowest realms are the four "bad" destinations, which include the animal and hell realms. It is pointless to debate whether these realms are real or simply fanciful metaphors that describe the various mind-states we might experience in this lifetime. The real message of this cosmology is this: unless we take steps to break free of the iron grip of kamma, we are doomed to wander aimlessly from one state to another, with true peace and satisfaction forever out of reach. The Buddha's revolutionary discovery came in finding that there is a way to break free: the Noble Eightfold Path, which equips us with precisely the tools we need to escape from this wearisome wandering, once and for all, to a true and unshakeable freedom. The information on this page was assembled from a variety of sources. In the interests of economizing space I have not attributed each fact to its respective source. --------------- TO BE CONTINUED TOMORROW ---------------- Love Buddha's dhamma, yawares/sirikanya #124791 From: "philip" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 9:55 pm Subject: Re: 2007 audio - 3. If no trying or forcing, then what? philofillet Hi Sarah > ... > S: "Ling arduous meditation" sounds a bit kinky:-) Ah yes, the good old lingam. I never leave home without it > > Yes, thanks, Ned was celebrated by his many friends. An interesting way Dhamma helped me through this was realizing that the fact that I failed to really be fully attentive to his situation in his last months when exchanging e-mails with him is not something to beat myself up over. That virya didn't arise, it's a dhamma, beyond control. Blaming myself would just mean further accumulation of akusala. On the other hand, noting truthfully how virya that mught have contributed to saving him didn't arise might be condition for virya to arise to help others in need. > ... > S: Yes, excellent. I'm glad there was a "celebration" and that your understanding of Dhamma has been such a support and given you the encouragement to help others in need. I felt just the same after Sharon's accident - inspired to go to a little extra trouble when there are opportunities which are always around us. Ph: In my case any such specific encouragement was short lived and more in the form of heightened sensitivity to harmfulness than any inspiration to help others. (Well, did go the extra mile to write that letter. By the way, Ned's father read a part of it out at thegathering, apparently found it very comforting, I offer that kusala of mine for you to rejoice in, enjoy it while you can, haha) And its gone now, as was the very short-lived liberation from hosility to GOTIWUBTA. (guys on the internet who understand better than abhidhamma.) I think the really helpful thing in all this was not finding myself inclined to help others, but understanding a liitle better that that inclination is a dhamma, or many dhammas, and arises beyond control, or doesn't, and no grief if it doesn't and there is hostility ibstead. I now believe that what we do is not as important as our understanding of what we do, and the anattaness of it, a notion which was for awhile anathema to me. Perhaps it will be again someday, no way to know. Phil p.s thanks for the further explanation re bhavanga and jitivindriya. > #124792 From: "Buddhatrue" Date: Fri Jun 8, 2012 11:12 pm Subject: Re: Hello dear friends! buddhatrue Hi Sarah, Thanks for replying. I make some comments: --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" wrote: > S: Phil's cousin Ned, who he was very close to, died recently (suicide). Phil wrote a lovely letter to his cousin's family and friends. Here it is" > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dhammastudygroup/message/124354 > I read it. Very nice. It is difficult to say the right thing about such a situation, but it is good that Phil made an effort to be helpful. Very sweet. > S: True - no mindfulness at moments of sloth and inertia of kusala of any kind. However, even when we feel very sleepy, there isn't sloth and inertia all the time. It's like when we're dreaming, sometimes we may wake up and there can be mindfulness at those moments, aware of the sloth, the laziness, the thinking - any reality at all. > Wow, you actually agree with me. Shocking! ;-)) Yes, there can be moments of mindfulness in-between moments of sloth/laziness. I would guess that how effective those moments are depend on how frequent they are. > Thx James - good to chat again. Hope your parents are well too. Do you still go back to the States? > Yes, my parents are doing well. My mother is going to retire this year so they will be able to relax and enjoy each some rest. Thanks for asking! I will go back to visit next year. > Metta > > Sarah > ====== > Metta, James #124793 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 12:56 am Subject: Re: choices truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: Sure, lots of thinking, gears turning, dominoes falling... >============================= "Gears turning, dominoes falling" are physical events. I am not sure if physical example is totally appropriate for mental events. So what is true in the physical world (as perceived) might not be totally true when it comes to mental events. With metta, Alex #124794 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 1:00 am Subject: Re: [dsg] How do new dhammas form? truth_aerator Dear Nina, all, Thank you for your reply. >N:When we think of the world, we think of a whole, of a >collection >of things. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't idea of "parts" (that make up the whole) conceptual as well? >N: This is not a reality that can be directly experienced, we >can only think of it. It is a concept. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Isn't thinking, an experience of some sort? If one asks an ordinary person what s/he is experiencing, then that person might talk about a lot of concepts. Surely those concepts are part of experience, as mere thinking, but still, experience. With metta, Alex #124795 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 1:13 am Subject: Re: why choice can't be made? truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >RE: There is no John, which is just a designation, not a being, so >he >cannot lift his arm. He can have the thought to lift the arm, >which >comes from other conditions, and that thought can condition >other >impulses to lift the arm. But there's no self, and >ultimately no >choice in that process. Mental processes have >conditionality >controlling their arising as well. Nothing happens >due to the willing >of it by a self. >===================================== I've used this as a conventional example to illustrate a point that emperically there is experience called choice, where there appears multiple courses of action, and choosing. Of course each of multiple kinds of actions, each of them is conditioned. But none of this needs to remove the importance of choice in the present. Is choice given in experience? Are there moments where multiple actions can possibly occur? Of course. To try to refute valid conventional question by going into "ultimate" analysis is not appropriate. Compare apples to apples. With best wishes, Alex #124796 From: "truth_aerator" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 1:16 am Subject: Re: choices truth_aerator Hello RobertE, all, >A: Past does not exist now, only present moment exists now during >which choice is made. Why do we give the past (which doesn't exist >now) equal or higher influence over the present which exists? > >RE: Because the present includes accumulations and tendencies, as >well as other conditions that affect what is happening at the moment >- this is true of every moment, they are never blank, until complete >cessation of experience, parinibbana. So there is no reason to >posit some sort of state that is empty of tendencies, since there is >none for worldlings, ever. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is no trans-temporal store-house of accumulations to affect the current citta. So the only citta that may condition the present citta is the proximate one that has just ceased as the new citta is arising. The choice in the present is what exists and can be experienced. > >You are idealizing "the mind." There is no such thing. Mind is >not a place or a thing. It is merely mental events, in succession. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Because mind is mental events in succession, this makes it less "whole", and easier to affect. It ceases and arises every moment. This, imho, makes it easier to change than if it was some trans-temporal thing containing accumulations for infinite past. >If you think consciousness is unconditioned, To my current awareness I've never said this in these discussions. We just differ on what conditionality can mean when it comes to choice. It may allows 2 or more possible actions to occur, and then impersonal choice in the present can choose either one of them. The situation is limited by conditions, sure. But within those limits are there possible options that *can* be chosen. With best wishes, Alex #124797 From: "Dieter Moeller" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 2:59 am Subject: Re: [dsg] Pilgrimage in India, Ch 1, 1. moellerdieter Dear Nina, all, thanks for starting the series (with Christine, Sarah and ..? hopefully to follow ) any elaboration by the commentaries in respect to: ''And they, nanda, who shall die while they, with believing heart, are journeying on such pilgrimage, shall be reborn after death, when the body shall dissolve, in the happy realms of heaven." with Metta Dieter #124798 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 6:22 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' epsteinrob Hi Rob K, Jon & Ken. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "rjkjp1" wrote: > KENH> > > > > > > That's how I understand what you have been saying to Robert E about 'ultimately true and ultimately false concepts.' There aren't any! > > > > > > J: Yes, concepts cannot be considered to be true or false in and of themselves. > > > > If I understand KENH he is saying this is just some idea that people had 2000 years ago and has no relation at all to actual reality. > > > ... Apparently those monks at that time had some cultural ideas and saw a connection between reality and concepts like ear, eye body etc. Whereas KENH(and you?) believes there is no relation at all. > > > =============== > > J: I'm afraid I don't quite follow what you mean by "a connection/no relation between reality and concepts" in this context. I don't have a problem with anything contained in the Vism extract. Happy to discuss if you could elaborate further. Rob K.: > The relationship between concept and reality is quite straighforward: the concepts that the VM use are TRUE and come from a direct understanding of actual relaities: this is what I believe. > > I would claim that the reason the Visuddhimagga said the heart base was situated in the blood contained inside the conventional, physical heart, is that IT IS IN ACTUAL FACT situated just there. And it not situated inside the brain - where scientists of these deluded times seem to think 'mind' arises. > > It seems KENH has a different opinion on this, but perhaps he will comment. This doesn't have any direct evidentiary weight as to what is or isn't in the Dhamma, but I think there is an intriguing synchrony in various traditions -- in the Western tradition, the Greeks considered the diaphragm area to be "the seat of the soul." Schizophrenia literally means "split diaphragm" for split self. In Hinduism, the Atman is considered to be in the heart center in the center of the chest, and Advaita Vedanta master Ramana Maharshi said that the spiritual Heart was on the right side of the chest, from which consciousness emanates. Seems like everyone in the various traditions have coincidentally picked a similar area for the heart/heart-mind/heart base. Maybe there's something to it... Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - #124799 From: "Robert E" Date: Sat Jun 9, 2012 6:31 am Subject: Re: ''Some Evidence Suggesting the Spurious Nature of Abhidhamma Philosophy'' epsteinrob Hi Ken H. --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" wrote: > I don't believe the Pali texts add anything to our conventional knowledge. Every word of them is to be understood in terms of satipatthana (right understanding of the present dhamma-arammana) *only*. That is interesting. > The Theras conventionally regarded the heart as the base of [conventional] consciousness. Therefore they used `heart' as a conventional counterpart, or shadow, for teaching purposes. Also interesting. > On that basis I too am happy to use `heart' as the conventional counterpart of the ultimately real base of [conditioned] consciousness. But that doesn't mean I will regard the heart that way for conventional purposes. In other words, you don't consider it correct or necessary to use relations between items of Dhammic experience as referents for conventional "real-world" understanding, for which you would consult science [brain as conventional seat of consciousness] rather than Dhamma [heart as seat of consciousness.] Do I read you correctly? With that in mind, would you say that the direct knowing of the "heart-base" doesn't actually occur in "the body" at all, since the body too is another conventional construct? Best, Rob E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - -